A data-information sharing framework for roading organizations’
response to a natural disaster.
Dharmista Gohil*
André Dantas
Erica Dalziell
Resilient Organisations Research Programme, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Canterbury, New Zealand
1. Introduction
After a natural disaster strikes, roading organisations need to efficiently respond in
order minimize the damage to society (Gordan et al, 1998). Roading authorities
(Department of Transport, Consultants, Contractors, etc) involved in the maintenance
and operation of roading assets have to respond in a coordinated fashion both within
themselves and with other lifeline organizations.
Data and information sharing within roading organizations is crucial for a coordinated
response to a natural disaster to make an accurate decision on the action to be taken.
At all response stages, data and information will affect the quality and reliability of
the decisions taken, because the more the involved parties know about the damage
situation and resources the more they will be able to accurately and efficiently
respond (Briton, 2004). Also, the sharing of the data and information will play a
considerable role in order to keep all informed about the latest development at each
response stages.
Although the importance of data and information sharing during disaster is widely
acknowledged, current practices and techniques presents considerable limitations in
providing tools that fulfil emergency management practitioners. On one hand, many
scholars have demonstrated that information gathering and processing during disaster
may affect the efficiency of response and recovery activities, but very limited efforts
have been observed in order to face this problem. On the other hand, technological
advances in information management of spatial-temporal data such as Geographical
Information Systems (GIS) have been made in recent years, but they cannot be
applied as conceived. This is mainly because of the special and dynamic requirements
during response activities to natural disasters.
This paper presents the development and application of a data-information sharing
framework for roading organizations’ response to a natural disaster. Using a
Geographical Information System (GIS), a standardized neutral structure for data and
information sharing is conceived to provide assessment of damages, resource
availability, treatment options, cost and time spent to resume normal activities.
Authorities will use this framework in a coordinated fashion to efficiently respond to
damages caused by natural disasters.
This paper is divided into five sections. After this introduction, the roading
organisations emergency management context in New Zealand is presented. Third
section describes the conceptual data/information sharing framework. A case study in
which the framework is applied in New Zealand is presented in the fourth section.
Finally, the fifth section presents the conclusions.
*Contact details: dgo26@student.canterbury.ac.nz, Phone: +64-3642238, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800,
Department of Civil Engineering, Christchurch, New Zealand.
2. Roading organisations emergency management context in New Zealand
This section aims to describe the context in which roading organisations operate
during emergency events. Next two sub-sections describe the major role of the
Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) in New Zealand
and how roading organisations interact in this context.
2.1. Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM)
MCDEM is the leader for making New Zealand and its communities resilient to
disasters. It employs a risk management strategy approach to reduction, readiness,
response and recovery to disasters. This approach starts with understanding and
studying the disasters likely to be faced in New Zealand and the vulnerability of the
communities and infrastructure to those disasters. It also educates the community on
what these disasters could do to the community. MCDEM also focuses on the
measures for reducing the risks and for managing the impacts when they occur
(MCDEM, 2005).
The MCDEM is a semi-autonomous body within the Department of Internal Affairs.
MCDEM is responsible to ensure the preparedness of the New Zealand community
for any natural and technological hazards or disasters. This is done by recognizing the
potential hazards and what these could do to the New Zealand residents, developing
measures for reducing the risks as well as managing the impacts when they occur. The
MCDEM works in coordination with local government, utilities and the emergency
services involved in civil defense management.
Events of large proportions affecting vast areas and creating massive damages that
treat human beings are mainly controlled by the MCDEM. Under the supervision of a
Civil Defence Controller, lifelines organisations (telecommunication, energy, water,
roading and waste treatment providers) interact with local and regional authorities.
The complexity of the interactions among involved organisations is considerable. In
addition, CD controller is directly responsible for taking actions in loc.
2.2. Transit New Zealand
New Zealand has about 10,837 kilometers of state highway network. Transit NZ
achieves its objectives by maintaining the existing roads and developing new
construction programmes. Transit NZ appoints Consultants for the technical services
and Contractors for carrying out the physical works.
During an emergency situation, it is the responsibility of the Contractor to carry out
the physical repairs and reopen the road to the traffic as soon as possible. The
Consultants are mainly involved in providing the technical details and strategic advice
to the Contractors. The Consultants also interact with Civil Defence and Emergency
Services and Transit. The Contractors are mostly involved in supplying information
about the road condition.
In Transit NZ’s procedures, emergency situations are classified into 3 levels (small,
medium and large) and according to time required for the road reopening and
extension of the damaged area (Transit NZ, 2003). Figure 1 presents a schematic
representation of levels of emergency and the involvement of organisations.
Emergency
Levels of Emergency
Small
Event
Medium
Event
Large
Event
Response
Local
Authorities
Consultants
Contractors
Transit
Transit Headquarters
Land Transport NZ
Civil Defence
Emergency
services
Ministry of Transport
Roading organizations involved
Figure 1: Levels of Emergency and roading organizations involved
3. Conceptual data/information sharing framework for natural disaster response
within New Zealand roading organizations
Based upon the understanding of the context in which Transit NZ, its consultants and
contractors operate during emergency events, this section presents a conceptual
framework that integrates information management techniques and GIS to improve
the efficiency of response actions and resources during natural disasters.
The general conception of the data/information sharing framework is based in
utilizing Transit NZ’s current asset management information system (Road Asset
Maintenance Management - RAMM) to create a georeferenced database according to
disaster response needs. The information framework for the roading organization uses
information from RAMM initially to identify the location according to the unique
road ID given to each road. This information is exported to a GIS database linking
each ID to the map. The information is filled in the emergency tables prepared at each
of the phases discussed in section 2. This information is then shared between the
contractors, consultants and Transit New Zealand in a Small and Medium Event. In
case of a large event, the information is shared between the contractors, consultants,
Transit New Zealand as well as Civil Defense. Figure 2 shows the information
framework for roading organizations.
Initial Warning
(Phase 0)
Prepare the
framework tables
Disaster/
Emergency
RAMM database
Data retrieved by
Spatial query
data exported
GIS database
ID
X
Y
1
X1
Y1
2
X2
Y2
…
…
…
-Consultant
-Contractor
-Transit New
Zealand
i
Small and
Medium
Small Emergency
Emergencies
Large Emergency
Yi
Information Shared
j
Information shared
…
Xi
Xi
…
n
Yj
…
…
…
Yn
Xn
ID
X
Y
RAMM
Z
T
V
…
$
i
Xi
Yi
Zi
Ti
Vi
…
$i
j
Xi
Yj
Zj
Tj
Vj
…
$j
…
-Consultant
-Contractor
-Transit New Zealand
-Civil Defence
Concultants fill table
A while contractor
reaches the site
1B Event reporting
(Table B filled)
-2A Event assessment
-2B Decision making
(Table C filled)
-3A Response deployment
-3B Field operation
-3C Following up
-4A Results reporting
(Table D filled)
Condition not good
-5A Efficiency
assessment
-5B Decision making
Road condition good
Stop
Figure 2: Information framework for roading organizations
4. Case study
A case study was conducted using road closures in the South Island of New Zealand
Using a GIS software, road closure records (from April 2004 to March 2005) were
georeferenced according to the conceptual information framework.
In order to assess the efficiency of the data/information sharing framework, we
conducted a comparative analysis between response phase durations before and after
the potential implementation of the framework. Based upon the estimation of response
duration, cost reduction scenarios were analyzed. Considering current Transit NZ
practices, Table 1 shows the results for small, medium and large emergencies for
different types for road closures.
The information framework may reduce the time for response in some of the phases.
There may not be any change in time for some phases; however the overall time will
be reduced. They comprise:
 Phase 3 (time taken for contractor to reach the site): This time can be reduced if
the contractor has a GIS map showing the exact location. The amount by which this
time is reduced may be assumed to be between 1 to 5 % of the original time;
 Phase 4 (contractor informs the consultant the actual site condition): This time can
also be reduced using the information framework by 1 to 5%;
 Phase 5 (decision making stage on the treatment to be given): time can be reduced
by 10 to 15% since there will be all the data available for the decision to be made
quickly;
 Phase 6 (waiting time for the orders from Civil Defense in case of large events):
time for this phase can be assumed to be reduced by 10 to 15% since the Civil
Defense will have the GIS map and the required information based on which the
decision may be made faster;
 Phase 7 (the time taken to do the repair work): time may be reduced by 1 to 5% if
the contractor has the map of the existing road features, etc before the road closures;
and
 Phase 8 (consultants can report back to the Civil Defense and the contractors of
the condition of the after repair): it can be reduced by 1 to 5% with the use of the
framework
The combination of these levels of reduction of each response phase as presented in
Table 2, the costs after the implementation of the framework are shown in Table 3.
The comparative analysis of Tables 1 and 3 shows that considerable reduction costs
associated with road closures could be reached. In the best case (scenario 2), a total
reduction of $16,733 in cost would be achieved. On the other hand, the worst case
(scenario 3) could generate a total reduction of $5,772.
Table 1: Average time and cost for all emergency level and type without the
data/information sharing framework
Emergency level Small
Medium
Large
Average total Average total Average total Average total Average total
time (Min)
Cost ($)
time (Min)
Cost ($)
time (Min)
Emergency type
Accident
177
28551
554
27884
Slips
156
1211
1072
18113
2951
Flooding
169
5202
1033
28280
2260
Snow
246
3839
1006
30394
3941
Fire
120
1136
Highwind
178
3356
Rain
420
6311
-
Average total
Cost ($)
60744
3405
105704
-
Table 2: Percentage of time reduced for each phase for all scenarios.
Phases
Reduction %
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.50%
5%
1%
2.50%
5%
1%
12.50%
15%
10%
12.50%
15%
10%
2.50%
5%
1%
2.50%
5%
1%
Table 3: Average time and cost for all emergency level and type without the
data/information sharing framework
Emergency level Small
Scenario 1
Avg
Avg
time Cost
(Min) ($)
Emergency type
Accident
172 27723
Slips
152 1175
Flooding
162 4989
Snow
225 3519
Fire
116 1101
Highwind
173 3262
Rain
▬
▬
Scenario 2
Avg Avg
time Cost
(Min) ($)
Scenario 3
Avg Avg
time Cost
(Min) ($)
Medium
Scenario 1
Avg
Avg
time Cost
(Min)
($)
Large
Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 1
Avg
Avg Avg
Avg Avg
Avg
time Cost time Cost time
Cost
(Min) ($) (Min) ($) (Min)
($)
Scenario 2
Avg
Avg
time Cost
(Min)
($)
Scenario 3
Avg
Avg
time
Cost
(Min)
($)
168 27058 174 28138 539 27149 527 26515 547 27539
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
148 1148 154 1193 1040 17576 1015 17159 1055 17838 2838 58412 2768 56957 2885 59372
158 4868 164 5071 1002 27445 979 26797 1017 27852 2165
3269 2111 3188 2201
3323
220 3432 230 3594 977 29519 954 28823 992 29954 3813 102259 3717 99699 3873 103883
114 1075 118 1117 ▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
169 3186 175 3309 ▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
404 6078 395 5934 411 6174
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
▬
5. Conclusions
This paper presented the conception and application of a data/information sharing
framework that is likely to contribute to the improvement of response activities during
natural disasters. Results of the case study demonstrate the potential for implementing
the framework in the operations of NZ roading organisations (Transit NZ, its
consultants and contractors) in conjunction with other lifeline organisations and the
MCDEM.
This is the first step in a long-term research project that intends to create a planning
instrument that evaluates how efficiently infrastructure organisations will make use of
physical and human resources during and after hazard events and assists asset
managers to optimise the deployment of resources in an actual event. The
data/information sharing framework plays a fundamental role in this project, because
it allows the efficient processing and analysis of data according to emergency
management needs.
Further studies will gear towards the physical implementation of the data/information
sharing framework in form of a prototype, which will be adjusted and tested
according to Transit NZ operational procedures. This will result in a Dynamic
Response GIS (DRGIS) tool that will operate using Global Positioning Systems
(GPS) in order to incorporate on-line Locational and attribute properties of roading
assets during emergency events.
References
Gordon, P. Richardson, H.R. and Davis, W., (1998) Transport-related impacts of the
Northridge earthquake, Journal of Transportation and Statistics, 1(2): 21- 36.
Britton, N. (2004) Response Strategies within an Integrated Disaster Risk
Management Framework, Fourth Annual IIASA-DPRI Meeting on Integrated
Disaster Risk Management: Challenges of Implementation, p.p.29-43.
MCDEM, (2005) Ministry of Civil Defense and Emergency Management: Structure
URL:http://www.civildefence.govt.nz/memwebsite.nsf/wpg
Transit New Zealand (2003) Network Consultants Emergency Management Plan:
Malborough, TNZ Contract 81PT, Malborough roads network contract