Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38

SIIV - 5th International Congress - Sustainability of Road Infrastructures

Analysis of Lifelines Transportation Vulnerability

Francis Ciriannia, Fabio Fontea,Giovanni Leonardia*, Francesco Scopellitia

a
Department of Mechanics and Materials – University Mediterranea of Reggio Calabria, Via Graziella, Reggio Calabria 89124, Italy

Abstract

Transportation lifelines are the infrastructural network within the transport system which assures to a community its social,
economic and environmental needs. It is fundamental to analyze the vulnerability of infrastructural lifelines due to the risk
exposure arising from natural hazards. There is a high level of dependence by other lifeline utilities on the transport networks.
An interruption of the road network may well result in the consequential loss of another service.
The present paper moves in this direction, dedicating particular attention to the highway system, proposing a fuzzy
methodology finalized to the assessment of the landslides susceptibility of the system.

© 2012
© 2012 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
Elsevier Ltd.
Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of SIIV2012
Selection Committee
Scientific Open access
and/or peer-review underunder CC BY-NC-ND
responsibility license. Scientific Committee
of SIIV2012
Keywords: lifelines, risk analysis, fuzzy logic, landslides hazard;

1. Introduction

Modern society relies entirely on an articulated network of infrastructures, which has assumed a vital role for the
system in its whole. Lifelines are, therefore, the networks which are developed on the entire territory to relate and
connect the various settlements and points of interest of the different subsystems. They guarantee the essential
services necessary for the functioning and the survival of the communities (transports, energy,
telecommunications, water and sanitary networks). We can define them as the set of structures, infrastructures and
services regarded as indispensable for the maintaining or protection of the life of the given systems.
This is why nowadays we refer to Engineering of lifelines [1]. In this term we address all knowledge and
methodologies to design infrastructures in the system which have been planned to reduce and minimize the
exposure and susceptibility of infrastructures, also as an outcome of the use of new technologies. Lifelines
engineering doesn’t have to be referred exclusively to natural disasters, as earthquakes, but in general, to any kind
of emergency due to a generic human or natural hazard or disaster: meteorological or hydro-geological events,
fires, floods, toxic and industrial accidents, hazardous materials transportation [2], etc. To design, adopting the

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-0965-875237; fax: +39-0965-875207.

E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-0428 © 2012 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of SIIV2012 Scientific Committee
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.857
30 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38

criteria for the maintenance of lifelines means to have greater guarantees of reliability and efficiency in any
condition of emergency [3]. These aspects of the design and management of infrastructures have come to the
public attention with a stronger appeal only in recent years. Recent experiences have highlighted the extreme
importance of the lifelines functioning in the conditions of emergency which follow a catastrophic event [4, 5].
Some lifelines have to guarantee effectiveness and efficiency in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, in some
cases it has to be maintained also during the event, to allow a rapid and efficient access and assistance and rescue,
guaranteeing evacuation, and more in general maintaining access for all emergency services [6].
It is fundamental therefore that the whole system of the lifelines, if damaged during the event, can be repaired
in the shortest time, one of the priorities in times of emergency, and doing so rehabilitating accessibility and
primary services, necessary for the sustenance of the population and the rescue process.

2. Lifeline transport network

The national transport system has its backbone, mainly, on infrastructures which are part of the lifelines
system. Quite simply, if we consider the road and rail network, or the urban mobility systems, as underground
metro and tram lines. The main characteristic which differentiates transport infrastructures from other types of
lifelines is the human access, for individual use, and in general for all needs of mobility.
In the case of transport systems there is a direct exposition for the population, as in transports the users are the
people served by the transport infrastructures. Therefore the exposition to a risk, or hazard, of the transport
infrastructure, implies an exposition to the risk of the users of the system. This is an aspect which assumes
primary value in the assessment of the risk for the population of an area, because the principal object of the
exposure analysis is the population which could be hit by the event.
Synthesizing we can say that the transport network assumes a primary interest in the risk assessment for the
following reasons:

x on and in transport infrastructures there is a high concentration of population, on the network (roads, railways,
urban lines) and in nodes (airports, railway stations, ports, underground). This direct exposition of the users is
such that it has to be necessarily be considered in the assessment;
x during the emergency phase (in the aftermath of a catastrophic event), it is necessary to have an efficient
transport network to ensure a rapid and easy access to the areas. The delays of the aid operations, due to the
reduced functionality of the road network, cause an indirect exposition on the population of the area hit by the
disaster. Thus the need to identify the existing transport lifelines, which have to be assessed for use in
extraordinary conditions. These infrastructures must be adapted in order to reduce their vulnerability;
x on the functional vulnerability of anthropic systems. The poor function of transport infrastructures causes
negative effects which can lead to a crisis of other systems connected, if not of the whole territorial system;
x the crisis of the transport system has important consequences on the socio-economic development of the area.
As a matter of fact, all the economic activities are adversely affected, and may have considerable difficulty of
recovery after the functional re-establishment of the system.
Transportation lifelines are vital during an emergency, and play an important role in all four phases of
emergency management: mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery [7].

The aim of this paper is to propose a fuzzy logic model for the assessment of roads exposure level to natural
hazards in the Province of Reggio Calabria (Italy). The proposed model is based on the implementation of the
available GIS information and the risk maps. The fuzzy logic model is developed with Matlab software (Jang
1997) as a hierarchical system with three inputs and one output. The aim of the model is use is in lifelines
management.
 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38 31

3. Transport lifelines in the study area

Almost all the territory of Calabria is subject to phenomena of hydrogeological and seismic risk.
The territory of Calabria is geologically young, and often subject to natural modifications. The hydro-
geological disaster (landslides, floods) is one of the risk factors to which Calabria is exposed. This is due, among
other conditions, from the physical conformation of the region, and the climatic conditions.
Extraordinary conditions, as earthquakes, and more ordinary meteorological conditions, as rainfalls, can both
induce landslides, rock fall, or debris flow. The particular geological and morphological conditions, with
mechanisms which are activated by extreme meteorological events, or seismic phenomenon, lead to the landslide
phenomena, on new formation and rapid evolution. The vulnerability of Calabria region to hydrogeological
hazard has been shown also in recent history (Crotone, 1996; Soverato, 2000) and many are the events of
landslides which led to damages to goods and human loss.
In the paper we analyze the exposition of the transport lifelines to landslide hazard.
The road system of the Province of Reggio Calabria is composed by a network of 1850 km of roads. The area
served is of 3.180 km2; the provincial roads connect the 97 cities and towns present in the province, with a total
population of 560.000 inhabitants. Some infrastructures have high traffic flows, with a high rate of HGV, and in
other cases sporadic traffic: the road use varies with the seasonal activities, and the variability is particularly
significant in the areas of tourist attraction. The strategic roads, which are the backbone of the transport lifelines,
have been classified in function of traffic flows, served population and relevance in the national and regional
transport system, as illustrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Strategic infrastructures of the province of Reggio Calabria

4. Methodology

The proposed fuzzy logic model is designed as hierarchical structure with several inputs and one output. The
number of inputs corresponds to the linguistic variables, which described the natural hazards. The output
represents a complex risk assessment [8]. Research methodology is based on integration of GIS and fuzzy
reasoning which helps decision makers to determine which risks are the most important ones, and ultimately
decide where hazard mitigation strategies should be employed.
32 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38

4.1. Fuzzy modeling

Fuzzy logic was introduced by Zadeh [9] as an extension of classical set theory and is built around the central
concept of a fuzzy set or membership function. Fuzzy set theory, the proper name for this theory, enables the
processing of imprecise information by means of membership functions, in contrast to Boolean characteristic
mappings. Assigning 0 to false values and 1 to true ones, fuzzy logic also allows in-between values.
Assuming that U is a set of values of u, fuzzy logic defines a mapping from U to the unit interval through a
membership function PA(u): U o [0; 1]. This membership function can be defined in linguistic terms.
Fuzzy models are flexible mathematical structures that have been recognized as universal function
approximators [10]. Fuzzy models use If-Then rules and logical connectives to establish relations between the
variables defined for the model of the system. Fuzzy rules consist of two parts: an antecedent part stating
conditions on the input variable(s); and a consequent part describing the corresponding values of the output
variable(s).Usually , the case of a single output variable is considered.
The fuzzy sets in the rules serve as an interface amongst qualitative variables in the model, and the input and
output numerical variables. The fuzzy modeling approach has several advantages when compared to other
nonlinear modeling techniques, such as neural networks: in general, fuzzy models can provide a more transparent
representation of the system under study, maintaining a high degree of accuracy. In Fig. 2, a general scheme of a
fuzzy model is shown.

Fig 2. General scheme of a fuzzy model

A fuzzy rule system that connects the input variables to the output variable by means of if–then rules is chosen.
Given particular values of the input variables, the degree of fulfillment of a rule is obtained by aggregating the
membership degrees of these input values into the respective fuzzy sets. The fuzzy output is determined by the
degrees of fulfillment and the consequent parts of the rules.
Numerous research studies has led to an universal acceptance of the belief that natural hazard systems must be
dealt with by the methods provided by fuzzy sets theory [3, 11, 12].
In fact, uncertainty of natural hazard is relative to randomness and fuzziness. For example, the occurrence of
earthquakes is a random event, while seismic intensity is a fuzzy concept. In the process of risk evaluation, the
random part is due to a large amount of unknown factors existing, and the fuzziness has concern with the terms
of macroscopic grade and incomplete knowledge sample [13].
The following example deals with the application of the fuzzy rule-based model to the lifelines vulnerability
due to landslides.
Landslides cause frequent and widespread damage to the population and built-up environment in many areas of
the world. Still, the hazard, vulnerability and risk analyses are extremely difficult to establish [14-16].
Landslides may be defined as a mass of soil, debris and/or rock which moves downslope or laterally because of
gravitational or inertial forces. This definition includes a large variety of ground motions such as debris flows,
deep failure of slopes, rock falls, etc. The various kinds of landslides can be classified by the type of movement
and the nature of material involved.
 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38 33

The indicators characterizing the landslides hazard have been defined using the published thematic GIS maps
for the landslide risks.
Following this approach it was possible to assign to every analyzed event a probability and an intensity level.
The probability is function of the activity level of the landslides (active, dormant, relict). The intensity is function
of a set of spatial distributed parameters describing the destructiveness of the landslide, i.e. velocity, kinetic
energy, total displacement, flow discharge, etc. [17].
These two indicators represent the inputs of the first fuzzy logic subsystem and the corresponding output gives
the complex hazard assessment of the studied natural risk. A scheme of the hierarchical fuzzy system is presented
in Fig. 3.
The inputs of the first fuzzy logic subsystem are Input 1 “intensity” and Input 2 “probability” and the linguistic
output variable is defined as Intermediate variable 1 “hazard level”.

I nput1
I nput2 Fuz zyLogic

FuzzyLogic Output
I nput3

Fig. 3. Fuzzy system

The third input indicator represents the strategic importance level of the exposed infrastructural elements in the
transport system. This classification of the importance of the primary transport network of the Province of Reggio
Calabria, is based on the level of service in case of calamity, the traffic flows and the served population defining
three sets (Figure 1):
1) strategic primary transport ways (High);
2) strategic secondary transport ways (Middle);
3) transversal access ways (Low).
The output of the fuzzy subsystem is output of the whole fuzzy system. This output variable give the complex
susceptibility score for to the defined indicators considering the strategic importance of the lifelines.
The value of the complex assessment is a criterion for decision making about the intervention priorities for risk
mitigation. The aim of the system of analysis is to give a numerical value, in opportune scale that indicates the
level of priority. The higher value corresponds to the higher risk degree.

5. Example of Application of the Proposed Model

The proposed model has been applied to assess the landslides susceptibility and the consequent risk of the
strategic infrastructures for their function of lifelines in the Province of Reggio Calabria (Effati 2012).
The main aim is to obtain a classification of the different section exposed to the landslides risk following the
illustrated methodology. Firstly on the basis of specific thematic maps the infrastructural sections interested by
different type of landslides (rock fall, debris flow, landslide, etc.) by using GIS software have been identified
[18]. Overlapping the information layers contained in thematic maps, a map where the exposed road sections are
highlighted has been obtained (Fig. 4 and Fig. 5).
34 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38

Fig 4. Landslides limits and considered lifelines.

Fig. 5. Particular of some exposed section of the motorway SA-RC and of the railway
 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38 35

This analysis give as output the total length of exposed sections and calculates the rate on the total
infrastructure length (Table 1).

Table 1. Strategic roads

Importance Name Road length (m) Length of the exposed sections (m) Rate (%)

High A3 - SA-RC 71000 1167 1.64

High Raccordo Autostradale 5700 237 4.16
Middle SS 18 - Tirrena Inferiore 106400 3964 3.73
High SS 106 Jonica 139100 2466 1.77
High S. G. C. Ionio-Tirreno 34200 67 0.20
Low SS 111 - Gioia Tauro-Locri 57800 2167 3.75
Low SS 112 - Bagnara-Bovalino 96000 14034 14.62
Middle Reggio Calabria - Battipaglia 63800 2176 3.41
Low Reggio Calabria - Taranto 135100 333 0.25

For these exposed lifelines sections the fuzzy logic system gives the corresponding susceptibility degree. In the
fuzzy logic system the three input linguistic variables are represented by fuzzy membership functions and are
assessed in the interval [0, 10].
The output (complex susceptibility score) is described by five fuzzy membership function: “very low”, “low”,
“middle”, “high” and “very high” (Table 2).

Table 2 Output levels

very high A rapid destruction of exposed infrastructures is possible.

The functionality of the whole transport system could be compromised.
high Damage to infrastructures should be expected, but not a rapid destruction.
The functionality of part of the strategic transport system could be compromised.
middle Slight damage to infrastructures is possible. Damage might occur but not at the structure. The
functionality of part of transport system could be limited or restricted.
low Low probability of a high intensity event. Local and limited reduction of the functionality of
no strategic lifelines.
very low Negligible danger, according to currently available information.

The complex susceptibility score is assessed in the interval [0, 100] using triangular membership functions.
The input and output membership functions are shown in Fig. 6.
The inference rules in the fuzzy system are defined through «if…. then». Some of the inference rules of the
first fuzzy subsystem are defined as follow:

Rule 1: IF intensity is “low” AND probability is “middle” THEN hazard is “low”

Rule 2: IF intensity is “low” AND probability is “high” THEN hazard is “middle”
…………………………………………..
Rule 20 IF intensity is “very high” AND probability is “very high” THEN hazard is “very high”
Some of the inference rules of the second fuzzy subsystem are defined as follow:
36 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38

Rule 1: IF hazard is “very low” AND importance is “low” THEN susceptibility is “very low”
Rule 2: IF hazard is “very low” AND importance is “middle” THEN susceptibility is “low”
…………………………………………..
Rule 15 IF hazard is “very high” AND importance is “high” THEN susceptibility is “very high”

Fig. 6. Input variable of fuzzy logic subsystem 1

The fuzzy logic system is implemented in Matlab using Fuzzy Logic Toolbox. The inference surface in 3D for
the first subsystem and the output membership function are given in Fig. 7.

Fig. . Inference surface and output membership functions

6. Results and Discussion

The application of the described methodologies for the assessment of landslide susceptibility of the transport
lifelines of the Province of Reggio Calabria, has led to the identification of the infrastructure sections subject to
risk, classified is a defined scale [1-100]. After defining the input and output of fuzzy inference system and its
membership functions and rules, a value of danger for each point was determined. The proposed values of the
fuzzy inference system were classified as: low, middle, high, very high. The results of the analysis are
summarized in Fig. 8 and in Table 3 where the lengths of the sections exposed at the different level are reported.
The results of the application have shown how given the rate of infrastructure, divided in classes, subject to
landslides susceptibility:

x the 2,43% of strategic primary transport ways;

x the 1,26% of strategic secondary transport ways;

x the 8,65% of transversal access ways.

 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38 37

The data shows that the risk is not spread on the entire infrastructure, affecting a limited part of the
infrastructure. It must be said that even if the study has shown that the sections subject to risk are limited, the
sections fall in areas which have a strategical value, and in an area where there is absence of alternative routes in
case of interruption of flow.

Table 3 Lengths of the sections exposed

Name Low risk (m) Middle risk (m) High risk (m) Very high risk (m)

A3 - SA-RC 0.00 401.00 766.00 0.00

Raccordo Autostradale 0.00 63.00 174.00 0.00
SS 18 - Tirrena Inferiore 0.00 2211.00 933.00 820.00
SS 106 Jonica 0.00 1406.00 302.00 758.00
S.G.C. Ionio-Tirreno 0.00 67.00 0.00 0.00
SS 111 - Gioia Tauro-Locri 1873.00 231.00 63.00 0.00
SS 112 - Bagnara-Bovalino 4000.00 5734.00 4300.00 0.00
Reggio Calabria - Battipaglia 0.00 368.00 725.00 1083.00
Reggio Calabria - Taranto 0.00 132.00 0.00 201.00

7. Conclusions

In this research a Geographic Information System (GIS) was employed to obtain a new approach for creating
maps of segments of roads exposed to landslide risk based on the theory of fuzzy logic.
The system, for the scale of definition which it involves, does not allow an exact geographical and physical
allocation of the probability of collapse of the structure but rather a relative hierarchical scale of values. In such
sense it supplies useful information regarding the intervention priorities and, above all, a scale of inspection
surveys and analyses of structural nature which can find the effective level of susceptibility of the infrastructure,
and the most opportune mitigation actions for the reduction of risk levels.
In this context the scale of values assumed from the calculated index is read as an indicator of the intervention
priorities.

References
[1] Bakir, S.A., Elms, D.G., Lamb, J. (1994) Risk management and lifeline engineering, in: Proc. 12th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand.
[2] Barilla, D., Leonardi, G., Puglisi, A. (2009) Risk Assessment for Hazardous Materials Transportation, Applied Mathematical Sciences, 3
(46) 2295-2309.
[3] Cirianni, F., Leonardi, G., Scopelliti, F. (2008) A Methodology for Assessing the Seismic Vulnerability of Highway Systems, AIP
Conference Proceedings, 1020 864-871.
[4] Casari, M., Wilkie, S.J. (2005) Sequencing Lifeline Repairs After an Earthquake: An Economic Approach, Journal of Regulatory
Economics, 27 (1) 47-65.
[5] Chang, S.E., Nojima, N. (2001) Measuring post-disaster transportation system performance: the 1995 Kobe earthquake in comparative
perspective, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 35 (6) 475-494.
[6] Miller, H.J. (2000) Transportation and communication lifeline disruption, The Geographic Dimensions of Terrorism, Routledge, 145-152.
[7] Cova, T.J., Conger, S. Transportation hazards, in: Kutz, M. (Ed.) Handbook of transportation engineering, McGraw Hill, New York,
2004, pp. 297-304.
[8] Zlateva, P., Pashova, L., Stoyanov, K. (2011) Fuzzy logic model for natural risk assessment in SW Bulgaria, in: Proc. 2nd International
Conference on Education and Management Technology, IACSIT Press, Singapore.
[9] Zadeh, L.A. (1965) Fuzzy sets, Information and control, 8 (3) 338-353.
38 Francis Cirianni et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 53 (2012) 29 – 38

[10] Zeng, X.J., Singh, M.G. (1995) Approximation theory of fuzzy systems-MIMO case, Fuzzy Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 3 (2) 219-
235.
[11] Adriaenssens, V., Baets, B.D., Goethals, P.L.M., Pauw, N.D. (2004) Fuzzy rule-based models for decision support in ecosystem
management, Science of the Total Environment, 319 (1) 1-12.
[12] Samadzadegan, F., Zarrinpanjeh, N. (2008) Earthquake destruction assessment of urban roads network using satellite imagery and fuzzy
inference systems, The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences., XXXVII 409-414.
[13] Chongfu, H. (1996) Fuzzy risk assessment of urban natural hazards, Fuzzy sets and systems, 83 (2) 271-282.
[14] Cascini, L., Bonnard, C., Corominas, J., Jibson, R., Montero-Olarte, J. Landslide hazard and risk zoning for urban planning and
development, in: Landslide Risk Management. Taylor and Francis, London, 2005, pp. 199-235.
[15] Cardinali, M., Reichenbach, P., Guzzetti, F., Ardizzone, F., Antonini, G., Galli, M., Cacciano, M., Castellani, M., A, V.V. (2002) System
Sciences A geomorphological approach to the estimation of landslide hazards and risks in Umbria , Central Italy, Natural Hazards and Earth
System Sciences, 2 (May 1998) 57-72.
[16] Glade, T., Crozier, M.J. (2005) The nature of landslide hazard impact, in: Landslide hazard and risk. Wiley, Chichester, pp. 43-74.
[17] Hungr, O. (1997) Some methods of landslide hazard intensity mapping, in: Proc. Landslide risk assessment, Balkema, Rotterdam.
[18] A.B.R. Calabria (2001) Piano Stralcio per l’Assetto Idrogeologico (PAI), Regione Calabria: Specifiche Tecniche, Catanzaro, ottobre.