The first report of the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, a document dedicated to investigating the resilience of nine different infrastructure sectors against different natural hazards, was recently released. The report is based on a model developed by a partnership of international bodies coordinated by CIMA Research Foundation, and the related resilience index: it is the first global multi-hazard model and one that also considers the effects of climate change
Roads, airports, hospitals, schools, rail networks, gas pipelines, power lines… Infrastructure provides indispensable services to our activities and, for this reason, is also a key element in thinking in terms of sustainable development. Indeed, the Agenda 2023 for Sustainable Development recognizes their role and importance in several goals, starting with the Goal 9, Building resilient infrastructure and promoting innovation and equitable, responsible and sustainable industrialization.
Infrastructures are the focus of activities carried out by the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI), an international partnership formed in 2019 to promote, through several types of action, the resilience of the infrastructures that are already in place and that will be built in the future. Among CDRI’s activities is the publication every two years of a report dedicated to laying out policy, economic and research priorities for greater infrastructure resilience. The first edition of the report was published in October 2023. Titled Capturing the Resilience Dividend, it presents the first multi-hazard risk model for infrastructure globally, estimating a resilience index for it. The work is based on the innovative Global Infrastructure Risk Model and Resilience Index (GIRI), developed by CIMA Research Foundation, Ingeniar, NGI and the University of Geneva, and will also be presented at the COP28 UAE organized in late November.
Investing in resilience
“New infrastructure investments without strengthened resilience are analogous to pouring water into a bamboo basket “. This is the comparison that the report offers already in its introduction to explain the central role that infrastructure resilience has for sustainable development. Indeed, investing in resilient infrastructure means not only reducing the loss of services and the costs of damage caused by disasters and climate risks, but also having the opportunity to improve the quality of the services offered, improving their reliability and efficiency and decreasing their environmental impact (for example, by reducing emissions or associated land use). These are all elements at the heart of sustainable development in its various dimensions: social, environmental and economic.
Understanding where and how to target infrastructure investments for resilience, however, requires a comprehensive view of the risk they face. This is what the new report does, focusing on nine different sectors: energy; oil and gas; telecommunications; ports and airports; roads and railways; fresh and wastewater; health; education; and finally commercial, industrial and residential construction.
Nine sectors and six risks for one model
“To assess the risks faced by each of these infrastructure sectors, we have built a global model to estimate their resilience. One of the most innovative elements of the model is that it is the first truly multi-risk, since the global models available usually focus on one or a few risks and sectors. In contrast, the model presented in the report analyzes risks concerning floods, droughts, earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones, and landslides,” explains Dr Roberto Rudari, program director of CIMA Research Foundation, among the bodies that contributed to the report’s production. CIMA’s specific responsibility has concerned coordinating activities and technical support for modeling concerning floods and droughts. “This required a methodology that would make all results as homogeneous as possible, so that they would be comparable across nations.” The model’s input data for hydrometeorological hazards also takes into account the effects of climate change, based on the latest available data, under two different scenarios (higher or lower global temperature rise).
The risk estimated by the model is then translated into metrics, showing, for example, the possible average annual loss for a given sector, in a specific area analyzed. Finally, the model returns a resilience index, which considers not only the direct damage to the infrastructure itself but also socioeconomic risk and vulnerability factors.
“The data resolution of a global-scale model is too low to quantify the risk for a specific asset or to design new infrastructure projects,” Dr Rudari points out. “However, GIRI is designed to allow comparisons to understand where investment may be most needed; it also provides a methodological example on the basis of which pne can develop the same analysis at the local level, using more detailed data. Finally, its role as a performance indicator is also worth noting. In fact, it allows changes and progress regarding infrastructure resilience to be monitored over time.”