In the aftermath of an extreme natural hazard, community residents must have access to functioning food retailers to maintain food security. Food security is dependent on supporting critical infrastructure systems, including electricity, potable water, and transportation. An understanding of the response of such interdependent networks and the process of post-disaster recovery is the cornerstone of an efficient emergency management plan. In this study, the interconnectedness among different critical facilities, such as electrical power networks, water networks, highway bridges, and food retailers, is modeled. The study considers various sources of uncertainty and complexity in the recovery process of a community to capture the stochastic behavior of the spatially distributed infrastructure systems. The study utilizes an approximate dynamic programming (ADP) framework to allocate resources to restore infrastructure components efficiently. The proposed ADP scheme enables us to identify near-optimal restoration decisions at the community level. Furthermore, we employ a simulated annealing (SA) algorithm to complement the proposed ADP framework and to identify near-optimal actions accurately. In the sequel, we use the City of Gilroy, California, USA to illustrate the applicability of the proposed methodology following a severe earthquake. The approach can be implemented efficiently to identify practical policy interventions to hasten recovery of food systems and to reduce adverse food-insecurity impacts for other hazards and communities.
more »
« less
Integrating Operational and Organizational Aspects in Interdependent Infrastructure Network Recovery
Managing risk in infrastructure systems implies dealing with interdependent physical networks and their relationships with the natural and societal contexts. Computational tools are often used to support operational decisions aimed at improving resilience, whereas economics‐related tools tend to be used to address broader societal and policy issues in infrastructure management. We propose an optimization‐based framework for infrastructure resilience analysis that incorporates organizational and socioeconomic aspects into operational problems, allowing to understand relationships between decisions at the policy level (e.g., regulation) and the technical level (e.g., optimal infrastructure restoration). We focus on three issues that arise when integrating such levels. First, optimal restoration strategies driven by financial and operational factors evolve differently compared to those driven by socioeconomic and humanitarian factors. Second, regulatory aspects have a significant impact on recovery dynamics (e.g., effective recovery is most challenging in societies with weak institutions and regulation, where individual interests may compromise societal well‐being). And third, the decision space (i.e., available actions) in postdisaster phases is strongly determined by predisaster decisions (e.g., resource allocation). The proposed optimization framework addresses these issues by using: (1) parametric analyses to test the influence of operational and socioeconomic factors on optimization outcomes, (2) regulatory constraints to model and assess the cost and benefit (for a variety of actors) of enforcing specific policy‐related conditions for the recovery process, and (3) sensitivity analyses to capture the effect of predisaster decisions on recovery. We illustrate our methodology with an example regarding the recovery of interdependent water, power, and gas networks in Shelby County, TN (USA), with exposure to natural hazards.
more » « less- Award ID(s):
- 1635717
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10460607
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Risk Analysis
- Volume:
- 39
- Issue:
- 9
- ISSN:
- 0272-4332
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 1913-1929
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Urban resilience is a multifaceted concept including the recovery of the physical infrastructure and various urban activities that depend on that physical infrastructure. It is relatively straightforward to quantify infrastructure resilience by tracking the recovered facilities in time and marking the time that the infrastructure is fully functioning again. However, the physical infrastructure recovery does not necessarily indicate that the urban activities bounce back to the predisaster conditions. The restoration of urban activities depends on the areas that a particular infrastructure serves (e.g., residential, commercial) and the connections with other critical facilities (e.g., health, education). It is important to investigate the infrastructure recovery and “resilience divide” with respect to the enabled services and affected populations in order to achieve all-inclusive resilience. For this purpose, we examined the resilience of different physical elements such as power feeders (i.e., underground or overhead lines), critical facilities (e.g., fire and rescue services, hospitals) and different socio-demographic segments of the population (i.e., different age groups, ethnicities, and income levels) which constitute an urban environment. The analyses were conducted using the power outages experienced after Hurricane Hermine in Tallahassee, as a case study. The findings show that overall resilience performance can be distinct and/or not homogeneous for the resilience of different physical elements, urban services, and population groups.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Communities face the challenge of finding restoration strategies in the aftermath of disasters. In particular, independent and self‐interested utility managers devise such strategies for infrastructure through a heuristic decentralized process. This paper takes a game‐theoretic approach to model the decentralized and strategic restoration decision making with application to interdependent infrastructure. Particularly, we model the decision process using simultaneous games to investigate decision makers' conflicting preferences. We employ Bayesian games to incorporate the realistic assumptions of poor interagent communication, resulting in incomplete information. Also, we account for behavioral biases such as bounded rationality, cooperative behavior or lack thereof, and equality‐driven resource allocations. We test our models using ideal, synthetic interdependent networks, and the realistic infrastructure of Shelby County, TN. Results show that cooperation leads to the best‐performing decisions even if others are not cooperative. The necessity of cooperation is even higher when there is a dominant player whose service is vital to other players. Our sensitivity results highlight the significant influence of resource availability and allocation on the performance of restoration plans. Our approach enhances the practicality of decision models for community resilience, and unravels novel policy strategies such as cooperation incentives.
-
Ribeiro, Haroldo V. (Ed.)Societal responses to crises require coordination at multiple levels of organization. Exploring early efforts to contain COVID-19 in the U.S., we argue that local governments can act to ensure systemic resilience and recovery when higher-level governments fail to do so. Event history analyses show that large, more urban areas experience COVID-19 more intensely due to high population density and denser socioeconomic networks. But metropolitan counties were also among the first to adopt shelter-in-place orders. Analyzing the statistical predictors of when counties moved before their states, we find that the hierarchy of counties by size and economic integration matters for the timing of orders, where both factors predict earlier shelter-in-place orders. In line with sociological theories of urban governance, we also find evidence of an important governance dimension to the timing of orders. Liberal counties in conservative states were more than twice as likely to adopt a policy and implement one earlier in the pandemic, suggesting that tensions about how to resolve collective governance problems are important in the socio-temporal dynamic of responses to COVID-19. We explain this behavior as a substitution effect in which more urban local governments, driven by risk and necessity, step up into the action vacuum left by higher levels of government and become national policy leaders and innovators.more » « less
-
Nicewonger, Todd E. ; McNair, Lisa D. ; Fritz, Stacey (Ed.)https://pressbooks.lib.vt.edu/alaskanative/ At the start of the pandemic, the editors of this annotated bibliography initiated a remote (i.e., largely virtual) ethnographic research project that investigated how COVID-19 was impacting off-site modular construction practices in Alaska Native communities. Many of these communities are located off the road system and thus face not only dramatically higher costs but multiple logistical challenges in securing licensed tradesmen and construction crews and in shipping building supplies and equipment to their communities. These barriers, as well as the region’s long winters and short building seasons, complicate the construction of homes and related infrastructure projects. Historically, these communities have also grappled with inadequate housing, including severe overcrowding and poor-quality building stock that is rarely designed for northern Alaska’s climate (Marino 2015). Moreover, state and federal bureaucracies and their associated funding opportunities often further complicate home building by failing to accommodate the digital divide in rural Alaska and the cultural values and practices of Native communities.[1] It is not surprising, then, that as we were conducting fieldwork for this project, we began hearing stories about these issues and about how the restrictions caused by the pandemic were further exacerbating them. Amidst these stories, we learned about how modular home construction was being imagined as a possible means for addressing both the complications caused by the pandemic and the need for housing in the region (McKinstry 2021). As a result, we began to investigate how modular construction practices were figuring into emergent responses to housing needs in Alaska communities. We soon realized that we needed to broaden our focus to capture a variety of prefabricated building methods that are often colloquially or idiomatically referred to as “modular.” This included a range of prefabricated building systems (e.g., manufactured, volumetric modular, system-built, and Quonset huts and other reused military buildings[2]). Our further questions about prefabricated housing in the region became the basis for this annotated bibliography. Thus, while this bibliography is one of multiple methods used to investigate these issues, it played a significant role in guiding our research and helped us bring together the diverse perspectives we were hearing from our interviews with building experts in the region and the wider debates that were circulating in the media and, to a lesser degree, in academia. The actual research for each of three sections was carried out by graduate students Lauren Criss-Carboy and Laura Supple.[3] They worked with us to identify source materials and their hard work led to the team identifying three themes that cover intersecting topics related to housing security in Alaska during the pandemic. The source materials collected in these sections can be used in a variety of ways depending on what readers are interested in exploring, including insights into debates on housing security in the region as the pandemic was unfolding (2021-2022). The bibliography can also be used as a tool for thinking about the relational aspects of these themes or the diversity of ways in which information on housing was circulating during the pandemic (and the implications that may have had on community well-being and preparedness). That said, this bibliography is not a comprehensive analysis. Instead, by bringing these three sections together with one another to provide a snapshot of what was happening at that time, it provides a critical jumping off point for scholars working on these issues. The first section focuses on how modular housing figured into pandemic responses to housing needs. In exploring this issue, author Laura Supple attends to both state and national perspectives as part of a broader effort to situate Alaska issues with modular housing in relation to wider national trends. This led to the identification of multiple kinds of literature, ranging from published articles to publicly circulated memos, blog posts, and presentations. These materials are important source materials that will likely fade in the vastness of the Internet and thus may help provide researchers with specific insights into how off-site modular construction was used – and perhaps hyped – to address pandemic concerns over housing, which in turn may raise wider questions about how networks, institutions, and historical experiences with modular construction are organized and positioned to respond to major societal disruptions like the pandemic. As Supple pointed out, most of the material identified in this review speaks to national issues and only a scattering of examples was identified that reflect on the Alaskan context. The second section gathers a diverse set of communications exploring housing security and homelessness in the region. The lack of adequate, healthy housing in remote Alaska communities, often referred to as Alaska’s housing crisis, is well-documented and preceded the pandemic (Guy 2020). As the pandemic unfolded, journalists and other writers reported on the immense stress that was placed on already taxed housing resources in these communities (Smith 2020; Lerner 2021). The resulting picture led the editors to describe in their work how housing security in the region exists along a spectrum that includes poor quality housing as well as various forms of houselessness including, particularly relevant for the context, “hidden homelessness” (Hope 2020; Rogers 2020). The term houseless is a revised notion of homelessness because it captures a richer array of both permanent and temporary forms of housing precarity that people may experience in a region (Christensen et al. 2107). By identifying sources that reflect on the multiple forms of housing insecurity that people were facing, this section highlights the forms of disparity that complicated pandemic responses. Moreover, this section underscores ingenuity (Graham 2019; Smith 2020; Jason and Fashant 2021) that people on the ground used to address the needs of their communities. The third section provides a snapshot from the first year of the pandemic into how CARES Act funds were allocated to Native Alaska communities and used to address housing security. This subject was extremely complicated in Alaska due to the existence of for-profit Alaska Native Corporations and disputes over eligibility for the funds impacted disbursements nationwide. The resources in this section cover that dispute, impacts of the pandemic on housing security, and efforts to use the funds for housing as well as barriers Alaska communities faced trying to secure and use the funds. In summary, this annotated bibliography provides an overview of what was happening, in real time, during the pandemic around a specific topic: housing security in largely remote Alaska Native communities. The media used by housing specialists to communicate the issues discussed here are diverse, ranging from news reports to podcasts and from blogs to journal articles. This diversity speaks to the multiple ways in which information was circulating on housing at a time when the nightly news and radio broadcasts focused heavily on national and state health updates and policy developments. Finding these materials took time, and we share them here because they illustrate why attention to housing security issues is critical for addressing crises like the pandemic. For instance, one theme that emerged out of a recent National Science Foundation workshop on COVID research in the North NSF Conference[4] was that Indigenous communities are not only recovering from the pandemic but also evaluating lessons learned to better prepare for the next one, and resilience will depend significantly on more—and more adaptable—infrastructure and greater housing security.more » « less
