Rebello, K; Jaggi, K; Costello, S; Blake, D; Oo, M; Hughes, J and Egbelakin, T (2019) Testing a criticality framework for road networks in Auckland, New Zealand. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 10(1), pp. 36-51. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to trial the application of a criticality framework for roads in an urban environment. The failure or disruption of critical transport routes can have substantial impacts on the economy and societal well-being. Determining the criticality of transport routes is thus of crucial importance for infrastructure providers, city planners and emergency management officials, as it enables appropriate resilience assessments and targeted improvement/intervention and investment strategies to be conducted. Design/methodology/approach: The authors summarise the proposed criticality framework developed by Hughes (2016) for road networks and apply and validate the framework to an area containing 907 km of roads in the central Auckland area of New Zealand. Following an initial trial of the framework, alterations were made to the framework logic, which included the introduction of a new criticality level to account for some roads providing minimal direct societal and economic benefit and a rationalisation step to ensure that road sections always link to others with either an equal or higher criticality. Findings: The modified framework and five-level criticality scale, when applied to the study area in central Auckland, is suitable for determining critical roads and can therefore assist with future assessments of road infrastructure resilience. Originality/value: The framework also has the potential to be applied more widely and adapted so that it is applicable for determining the criticality of other infrastructure types and in other settings, which would allow improved assessments within and across sectors.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | criticality assessment; resilience |
| Index terms: | testing, planner, New Zealand, urban environment, emergency management, well-being, methodology, investment strategy, infrastructure resilience |
| Subjects: | risk management, urban sustainability, profession, mental health and wellbeing, professional practice, economic analysis, Geography, financial risk, research methods |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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