White, T; Ariaratnam, S T and Michael, J (2012) Subterranean infrastructure reconnaissance for manmade and natural hazards and disasters. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 3(1), pp. 66-86. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: The consideration of all aspects of the systems that support a community is necessary to accomplish adequate long range asset planning and protection. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the addition of a subterranean infrastructure reconnaissance emphasis to an existing series of vulnerability assessment tools used by the State of Arizona, and investigate economic impact (disaster recovery) estimation methods for potential incorporation. The intent is to provide a framework for model development and suggest data to be collected. Design/methodology/approach: Through modifications of existing system components, a subterranean infrastructure reconnaissance emphasis is proposed for the State of Arizona's current vulnerability assessment tools. Although they can be adjusted as needed, the modifications presented herein include 11 subterranean assets and ten threats to subterranean assets. Furthermore, existing methods for estimating the economic impact of disasters are investigated via literature reviews, e-mails, and telephone correspondence. Findings: Regarding the subterranean infrastructure reconnaissance component, a number of emerging technologies are currently available to monitor the various infrastructure elements from the identified potential threats. The process of linking the various data collection elements into a comprehensive surveillance system is currently underway in Arizona. Interim reconnaissance techniques using local statistic models will be applied incrementally while the data integration process is underway. With respect to the economic impact estimation module, the Federal Emergency Management Agency's HAZUS-MH loss estimation model was identified as a top prospect for testing. Research limitations/implications: The research focuses on examining the interdependencies and vulnerabilities of critical subterranean infrastructure. Therefore, critical surface or above ground infrastructure components are not primarily discussed. Additionally, this paper presents only a plan; there are no empirical results to date. Practical implications: The methodology discussed may be utilized to support the decision-making process for managing resources used to sustain subterranean infrastructure operations, with the goal of providing resiliency to community support mechanisms. Originality/value: The specific focus on developing a subterranean infrastructure reconnaissance emphasis in a State's disaster management program is a novel tool for Arizona. The value is to enhance preparation, response, resilience, and recovery from hazards and disasters affecting the State's critical subterranean infrastructure. It is theorized that value will further be generated in a resulting subterranean infrastructure reconnaissance template, which can be adopted by other emergency and disaster management organizations.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | critical infrastructure; disaster management; disaster resilience; forward planning; subterranean infrastructure; United States of America |
| Index terms: | e-mail, United States of America, recovery, critical infrastructure, disaster recovery, model development, methodology, module, emergency management, disaster management, literature review, surveillance, natural hazard, disaster resilience, integration, decision-making process, program, testing, economic impact, loss estimation, agency, estimation, support mechanism, vulnerability, emerging technology, estimating |
| Subjects: | environmental hazards, operations management, financial and cost management, climate science, innovation and technology management, infrastructure and transport systems, financial risk, communication, organization, data analysis and analytics, architectural elements, software systems, monitoring and control systems, professional practice, organizational analysis, sociology, Geography, decision analysis, research methods, emergency and crisis management, analytical methods, financial analysis |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Project Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Cost Management, Governance, Geographical Context, Information Management, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here