Search

Transport network criticality analysis aims at ranking transport infrastructure elements based on their contribution to the performance of the overall infrastructure network. Despite the wide variety of transport network criticality metrics, little guidance is available on selecting metrics that are fit for the specific purpose of a study. To address this gap, this study reviews, evaluates and compares seventeen criticality metrics. First, we conceptually evaluate these metrics in terms of the functionality of the transport system that the metrics try to represent (either maintaining connectivity, reducing travel cost, or improving accessibility), the underlying ethical principles (either utilitarianism or egalitarianism), and the spatial aggregation considered by the metrics (either network-wide or localised). Next, we empirically compare the metrics by calculating them for eight transport networks. We define the empirical similarity between two metrics as the degree to which they yield similar rankings of infrastructure elements. Pairs of metrics that have high empirical similarity highlight the same set of transport infrastructure elements as critical. We find that empirical similarity is partly dependent on the network’s topology. We also observe that metrics that are conceptually similar do not necessarily have high empirical similarity. Based on the insights from the conceptual and empirical comparison, we propose a five-step guideline for transport authorities and analysts to identify the set of criticality metrics to use which best aligns with the nature of their policy questions.

Master Planning is currently the dominant approach to airport strategic planning. However, history shows that this approach can often result in costly mistakes. Because there are many stakeholders with conflicting objectives, deep uncertainty about the future, and many potential strategies, planners often narrow their scope by using a single forecast for the future, leaving out alternative strategies, and excluding stakeholders, resulting in a Master Plan that quickly becomes obsolete and may be opposed by some stakeholders. What is needed is a flexible, integrated approach that enables collaboration among stakeholders. Such an approach can be facilitated using a Decision Support System (DSS) that provides a way for decisionmakers and stakeholders to evaluate alternatives quickly and easily with respect to their outcomes of interest. We present the conceptual design for a DSS called HARMOS, showing how it meets the high-level requirements for airport strategic planning while addressing the proble...