Seismic vulnerability analysis of a complex interconnected civil infrastructure - Seismic Risk Analysis and Management of Civil Infrastructure Systems - page 459

Global

Business
interruptions

Permanent
housing

Regional

National
governments

Temporary
shelter

Local

Insurance sector
Emergency managers

18.1 The three dimensions in an infrastructure vulnerability study.

the systems (e.g. cascading failures). Finally, it can be observed how differ-
ent stakeholders/end-users have an interest in each different combination
of time-frames and space-scales. These aspects are all illustrated in Fig. 18.1.
One distinguishing feature of available studies is that, typically, they
address either the emergency phase (short-term, urban/regional scale,
emergency managers; e.g. Franchin et al., 2006b), or the economic recovery
phase (medium to long-term, regional/national scale, politicians/planners/
re-insurance industry; e.g. Karaca, 2005). The model described in the fol-
lowing focuses on pre-event (before the time-frame) performance assess-
ment for the immediate aftermath of the event (short term). The target
benefi ciaries are emergency managers. The developed model facilitates the
forecasting of the expected impact, and thus is valuable for planning and
implementing risk mitigation measures at the urban/regional scale.

18.3 Model, analysis type and interactions

From a spatial/topological point of view the component systems of the
infrastructure can be classifi ed into three categories:

￿ Point-like (critical facilities): single-site facilities (hospitals, power-
plants) whose importance for the functionality of the infrastructure
justifi es detailed description and analysis of their functionality and
vulnerability.

￿ Line-like (utilities, lifelines): distributed systems comprising a number

of vulnerable point-like sub-systems in their nodes, as well as vulnerable
segments, and characterised by their fl ow-transmission function.