Transport Network Vulnerability

Assessment Methodology, Based

on the Cost-Distance Method
and GIS Integration
Dragos Toma-Danila
Abstract Considering the various effects of natural disasters, and the need for a
fast intervention and recovery time, before facing the associated problems it is
needed to mitigate the risks. A basic and initial step is to assess the vulnerability in
high risk areas. The importance of a transport network is major, whether it is a
road, railway (for access) or pipe (for resources) network. Various methods were
described for analyzing their behavior to disastrous events (like earthquakes,
landslides, ooding). The methodology proposed in this study integrates all related
input data within a GIS software, adding by so the spatial dimension, and adapt the
cost-distance method to obtain ctive costs that translate into vulnerability states
for each point of a network. Also, the hot-points that can determine detour costs
are taken into consideration, by means of random What if? scenarios that are
generated by an automation model. The fact that the cost-distance method requires
origins to which the costs will refer it is important, because the vulnerability values
will also be related to how hard it is for an emergency intervention team to reach a
certain segment of the network. Because of the various degrees of freedom in the
methodology, different methods can be also added to the actual core, in order to
serve the purpose, whether it is emergency route analysis, road planning or loss
estimation assessment. In order to test and exemplify the methodology and the
results, a road network seismic vulnerability assessment example is presented, for
a Romanian County right on top of the Vrancea Seismic Area. Specic details are
given about the possibilities to implement the methodology.
Keywords Network analysis

Cost-distance method

Vulnerability assessment

GIS
D. Toma-Danila (&)
National Institute for Earth Physics, Magurele, Ilfov, Romania
e-mail: toma@infp.ro
S. Zlatanova et al. (eds.), Intelligent Systems for Crisis Management, Lecture Notes
in Geoinformation and Cartography, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-33218-0_15,
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
199
1 Introduction
Each country in the world is subject to different natural disasters, which pose
various risks to the population and economy. The extent of the damage (both in
terms of space and effects) determines the scale of the recovery actions to follow.
But one of the most basic initial steps is to have access in the affected area. Upon
this depend the quick real assessment of the situation, the salvation of people
requiring medical care or trapped under debris, the delivery of provisions and other
important actions. The road and railway networks need to be operative as quickly
as it can, making also proper links with the airports and harbors. Following a big
natural disaster, the trafc ow to the affected region also greatly increases, so the
support to sustain it must be assured.
As it can be seen, no matter of the disaster, the transportation network is the
fundamental base for interventions. By assessing its vulnerabilities, early planning
can be made in order to eliminate the threat of disrupting the important links
within the network. The planning can consider numerous aspects, like the creation
of alternative routes, strengthening the vital corridors, bridges or tunnels safety,
reconsidering the efciency of the emergency intervention centers and medical
resources in the territory etc. The methodology proposed in this study will refer to
the vulnerability assessment, with an example for the seismic risk.
In order to evaluate the vulnerability of a transport network, various methods
have been previously developed [6]. According to Pinto et al. [7], three types of
studies that asses the seismic performance of transportation networks can be
depicted, based on the level they are referring to:
Level I studies: the attention is focused on the functioning of the network in
terms of pure connectivityuseful for rescue function right after the earthquake
Level II studies: add the consideration of the network capacity to accommodate
trafc ows
Level III studies, that try to give a more realistic general picture, by combining
direct physical damage estimates with various economic models.
The purpose of the methodology presented here might be considered as a level I
study, but nevertheless the possibility of adding knowledge based on more com-
plex procedures and on an economical approach can turn it into a more advanced
study. Practically, it can adapt to the requirements of the user, keeping just the
cost-distance method as a core. The cost-distance method is specic for evaluating
the economic travel costs in a territory, but this cost can be considered ctive,
showing how hard it is to reach a point from an origin, by accumulating vulner-
ability values along the way. The idea of using the Cost-Distance Method in
various elds of study like ecology [2] or road planning [1] was already consid-
ered, providing proper results.
With the proposed methodology, performed with relevant and well understood
input data, answers to several important questions can be obtained:
200 D. Toma-Danila
How efcient is the transport network distributed, as support for prompt inter-
ventions in risk areas?
What are the vulnerable areas (of the network) and what impact can have the
isolation of them?
How well are the emergency intervention centers distributed along the network?
How long can it take to intervene, giving the vulnerabilities of the road?
What are the safest and reliable routes?
What segments are vital for the access in some isolated areas?
How many people can be affected by the failure to provide quick reaction
measures?
2 About the Methodology
The fundamental idea behind the proposed methodology was to create a
completely GIS integrated complex tool, allowing different but not xed inte-
gration of own data and procedures from different elds, in order to assess the
vulnerability of a network. This network might be of roads, railways, pipes or any
other network with a spatial extent. What weve tried was to involve more of the
geographic component of the elements (link them in a singular system) and focus
on the relations within the whole network. Studying the capabilities of the Spatial
Analyst Toolbox in the ESRI ArcInfo software, especially the Cost-Distance
Method, we observed that by setting the right input (create a cost vulnerability
raster just for the network) you can obtain a map showing how potentially difcult
is to get from an origin to any connected place, therefore if a crossed cell is
vulnerable, the next cell will also be vulnerable, if there is no safer way to get to it.
As the ArcMap help on cost functions explains, the cost values assigned to
each cell are per-unit distance measures for the cell. If the cell size is expressed in
meters, the cost assigned to the cell is the cost necessary to travel 1 m within the
cell. If the resolution is 50 m, the total cost to travel either horizontally or verti-
cally through the cell would be the cost assigned to the cell times the resolution
(total cost = cost * 50).
In selecting the GIS software suited for the implementation of the methodology
that uses not only the cost-distance analysis but also spatial editing, raster analysis
or automation of processes (as seen in Fig. 1), ESRI ArcGIS software, as a leading
and worldwide used solution, with easy to use but complex features, was the
proper solution and environment.
As it can be observed in Fig. 1, the rst mandatory element for the assessment
of the network vulnerability is the network denition. This can be done in a vector
or raster format directly. Important is that after the conversion into raster, con-
nected segments are linked, the cell size is small enough and the blank spaces near
the network get the No Data raster value. In order to x problems that occur
Transport Network Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 201
when the polyline is converted into raster, a good practice is to generate buffers
around them, initially.
Another mandatory input data is the denition of Emergency Intervention
Origins. In order to compute the vulnerability with the Cost-Distance Method, it is
needed to know points to refer to. If a city has an Emergency Intervention Center
for natural disasters, or a hospital for example, then the vulnerability of the net-
work in this city is the smallest. There is no limit in dening these origins, but they
have to be placed on top of the network cells with data. The provided data doesnt
necessarily have to be realfor planning purposes, proposed points can be created
and the vulnerability differences can be noticed.
One of the important steps that involve the operators understanding is the
denition of elements that can inuence the network vulnerability. Each one has to
decide what data to use, what the implications to the network are or what is more
hazardous. In the end, the methodology requires just a cost raster, with the similar
extent as the network raster. But getting to it, several steps need to be carried out.
Initially, each set of data must be converted into raster. Then, depending on the
importance of the numeric intervals or text description, new risk values are
assignedin general, based on a similar scale. This similar scale will reect when
all the impact rasters are compiled together, and a certain weight factor cumulating
Fig. 1 The general plan of the proposed methodology
202 D. Toma-Danila
100 % is attributed. For the case study bellow, a model of how the reclassication
values are assigned is given and also proposed. In general, natural disasters
inuence the landscape, so data sets like the slope or the land use, which can be
obtained for free from SRTM or CORINE data sets, can be added to the weighted
overlay compilation.
After obtaining the cost raster, the rst Cost-Distance Analysis can be
performedfor a perfectly linked network situation. During a natural disaster,
several points are more vulnerable than others. If these points will block the
network, how will the joined segments be affected? To answer this question, the
next step of the methodology involves a What if? approach, that tries to assess
the vulnerability further, by simulating a large and random number of situations.
The automated analysis created (with the aid of ArcGIS Model Builder) requires
the denition of the hot spots, which can be made based upon the cost raster
created earlier, or on specic knowledge. This time, data has to be in a vector
formatpolygons that cut the segments perpendicular. Each simulation deter-
mines what points are considered to block the network, then changes values from
the initial cost raster into no data, and then applies the cost-distance method.
After many simulations, from worst case scenario to few blockages scenario, all
distance rasters can be merged as mean, into a nal output of the network vul-
nerability, called also distance raster.
The output, together with additional data, will hopefully be able to answer
realistically to the questions enumerated in the introduction. By adding a popu-
lation layer and reclassifying the distance raster values, estimations about the
possible number of isolated people after a natural disaster can be made. Also, the
ArcGIS Spatial Analyst Toolbox offers the possibility to perform a Cost Path
Method that will return the best (safest) path between any point in the network and
the costly nearest origin. There are many possibilities, for different purposes. In the
case study we tried to provide a good example of the methodologys capabilities.
3 Case Study: Vrancea County Road Network Seismic
Vulnerability Assessment
3.1 Main Characteristics of the Analyzed Area
In order to exemplify and test the proposed methodology, a representative study
area was selectedthe Vrancea County. Located in Romania, this county is under
a constant seismic risk generated by the Vrancea active seismic area. This area is
located in the curvature of the Carpathian Mountains, at the contact between the
East European plate and the Intra-Alpine and Moesic subplates, and it has been in
the Twentieth century the cause of 32 intermediate depth earthquakes with
Mw C 6, including devastating events like the one 10 Nov 1940, with Mw 7.7 and
h = 150 km, and the one on 3 Mar 1977, with Mw 7.4 and h = 94 km (Fig. 2).
Transport Network Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 203
These particular events highlighted major problems near but also very far from
the epicenters (up to 300 km). In the Vrancea County, more than 90 % of Panciu
city was destroyed during the 1940 event, a lot of buildings in Focsani City and
different villages collapsed, due to the poor quality of constructions but also to
landslides, liquefaction and post-earthquake phenomenon (Figs. 3 and 4). The
1940 and 1977 events also severely affected Bucharest capital city, which is
&150 km away from the epicentral area; over 33 buildings and ats collapsed in
Fig. 2 The localization of the Vrancea County and the earthquake epicenters in the Romplus
Catalogue [5]
Fig. 3 Slumping and lateral
spreading of the road, in
Balintesti, near the Vrancea
County, after the 1940
earthquake [4]
204 D. Toma-Danila
the 1977 earthquake. For this event, the national death toll was 1578 persons (1391
in Bucharest), and 11300 wounded persons.
In the last couple of years the concern regarding the recurrence of a new major
earthquake wasnt unfortunately doubled by signicant mitigation efforts. The
quality of new constructions often avoided seismic design regulations, the
retrotting of old buildings proved to be a slow process, and the equipment of
emergency intervention units wasnt renewed properly (especially in less eco-
nomically developed counties like Vrancea, were, for example, 11 of 12 reghter
cars are more than 15 years old, and some state hospitals were closed). The
purpose of studies like this one aims to highlight the importance of taking
important precautionary measures, in order not to face the simulated possible
deciencies.
The main characteristics of the Vrancea County, in accordance to the followed
purpose, are (as also mapped in Figs. 5, 6 and 7):
It is situated in Romania, having a total area of 4863 km
2
and a population of
390048 in 2011 (37.7 % urban). The maximum height is 1785 m.
The capital city of the county is Focsani, with a population of 100007 people in
2008. Other cities, much smaller, are Adjud (17554 people in 2008), Marasesti,
Panciu and Odobesti. The number of villages is 331.
The most important rivers are Siret, Putna, Milcov and Ramnicu Sarat. During
spring or autumn, they can and generated severe ooding that affected many
villages and the transport infrastructure.
The road network is wide, comprising two main directions: South-North
(Bucharest-Buzau-Focsani-Bacau), linked by E85, and West-East (Brasov-
Focsani-Husi or Galati), linked by DN2D and E581. In the mountainous and
hillside part of the county, villages are connected by local roads, most of them
very narrow and not asphalted. Some bridges were newly constructed or con-
solidated after the oods in 2005 and 2010, especially on Putna and Milcov.
Fig. 4 Fans damaged by toe
of landslide, in Slon, Prahova
County, after the 1977
earthquake [4]
Transport Network Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 205
3.2 Performing the Cost-Distance Spatial Analysis
As the rst part of the article highlighted, a few mandatory input data les are
required, in order to perform a basic Cost-Distance Analysis. The selection below
is meant to show how free data converted into GIS can be used, and how important
is the association of proper weight factors. The implementation must be considered
Fig. 5 Map showing
the population distribution
and the emergency
intervention centers in case
of a natural disaster
Fig. 6 General map of the
county, showing the relief,
rivers and road network
206 D. Toma-Danila
mainly as an exercise, because each region and set of data provides different
challenges in assigning risk priorities.
For the denition of the road network, a vectorial GIS road database was
created from a vectorial database digitized from declassied military maps from
1996, actualized in Google Earth with the aid of Google/Yahoo/Bing Maps
overlays (thanks to the http://www.mgmaps.com service). Together with the
geometry, the classication of the road was keeps as an attribute, being later
considered in the description of the road vulnerability.
The locations of the emergency intervention centers were obtained from the
ofcial site of the General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations (www.igsu.ro).
The county headquarter is in Focsani; other locations are in Adjud, Panciu and
Vidra. For the basic purpose of this study, all of these centers were considered
equal, as intervention potential efciency.
For the description of road start-up vulnerability to earthquakes, several data,
converted into a raster format, was used. As said before, the type of road was
considered. Four classes were identied, and assigned numbers from 1 to 4 (1 for
the European Roads, 2 for National Roads, 3 for County Roads and 4 for Local
Roads).
The impact of slope on the road must always be considered, not just because of
the actual road angle, but also because of the potential hazardous versants and
roughness of the terrain. For computing the slope angle, a Digital Elevation Model
(DEM) can be used. Based on the SRTM 3 Arc-Seconds free GIS data (http://
srtm.csi.cgiar.org/), slope angle values were computed for the Vrancea County,
varying from 0
0
to 31.5
0
(Fig. 8). The reclassication was based on equal intervals,
as it can be seen in Fig. 9. The highest the angle, the more vulnerable is considered
the road cell.
In case of an earthquake, the intensity denes how the earthquake was felt at the
surface. Each intensity scale links observed effects to a value, most common
between 1 and 12 (Modied Mercalli, MedvededSponheuerKarnik sca-
le = MSK and EMS-98). In the case of the road network, high intensities can
determine the disrupting of road segments, by cracking, structure failures (bridges,
tunnels etc.), soil liquefaction, landslides etc. Giving that Vrancea County is so
close to the hypocenter, expected high intensities are not to be neglected. That is
Fig. 7 Pie chart showing the
length of the road network in
Vrancea County
Transport Network Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 207
why, for the analysis, we used the isoseismal map, providing MSK intensities
between IX 1/2 and VII (Fig. 10). Considering the effects associated with these
high intensities, multiplication values were dened (92 for I = VII, 93 for
I = VIII or VIII and 94 for I = IX and more) and later added in multiplying
risk elements that might be triggered by the earthquake, such as slope angle
(causing landslides or soil cracks), bridges or industrial sites failure.
Because road networks also depend on the adjacent land cover they pass
through, GIS data from the CORINE 2006 mission (http://www.eea.europa.eu/
data-and-maps/data/corine-land-cover-2006-raster) was also used. In this data,
major river bodies are dened, so bridge locations can be identied; knowing the
characteristics of the area, these crossings can receive a certain vulnerability value,
multiplied with the value of intensity. As a further work in the eld, bridges can be
Fig. 8 Map of the slope
angle values
Fig. 9 Reclassication
values for the slope angle
raster
208 D. Toma-Danila
added to the analysis as structures with specic damage functions, possible to be
also analyzed in real time by sensors. Beside bridges, CORINE data also includes
possible hazardous areas, like industrial facilities, swamps, rock formations or
types of forest (Fig. 11). Table 1 shows how the classication was carried out.
Fig. 10 Isoseismal map of
the maximum credible
Vrancea earthquake
(Mw = 7.7) [3]
Fig. 11 CORINE 2006 data
used for the Vrancea County
Transport Network Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 209
After all necessary data is converted into raster and reclassied, an important
step is to properly assign weight values for each risk factor. By using the Weighted
Overlay Tool, each of the nal 3 impact rasters receive importance values and
weight (Table 2). In this example, the slope was considered more important
(50 %), the type of the road was considered to inuence the vulnerability 20 %,
and land cover data 30 %, the last two having been also multiplied according to the
MSK maximum intensity factor. As a consequence, a preliminary vulnerability
map was obtained, with 0 as the less vulnerable road cell and 10 the possible most
affected. Most values are between 1 and 5, but there are also some extreme values.
The areas with these extreme values are later considered as very possible
generators of road blocks. Together with more personal knowledge about areas
that cause roadblocks in case of an earthquake, these most vulnerable points are
added to a shapele polygon. The idea is that, by assigning random values
numerous times (using Field Calculator with arc rand expression), all various
possible scenarios will reect the different dependencies in the road network; if a
whole area depends on a single vulnerable link with the origin points or the detour
route too long, this will reect in a higher cost-distance.
In this case study, a specic model was created in ArcGIS Model Builder
(Fig. 12), allowing the automation of the process. 100 different scenarios were
randomly computed, each one showing a particular situation that might occur, with
more or less hot points determining road blocks. All the cost-distance values in
each cell were then mediated, and a nal vulnerability map was obtained (Fig. 13).
Comparing it with the initial vulnerability map, an increase in the vulnerability of
some more isolated areas is revealed.
Table 1 Reclassication values for the CORINE 2006 data
CORINE 2006 land cover classication Reclassication
value
Continuous urban fabric 6
Discontinuous urban fabric, industrial or commercial units,
construction sites, water bodies
4
Rocks, mineral extraction sites 3
Dump sites, beaches, dunes, sand, different types of forest 2
Table 2 Weight overlay percentages and values used for generating the basic cost raster
Raster type Weight overlay (%) Reclassication (after multiplication with MSK Intensity)
Road weight 20 1 = 1; 2 = 2; 3 = 4; 4 = 6
Land cover 30 0 = 0; 4 = 2; 6 = 5; 8 = 7; 9 = 8;
12 = 10; 16 = 10
Slope 50 0 = 0; 2 = 1; 3 = 1; 4 = 2; 6 = 4; 8 = 6; 12 = 6;
16 = 8; 18 = 8; 24 = 10; 30 = 10; 32 = 10
210 D. Toma-Danila
3.3 Result Analysis
The nal results are more relevant showed on maps, which is in fact the purpose of
using a GIS. The distance raster can be symbolized in order to show different
vulnerability degrees, and various overlays can be made, in order to better
understand the implications and the solutions to the questions in the introduction.
In Fig. 13 is shown the road network vulnerability, together with building
damage estimates obtained from a simulation for the 1977 earthquake, with SE-
LENA Software [8]. It can be noticed that although the most vulnerable roads are
in the western part of the county, there are not a lot of settlements there, and also
Fig. 12 Scheme of the model built in order to create random simulations, for the cost-distance
method
Fig. 13 The road network
vulnerability and the building
loss estimates during a 1977
similar earthquake
Transport Network Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 211
the expected damage is smaller than the one in the central and eastern parts, where
the network is more dense and less vulnerable. A potential vulnerable area is in the
north-eastern part of the county, because of the single link in the network and the 5
communes with signicant damage estimates.
Another application for the methodology is the use of Cost Path Method. In
Fig. 14 are presented the safest paths (computed automatically) from isolated
villages to the Emergency Intervention Centers. Some of them (the ones in the
south-west part) are more than 50 km long, so a closer center must be established.
4 Conclusions
After providing these detailed explanations about the methodology, some impor-
tant advantages can be extracted:
First of all, the answers aimed to be provided refer to real and important situ-
ations; they try to clarify the vulnerability of a certain type of network, in
reaction to natural disasters, and that is most certainly an analysis that can save
lives and decrease other losses.
The easy integration within a GIS software like ArcGIS allows it to be exible
and easily operable, providing also the means for a further geographic analysis.
Apparently, the chain of methods is simple, but the straight forward approach
allows for a quick understanding of the methodology and various possibilities of
adapting it to the specic purpose and level of detail intended. From real time
Fig. 14 The road network
vulnerability and the safest
cost path routes toward
isolated villages
212 D. Toma-Danila
network monitoring to planning purposes, the methodology can assess the
behavior of the network and its vulnerability.
The dependency for a start-up complex GIS database is reduced.
Maps can be created very easily, giving that all the output is in GIS format.
The Cost-Path Method can be applied in order to nd the best routes.
As this paper marks the rst steps in using the mentioned approach, if
scientically approved, further studies will take place, in order to nd better ways
of reclassifying the risk factors rasters, creating a complete module for ArcGIS or
experimenting with more complex data and network models.
References
1. D.M. Atkinson, P. Deadman, D. Dudycha, S. Traynor, Multi-criteria evaluation and least cost
path analysis for an arctic all-weather road. Appl. Geogr. 25(4), 287307 (2005)
2. M.A. LaRue, C.K. Nielsen, Modelling potential dispersal corridors for cougars in midwestern
North America using least-cost path methods. Ecol. Model. 212, 372381 (2008)
3. G. Marmureanu, C.O. Cioan, A. Marmureanu, Intensity seismic hazard map of Romania by
probabilistic and (neo)deterministic approaches, linear and nonlinear analyses. Rom. Rep.
Phys. 63(1), 226239 (2011)
4. N. Mandrescu (ed.), The Large Vrancea Intermediate Depth Earthquakes Occurred in the
XXth Century and Their Effects on the Romanian Territory; Photographic Testimonies
(Academiei Romane, Bucharest, 2008)
5. National Institute for Earth Physics (NIEP), Romplus earthquake catalogue 2012, Romania
6. Pho Thanh Tung, Road vulnerability assessment for earthquakes. Ph.D. Dissertation,
International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation, Enschede, 2004
7. P.E. Pinto, F. Cavalieri, P. Franchin, A. Lupoi, Denition of system components and the
formulation of system functions to evaluate the performance of transportation infrastructures.
SYNER-G Project No. 244061, Deliverable no. D2.6, June 2011
8. D. Toma-Danila, A Seismic Risk Analysis for Focsani and Bacau Counties, Using SELENA in
Near Real-Time and GIS Tools, Moldavian Risksfrom Global to Local Scale (Bacau,
Romania, 2012)
Transport Network Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 213