4.7 Article

Evaluating resilience in urban transportation systems for sustainability: A systems-based Bayesian network model

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2020.102840

关键词

Resilience; Sustainable development; Transportation system; Bayesian network model; Systemic thinking

资金

  1. Future Resilient Systems at the Singapore-ETH Centre [FI-370074011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a hierarchical Bayesian network model (BNM) to quantitatively evaluate the resilience of urban transportation systems. Based on systemic thinking and taking a sustainability perspective, we investigate the long-term resilience of the road transportation systems in four cities in China from 1998 to 2017, namely Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing, respectively. The model takes into account various factors collected from multi source data platforms involved in stages of design, construction, operation, management, and innovation in road transportation systems. We test the model with the forward inference, sensitivity analysis, and backward inference. The result shows that the overall resilience scores of all four cities' transportation systems are within a moderate range with values between 49% to 59%. Although they all have an ever-increasing economic level, the levels of transportation resilience in Beijing and Tianjin decrease first and then gradually increase in a long run, which indicates a strong multi-dimensional, dynamic, and non-linear characteristic in resilience economic coupling effect. Additionally, the results obtained from the sensitivity analysis and backward inference suggest that decision makers should pay more attention to the capabilities of quickly rebuilding and making changes to cope with future disturbances. As an exploratory study, this study clarifies the concepts of long-term multi-dimensional resilience and specific hazard-related resilience and provides an effective decision-support tool for stakeholders when building resilient infrastructure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据