Network Evaluation Based on Connectivity Reliability and Accessibility

  • Ryuhei Kondo
  • Yasuhiro Shiomi
  • Nobuhiro Uno
Conference paper
Part of the Transportation Research, Economics and Policy book series (TRES)


Our daily lives and activities rely heavily on transportation systems, particularly road networks. At the same time, we face the risk of various types of natural disasters. It is, therefore, extremely important to establish road networks that are robust and reliable under conditions of network degradation caused by natural disasters. Even immediately after a disaster, an area should retain connectivity with its neighboring areas, while at the same time residents in the area should have access to adequate urban services, such as medical facilities, at a reasonable travel cost. To achieve the former goal, the concept of connectivity reliability has been developed, and to achieve the latter, accessibility measures have been proposed. This study proposes a method of evaluating road network robustness against a natural disaster by applying the concepts of connectivity reliability and accessibility. A new network evaluation measure, which considers both the risk of link disruption and the number of opportunities in an area, was first established. Then, the measure was applied to test networks, and the influence of network topology and distribution of opportunities were analyzed. Finally, the road network and medical facilities in Kyoto Prefecture were evaluated using the proposed measure.


Natural Disaster Network Topology Road Network Travel Cost Impedance Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ball, M, TL Magnanti, CL Monma, GL Nemhauser (1995) Handbooks in operations research and management science, Vol.7, Network models. North-HollandGoogle Scholar
  2. Ben-Akiva ME, Lerman SR (1985) Discrete choice analysis: theory and application to travel demand. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhat C, Handy S, Kockelman K, Mahmassani H, Chen Q, Weston L (2000) Development of an urban accessibility index: literature review. Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report, TX-01/7–4938–1Google Scholar
  4. Hansen WG (1959) How accessibility shapes land use. J Am Inst Plann 25:73–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jenelius E, Petersen T, Mattsson LG (2006) Importance and exposure in road network vulnerability analysis. Transp Res A 40:537–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jiang BC, Claramunt C, Batty M (1999) Geometric accessibility and geographic information: extending desktop GIS to space syntax. Comput Environ Urban Syst 23:127–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jones SR (1981) Accessibility measures: a literature review. Laboratory Report 967. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, UKGoogle Scholar
  8. Kurauchi F, Sumalee A, Tamura H, Uno N (2007) Bilevel programming problem for analyzing capacity vulnerability in transportation network under limited damage. Paper presented at the Third International Symposium on Transportation Network Reliability, 19–20, July, 2007, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  9. Kurauchi F, Uno N, Sumalee A, Seto Y (2009) Network evaluation based on connectivity vulnerability. In: Lam WHK, Wong SC, Lo HK (eds) Transportation and traffic theory. Springer, New York, pp 637–649Google Scholar
  10. Miller HJ (1991) Modeling accessibility using space-time prism concepts within geographical information systems. Int J Geogr Inf Syst 5:287–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Minami M, Takano S, Satoh K (1996) An evaluation method for measuring performance levels of alternate routes on highway networks. J Infrastruct Plann Manage 530(3):67–77 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  12. Okada N, Kajitani Y, Sakakibara H, Tatano H (1999) Modeling of performance criteria for measuring disparity/concentration of metropolitan highway networks under a near-field earthquake risk. J Infrastruct Plann Manage 632(45):93–104 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  13. Research Report of International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences (IATSS) (2000) Study on personal passenger car traffic regulation following the great earthquake disaster (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  14. Taylor MAP (2008) Critical transport infrastructure in urban areas: impacts of traffic incidents assessed using accessibility based network vulnerability analysis. Growth Change 39(4):593–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Taylor MAP, Sekhar SVC, D’Este GM (2006) Application of accessibility based methods for vulnerability analysis of strategic road networks. Netw Spat Econ 6:267–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Train K (2002) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Wakabayashi H, Iida Y (1992) Upper and lower bounds of terminal reliability of road networks: an efficient method with Boolean algebra. J Nat Disaster Sci 14(1):29–44Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Metropolitan Expressway Co., Ltd.TokyoJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of EngineeringKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  3. 3.Graduate School of ManagementKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations