Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
IMPROVER D2.1 Methodology for identifying hazard scenarios to assess  the resilience of critical infrastructure
University College London, UK.
University College London, UK.
INERIS, France.
INOV, Portugal.
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Critical infrastructure is exposed to a wide range of hazards, capable to disrupt its operations in various degrees. This raises the question of which hazard scenario an operator shall use to assess the resilience of their critical infrastructure asset. Various techniques aiming to prioritize the various risks are commonly used in the literature. This study proposed an 8-step methodology, which aims to rank the risks of pre-defined hazard scenarios by eliciting the opinions of the stakeholders through a structured expert elicitation technique termed paired comparison. The novelty of the proposed technique is its ability to quantify the degree of disagreement regarding the ranking order of the scenarios and thus to capture the uncertainty associated with these risks.

 

The proposed methodology has been applied to four living labs, namely: the Oresund region, the port of Oslo, the A31 Highway in France and the potable water network in Barreiro. The applications aims to rank scenarios of natural and operational hazards according to their disaster- and emergency-risk. Despite the small number of participants, the results provide an excellent basis for further discussion regarding the most likely disaster or emergency risk scenarios. For most living labs, the ranking of the hazards using paired comparison was successful in identifying the scenarios associated with the highest risk. Overall, ranking the natural hazards according to their disaster- or emergency-risk has been associated with a higher degree of consensus than the ranking of the operational hazards reflecting on the higher complexity and perhaps the limited understanding of the later.

 

In more detail, snow storm is the hazard with the highest disaster risk for the A31 Highway. Similarly, earthquake is the hazard with the highest disaster risk for the water network in Barreiro. Three meteorological hazards ranked the highest for both the likelihood to occur and to cause disaster to the Øresund region. By contrast, the ranking of the hazards for the port of Oslo identified several scenarios with similar likelihood to cause disaster, which ranked very different in their likelihood to occur in the next 5 years. This raises question as to whether the most of least likely to occur scenarios is most suitable which can be answered in collaboration with the stakeholders.

 

With regard to the operational hazards, the contamination of the water in the water source or the distribution network due to an accident at the high-risk industrial SEVECO operations has been identified as the single scenario with the highest risk of disaster for the water network in Barreiro. Three events including a multiple day strike and two accidents in the wet bulk terminal have been identified as having the highest disaster risk for the port of Oslo. By contrast, no operational hazards can be identified as having the highest risk of occurrence for the A31 highway and the Øresund region

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. , p. 146
Series
IMPROVER ; D2.1
Keywords [en]
resilience, critical infrastructure, infrastructure, hazards, risk assessment
National Category
Infrastructure Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-38986OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-38986DiVA, id: diva2:1323326
Funder
EU, Horizon 2020, 653390Available from: 2019-06-12 Created: 2019-06-12 Last updated: 2019-06-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

IMPROVER D2.1(4369 kB)2 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 4369 kBChecksum SHA-512
cdb45b313fc258206eeca16d042e81660a282fe7852f5d0c8f4196273a8314298cc9c0ccb95cea4f569c1cc31919c976148ca453bbbbee2d5cffa5b83be07366
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Honfi, DanielLange, DavidReitan, Nina KristineStoresund, Karolina
By organisation
Strukturer och KomponenterBrandmotståndSP Fire Research AS, Norge
Infrastructure Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 2 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 38 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf