The concept of the system resilience within the infrastructure dimension: application to a Latvian case

Abstract Regarding the infrastructure systems resilience often means a capability of the system to recover its function and properties after a disruptive event. The evaluation of the resilience depends on the formulation of the resilience itself, the type of the system to be analysed and the methodology applied (i.e. quantitative or qualitative evaluations). The significance of this research field is crucial for optimizing recovery strategies and disaster risk management. This study provides a new methodological approach for selection of the most effective restoration strategy of a networked infrastructure system, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative (multi-criteria analysis) methods. The proposed methodology was summarized into a general algorithm and implemented into a programmed tool for practical application. The case of a real system was examined by the application of the developed methodology to the district heating pipeline system of Salaspils city (Latvia). This study also comprehends the main aspects to be considered when using the specific resilience metric as a function of time and involving economic components. The practical value of the current study is represented by the tool, which can be used by the stakeholders in the regional planning, organization of restoration and other processes, where high level efficiency in use of materials and time resources is required.

[1]  E. Dalziell,et al.  Resilience, Vulnerability, and Adaptive Capacity: Implications for System Performance , 2004 .

[2]  Lindsey R. Barnes,et al.  A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters , 2008 .

[3]  Shaomin Wu,et al.  Resilience to evolving drinking water contamination risks: a human error prevention perspective , 2013 .

[4]  Thomas Glade,et al.  Multi-hazard Analysis In NaturalRisk Assessments , 2011 .

[5]  Min Ouyang,et al.  A three-stage resilience analysis framework for urban infrastructure systems , 2012 .

[6]  Michel Bruneau,et al.  A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities , 2003 .

[7]  Mohammad Javanbarg,et al.  Minimal Path Sets Seismic Reliability Evaluation of Lifeline Networks with Link and Node Failures , 2009 .

[8]  Hans Dieleman,et al.  Organizational learning for resilient cities, through realizing eco-cultural innovations , 2013 .

[9]  Marina Beermann,et al.  Linking corporate climate adaptation strategies with resilience thinking , 2011 .

[10]  Michel Bruneau,et al.  Framework for analytical quantification of disaster resilience , 2010 .

[11]  Resilience Alliance,et al.  Assessing resilience in social-ecological systems: workbook for practitioners , 2010 .

[12]  Jieh-Jiuh Wang,et al.  Assessment of disaster resilience capacity of hillslope communities with high risk for geological hazards , 2008 .

[13]  Devanandham Henry,et al.  Generic metrics and quantitative approaches for system resilience as a function of time , 2012, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[14]  C. S. Holling.  Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems , 1973 .

[15]  Jeremy Hilton,et al.  A Framework for Resilience Thinking , 2012, CSER.

[16]  Geoff Coyle.  Practical Strategy: Structured tools and techniques , 2004 .

[17]  Ezio Todini,et al.  Looped water distribution networks design using a resilience index based heuristic approach , 2000 .

[18]  Michel Bruneau,et al.  Conceptualizing and measuring resilience: A key to disaster loss reduction , 2007 .

[19]  Yasushi Asami,et al.  Beyond geo-spatial technologies: promoting spatial thinking through local disaster risk management planning , 2011 .