ITS and Emergency Management: An organisation-focused approach

ITS and emergency management:

an an organisationorganisation--focused focused approachapproach

Dr. André Dantas

Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering

Christchurch, New Zealand

or

Creating a tool to Creating a tool to

suit endsuit end--usersusers’’

needsneeds(not the creator’s needs)

otherwise it will not be useful

Presentation outline

•Context

•Applying knowledge management theory and principles

•Building strong linkages with end-users organisations

•Preliminary test results

•Ongoing research activities

•Main findings from emergency events / exercises

•Conclusion

CONTEXT

How to deal with injured/affected people?

What to do?

What and how to repair damaged infrastructure?

How and which resources to use?

How and which information to share?

How to coordinate efforts?

How to go back to business as usual?

Context

How to minimize disruption to society by “optimising” the

allocation of available resources over time?

Context

Organisations at the core of the

problem/solution?

Emergency Event

Other emergency response and recovery

organisations

=Dynamic Response Recovery Tool

ConsultantsTransit NZ

Contractors

•Support information sharing

•Assist resource deployment decision-making

•Minimize disruption

Context

APPLYING KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT THEORY AND PRINCIPLES

Information Management Cycle

Information Needs

Information

AcquisitionInformation use Adaptive

Behavior

Information Organisation

and Storage

Information products and

services

Information

distribution

Knowledge management

After spending lots of time with Transit NZ, its contractors and consultants….

…after visiting and interviewing various

emergency management professionals…

Information needs

Table 2. Transit NZ and response partners’ information needs in response activities Regional Consultant info needs Regional Contractor info needs Transit NZ Regional Office info needs CD info needs

Event

Occurrence

-Potential damaged area/region

-Type of event

-Intensity and expected duration

-Available resources

Event

Observation

-Damaged area/region

-Type of event

-Damaged asset type

-Partial or complete road closure

-Alternative roads

-Traffic flow composition

-Contractors’ resources

-CD emergency declaration?

-Damaged area/region

-Type of event

-Attributes of potentially damaged assets

(Location; Original condition;

Characteristics; Costs; Priority

Repair availability).

-Damaged area/region and event type

-Damaged asset type;


-Alternative roads


-Contractors/Consultants’ available resources

-Initial road closure time/ costs estimation

-MCDEM emergency declaration?

Event

Assessment

Comparison before and after / damaged asset

Location

Original condition

Characteristics

Treatment options

Costs

Priority

Repair availability

-Contractors’ available resources

-Report on before and after / damaged asset

-Summary of damaged assets per type

-Summary of treatment options

-Summary of Costs/Priorities

Repair availability

-Consultants and contractors available resources

-Initial road closure time estimation

-Initial cost estimation


-Report on road closures

(Location; Partial/complete;

Expected road opening

-Consultants and contractors

available resources


Resources

Deployment

-Location of Contractors’ equipment and personnel

-Deployment times

-Allocation plan of resources and personnel per

damaged asset (Location; Original condition;

Characteristics; Treatment; Priority; Effectiveness)

-Traffic management plan

MCDEM emergency declaration?

-Allocation plan of resources and

personnel per damaged asset (Location;

Original condition; Characteristics;

Treatment; Priority; Effectiveness)

-Deployment times

-Traffic management plan


Event

Reporting

Damaged area/region

-Attributes of damaged assets: (Location;

Original/Current conditions; Characteristics;

Treatment; Costs; Priorities; Repair availability)

Damaged asset type

Attributes of damaged assets: (Location;

Original/Current conditions;

Characteristics; Treatment; Costs;

Priorities; Repair availability)


-Alternative roads



-Damaged asset type


-Alternative roads


-Contractors/Consultants’ available resources

-Road closure time/costs estimation


Event Re-

assessment

-Comparison before and after / damaged asset

(Location; Original condition; Characteristics;

Treatment options; Costs; Priority; Repair

availability)


Stop response/Initiate Recovery mode/Continue

Response?

-Report on before and after / damaged asset

-Summary of damaged assets per type, treatment options,

Costs and Priorities

-Repair availability

-Consultants and contractors available resources

-Initial road closure time cost estimation

-Stop response/Initiate Recovery mode/Continue Response?

-Report on road closures

(Location; Partial/complete;

Expected road opening

-Consultants and contractors

available resources



DGIS


DGIS

Event

PK EventID

Description, etc.

Consultant

PK ConsultantID

Details, etc.

Case

PK CaseID

FK2 ConsultantID

FK1 EventIDFK3 StatusID

etc.Incident

PK IncidentID

Decsription, etc.

FK1 EventID LocationID

PavementDamageID

DamageID BridgeDamageID

SignPostDamageID

DetourRouteID CulvertDamageID

TreatmentID

FK2 LocationReferenceID

IncidentAssignment

PK IncidentAssignmentID

FK1 IncidentIDFK2 ContractorID

FK3 StatusID

etc.

Contractor

PK ContractorID

Details, etc.

Status

PK StatusID

eg. Opened, In Progress, Suspended, Closed, etc.

PavementDamage

PK PavementDamageID

Description

FK1 IncidentID

RoadDamage

PK RoadDamageID

Roughness

SkidResistance

TextureFK1 IncidentID

BridgeDamage

PK BridgeDamageID

Name Type

Description

FK1 IncidentID

SignPostDamage

PK SignpostDamageID

Type

Size

DescriptionFK1 IncidentID

DetourRoute

PK DetourRouteID

Description

FK1 IncidentID

FK2 RegionID

CulvertDamage

PK CulvertDamageID

Name

Type

DescriptionFK1 IncidentID

Treatment

PK TreatmentID

TreatmentGiven

FK1 IncidentID

Region

PK RegionID

RegionName etc

PavementDetails

PK PavementDetailID

FirstChipSize SecondChipSize

Thickness

DateFK1 IncidentID


RoadCondition

PK RoadConditionID

Roughness

SkidResistance Texture

FK1 IncidentID

DateFK2 LocationReferenceID

BridgeDetails

PK BridgeDetailID

Name Type

Foundation

FK1 IncidentID Date


SignPostDetails

PK SignpostDetailID

Type Size

Foundation

FK1 IncidentID Date


CulvertDetails

PK CulvertDetailID

Name Type

Foundation

FK1 IncidentID Date


LocationReference

PK LocationReferenceID

SH RoadName ReferencePosition

Observation

Pre & Post Event

(History tables)


BUILDING STRONG

LINKAGES WITH END-USERS

ORGANISATIONS

Linkages with end-users

PRELIMINARY TEST RESULTS

What if DGIS was

implemented?

C

C

CC

C

C

C

C

C

NZ CoastState Highway

Accident

Black iceC Contractors office

Fire

Floods

Rain

Rockfall

Slips

Snow

Washout

100000 0 100000 200000 Kilometers

N

EW

S

Road Closure events from April 2004 to March 2005

Only in the South Island, over NZ$300 thousand could be saved annually, if DGIS implemented.

What if DGIS was used in emergency exercises?

ONGOING RESEARCH ACTIVITIES

Event

Consultants

Transit NZ

Contractors•Distribute Info

SHO •Classify event type

•Identify key priorities

•Quantify potential damage

•Set of actions

Optimization

•Resource Allocation

•Time and cost estimates

•Recommended response

•Display recommendations

DRRT framework

Expert System

Ongoing activities

Ongoing activities

We are currently 4 years into a 6 year programme

Challenges ahead:

Building a truly dynamic GIS system

Developing the expert-system to support response and recovery decision-making:

–Simplified optimisation techniques to suggest alternative response priorities

–Understanding (currently implicit) priority setting by different players

–End-user buy-in and willingness to pilot and implement

Conclusion

•Barriers can be reduced if technology is employed according to organizations’ needs;

•Involvement of end-users during all development stages can produce considerable results;

•Opportunities in exploring new emergency responseparadigms with extensive telecommunications and geo-spatial technologies;

•Potential has already been observed and quantified,but implementation of response systems require muchmore than technology.

•Challenges in developing technological and methodological solutions according to organisational needs

Publications

www.resorgs.org.nzSeville, E. , Brunsdon, D, Dantas, A. , Le Masurier, J. ,Wilkinson, S., Vargo, J. (2008) Organisational resilience: Researching the reality of New Zealand organisations; Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning , Volume 2, Number 2, pp. 258 – 266.

Dantas, A., Seville, E., Gohil, D. (2007) Information Sharing During Emergency Response and Recovery: A Framework for Roading Organisations; Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Vol 2022, pp. 21-28; ISSN 0361-1981;

Seville, E., Brunsdon, D., Dantas, A., Le Masurier, J., Wilkinson, S., Vargo, J. (2006) Building Resilience; Resilient Organisations Research Programme, Report No.4; University of Canterbury, New Zealand.

Dantas, A., Seville, E., Nicholson, A (2006) Information sharing during disaster: Can we do better? Resilient Organisations Research Programme, Report No.2; University of Canterbury, New Zealand.

Dantas, A., Seville, E. (2006) Organisational issues in implementing an information sharing framework: lessons from the Matata flooding events in New Zealand; Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management; Vol 14, No. 1, March, pp. 38-52. Blackwell Publishing; ISSN; 0966-0879.

Thank you

Dr. André Dantas

Resilient Organisations Research ProgrammeCivil and Natural Resources Engineering Department University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

www.resorgs.org.nz