Protection of transport infrastructures against major accidents in land use planning policies. A decision support approach

Users of transport infrastructures nearby hazardous plants may represent important populations potentially impacted by a major accident. Toulouse catastrophe in 2011 has been an illustrative example as it strongly impacted highway users. Therefore, transport infrastructure users (Roads and railways mainly) represent a population to be protected within a land use planning policy as it is the case for inhabitants. Accordingly, this paper presents a decision support approach aiming to help local stakeholders identifying the most cost effective measures to protect transport infrastructures from major accidental consequences. The suggested approach takes in account both technical and participatory constraints with the aim of offering an equal chance to all involved stakeholders to understand the issues under discussion and formulate opinions and values. After a description of the French regulatory context, the major technical difficulties related to transport infrastructures protection will be described before introducing the main technical choices adopted by the team. Finally, a decision support procedure is described and a real case study presented. This work is strongly embedded in the French regulatory context. However, we believe the decision support structure as fully adaptable to other regulatory contexts.

[1]  David Okrent,et al.  Risk perception and risk management: on knowledge, resource allocation and equity , 1998 .

[2]  Reinhard Diestel,et al.  Graph Theory , 1997 .

[3]  Clément Lenoble,et al.  Introduction of frequency in France following the AZF accident , 2011 .

[4]  T. Webler,et al.  Fairness and competence in citizen participation : evaluating models for environmental discourse , 1995 .

[5]  Ortwin Renn.  Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges , 1998 .

[6]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  A Brief Primer on Participation: Philosophy and Practice , 1995 .

[7]  Bruna Zani,et al.  The Effect of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident on Risk Perception, Antinuclear Behavioral Intentions, Attitude, Trust, Environmental Beliefs, and Values , 2013 .

[8]  Jérôme Taveau,et al.  Risk assessment and land-use planning regulations in France following the AZF disaster , 2010 .

[9]  Michalis Christou,et al.  Risk Assessment In Support To Land-Use Planning In Europe: Towards More Consistent Decisions? , 2011 .

[10]  D. Seddon.  A `New Paradigm' for Analysis? , 1986 .

[11]  Nijs Jan Duijm.  Acceptance criteria in Denmark and the EU , 2009 .

[12]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  An explicative model of ‘public’ interorganizational interactions , 1993 .

[13]  Sisi Zlatanova,et al.  Risk-maps informing land-use planning processes A survey on the Netherlands and the United Kingdom recent developments. , 2007, Journal of hazardous materials.

[14]  T. Aven,et al.  How to define and interpret a probability in a risk and safety setting , 2013 .

[15]  J. Short.  The Social Fabric at Risk: Toward the Social Transformation of Risk Analysis , 1984 .

[16]  T. R. Lakshmanan,et al.  The broader economic consequences of transport infrastructure investments , 2011 .

[17]  J. Mingers,et al.  A New Paradigm of Analysis , 2001 .

[18]  Marvin Rausand,et al.  Foundations and choice of risk metrics , 2014 .

[19]  Trevor Kletz.  Reducing Risks, Protecting People—HSE's Decision Making Process, HSE Books, 2001, 74 pp, £5, ISBN 0 7176 2151 0 , 2003 .