A framework for characterising infrastructure interdependencies

Abstract

Abstract:The interdependencies within and between infrastructure systems can produce benefits and risks. The perception and value of these relationships can vary significantly depending on the viewpoint of the actors within the system. The current methods for describing these relationships do not necessarily account for these different perspectives, and tend to focus on reducing the risks and vulnerabilities associated with interdependency. By taking a holistic, multi-stakeholder approach of the infrastructure system it is possible to also identify the proactive opportunities for improving efficiency, effectiveness and resilience that can emerge from the relationships. A taxonomy is presented which allows for the characterisation of infrastructure relationships in multiple dimensions, with particular focus on identifying opportunities in a way that is therefore complementary to current methods. An application of this taxonomy to the identification of potentially beneficial relationships within the UK infrastructure system is described.Keywords: infrastructure interdependency; system-of-systems; systems architecture framework.Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Carhart, N. and Rosenberg, G. (2016) His research has included the development and implementation of new accident modelling techniques and process to enhance socio-technical resilience within high-hazard industries. Under ICIF he is involved in researching the planning and management of emergent properties within the infrastructure system-of-systems in order to enhance the value proposition and ensure the sustainable delivery of the valued society outcomes it facilitates. This has looked at supporting resilience at all levels of the system from the individual user to the governance structures and the critical role that learning and education play in managing the complex challenges of the future. He is also the editor of the Hazards Forum Newsletter. Ges Rosenberg is a Research Fellow in the Engineering Systems and DesignResearch Group at the University of Bristol focussed on systems-based, interdisciplinary approaches to engineering. His key themes include uncertainty management, evidence-based decision making, sustainability, resilience and 36 N. Carhart and G. Rosenberg creating value through co-design of innovative business models. His research includes co-developing the interdependency planning and management framework for UK Treasury's Green Book supplementary guidance: valuing infrastructure spend. He is the Network Manager for the EPSRC-funded project 'Redistributed Manufacturing | Resilient Sustainable City'. His prior background is in aerospace engineering including mathematical modelling, simulation and analysis of linear and nonlinear dynamic systems, and controls-structures interaction. This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled 'Establishing a common language of infrastructure interdependency' presented at the

Infrastructure Interdependencies: Opportunities from Complexity

“…In a 2013 workshop bringing together 25 infrastructure stakeholders from the energy, ICT, transportation, waste and water sectors and including representation from industry, academia and governance, a focus was placed on identifying beneficial interdependencies within and across sectors. Of 77 identified interdependencies, 87% intra-sector and 86% inter-sector linkages were categorised as having beneficial outcomes (Carhart and Rosenberg 2016). This result strongly suggests that the prevailing focus on interdependency solely as a risk factor is disproportionate and incomplete.…”

“…The existence of this typology has been beneficial in efforts to explore infrastructure interdependencies, as it provides a structured framework by which complex interconnections can be classified, understood and analysed (Chai et al 2011;Johansson and Hassel 2010;Wu et al 2016). More recent efforts by Carhart and Rosenberg (2016) have sought to expand upon the Rinaldi framework, proposing subdivisions to the category of logical linkages such as policy/procedural, societal, and economic interdependencies, as well as describing a framework of twelve variables by which interdependencies may be explicitly described and typified.…”

“…In order to better identify opportunities from interdependency, these opportunities may be organised into a typology depending on the nature and intensity of the interdependency in question. Previous typologies have been proposed by which infrastructure interdependencies can be broadly categorised and understood (Carhart and Rosenberg 2016;Ouyang 2014;Rinaldi et al 2001); the aim here is not to replace or challenge these efforts, but rather to complement them by presenting a typology specifically targeted at the identification of beneficial opportunities arising from these interdependencies.…”

Negative Impacts From Disruption of Road Infrastructure Element Performance on Dependent Subsystems: Methodological Framework

“…The core information is the type of failure and the importance factor. In their publication, Carhart and Rosenberg (2016) give a framework for characterising the dependencies of infrastructures. In their evaluation of the intensity of the link, they work with 12 variables defining it: (1) directionality, (2) order, (3) coupling, (4) location, (5) type, (6) interaction type, (7) functionality, (8) necessity, (9) outcome, (10) life-cycle impact stage, (11) geographic scale, and (12) sectoral scale.…”

Infrastructure as a Complex Adaptive System

“…National infrastructure systems often have mixed planning, delivery, operation, ownership, and regulatory frameworks, where governance frequently extends across private firms and individuals, public institutions, and third-sector organisations [31]. This reflects the historical legacy of many infrastructure systems, which were once publicly owned and centralised systems.…”