Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Disaster risk assessment of ports based on the perspective of vulnerability

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Global environmental changes have led to frequent occurrences of climatic extremes. The increasingly frequent and high-magnitude natural disasters in Taiwan have caused significant mortality, injury, and property damage. In response, there have been requests to improve the capacity to cope with extreme climatic conditions through increased awareness and identification of vulnerability. Disruptions to transportation systems affect the resilience for sustaining daily operations. Among the various types of transportation systems, ports provide substantial employment and industrial activity, contributing to national and regional development. In addition, ports integrate the functions of supply chains such as services in logistics, information, and business, becoming the location of industrial clusters. Therefore, this study examines the risk of port failures from the perspective of vulnerability. Specifically, seven vulnerable factors derived from the extant literature and lessons learned from the previous disaster cases are evaluated using geographic information systems. The results reveal that port capacity and efficiency have a significant effect on port vulnerability in which the efficiency of gantry cranes, labor productivity, free trade zone business volume, and ground access networks play crucial roles in port failure. Moreover, the risks associated with port operation are evaluated by overlapping a hazard map of areas prone to debris flows and tsunami inundation. The risk maps can assist decision makers in understanding the vulnerability and adopting appropriate strategies to minimize disaster risks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Athanasatos S, Michaelides S, Papadakis M (2014) Identification of weather trends for use as a component of risk management for port operations. Nat Hazards 72:41–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlas Y, Yasarcan H (2006) Goal setting, evaluation, learning and revision: a dynamic modeling approach. Eval Program Plan 29:79–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berle Ø, Asbjørnslet BE, Rice JB (2011) Formal vulnerability assessment of a maritime transportation system. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 96:696–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollin C, Hidajat R (2006) Community-based disaster risk index: pilot implementation in Indonesia. In: Birkmann J (ed) Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards—towards disaster resilient societies. United Nations University, New York, pp 271–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan SL, Huang SL, Wang SH (2003) On the risk zoning of flood hazard in Taipei areas. J City Plan 30:263–280 (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang YT, Lee SY, Tongzon JL (2008) Port selection factors by shipping lines: different perspectives between trunk liners and feeder service providers. Mar Policy 32:877–885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen BY, Lam WHK, Sumalee A, Li Q, Li ZC (2012) Vulnerability analysis for large-scale and congested road networks with demand uncertainty. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 46:501–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen CW, Lee CC, Tseng CP, Chen CH (2013) Application of GIS for the determination of hazard hotspots after direct transportation linkages between Taiwan and China. Nat Hazards 66:191–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox A, Prager F, Rose A (2011) Transportation security and the role of resilience: a foundation for operational metrics. Transp Policy 18:307–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Andrade MMN, Szlafsztein CF, Souza-Filho PWM, Araújo ADR, Gomes MKT (2010) A socioeconomic and natural vulnerability index for oil spills in an Amazonian harbor: a case study using GIS and remote sensing. J Environ Manag 91:1972–1980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fedeski M, Gwilliam J (2007) Urban sustainability in the presence of flood and geological hazards: the development of a GIS-based vulnerability and risk assessment methodology. Landsc Urban Plan 83:50–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng CM, Hsieh CH (2009) Implications of transport diversity for quality of life. J Urban Plan Dev 135:13–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming DK, Baird AJ (1999) Comment: some reflections on port competition in the United States and Western Europe. Marit Policy Manag 26:383–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foggin JH, Dicer GN (1985) Disappearing hinterlands: the impact of the logistics concept on port competition. Proc Transp Res Forum 26:385–391

  • Franc P, van der Horst M (2010) Understanding hinterland service integration by shipping lines and terminal operators: a theoretical and empirical analysis. J Transp Geogr 18:557–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung KF (2001) Competition between the ports of Hong Kong and Singapore: a structural vector error correction model to forecast the demand for container handling services. Marit Policy Manag 28:3–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GTZ (2004) Guidelines: risk analysis—a basis for disaster risk management. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, Eschborn

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton AJ (2005) Species diversity or biodiversity? J Environ Manag 75:89–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heaver TD, Meersman H, van de Voorde E (2001) Co-operation and competition in international container transport: strategies for ports. Marit Policy Manag 28:293–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh CH, Feng CM (2014) Road network vulnerability assessment based on fragile factor interdependencies in spatial-functional perspectives. Environ Plan A 46:700–714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh CH, Tai HH, Lee YN (2013) Port vulnerability assessment from the perspective of critical infrastructure interdependency. Marit Policy Manag. doi:10.1080/03088839.2013.856523

    Google Scholar 

  • Lam JSL, Dai J (2012) A decision support system for port selection. Transp Plan Technol 35:509–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee HS, Chou MT, Kuo SG (2005) Evaluating port efficiency in Asia Pacific region with recursive data envelopment analysis. J East Asia Soc Transp Stud 6:544–599

    Google Scholar 

  • Lei Y, Wang J, Yue Y, Zhou H, Yin W (2014) Rethinking the relationships of vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation from a disaster risk perspective. Nat Hazards 70:609–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin Y, Lee T (2012) Assessment of vulnerability and risk of Taijiang coastal areas to climatic changes. Int J Environ Earth Sci Eng 6:20–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindley SJ, Handley JF, Theuray N, Peet E, McEvoy D (2006) Adaptation strategies for climate change in the urban environment: assessing climate change related risk in UK urban areas. J Risk Res 9:543–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindley SJ, Handley JF, McEvoy D, Peet E, Theuray N (2007) The role of spatial risk assessment in the context of planning for adaptation in UK urban areas. J Built Environ 33:46–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lirn TC, Thanopoulou HA, Beynon MJ, Beresford AKC (2004) An application of AHP on transhipment port selection: a global perspective. Marit Econ Logist 6:70–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loo BPY, Chow SY (2006) Sustainable urban transportation: concepts, policies, and methodologies. J Urban Plann Dev 132:76–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller-Hooks E, Zhang X, Faturechi R (2012) Measuring and maximizing resilience of freight transportation networks. Comput Oper Res 39:1633–1643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller F (1998) Gradients in ecological systems. Ecol Model 108:3–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller M, Vorogushyn S, Maier P, Thieken AH, Petrow T, Kron A, Büchele B, Wächter J (2006) CEDIM risk explorer—a map server solution in the project ‘Risk Map Germany’. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 6:711–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science and Technology Center for Disaster Reduction (2013) 2013 hazard potential maps, NCDR Disaster Prone Website. http://satis.ncdr.nat.gov.tw/Dmap/102Catalog.aspx. Accessed 16 June 2013

  • Nir AS, Lin K, Liang GS (2003) Port choice behavior—from the perspective of the shipping. Marit Policy Manag 30:165–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum EP (1993) Ecology and our endangered life-support system. Sinauer Associates, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Park RK, De P (2004) An alternative approach to efficiency measurement of seaports. Marit Econ Logist 6:53–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves D (2005) Planning for diversity: policy and planning in a world of difference. Routledge, Oxon

    Google Scholar 

  • Remondo J, Bonachea J, Cendrero A (2008) Quantitative landslide risk assessment and mapping on the basis of recent occurrences. Geomorphol 94:496–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song DW, Yeo KT (2004) A competitive analysis of Chinese container ports using the analytic hierarchy process. Marit Econ Logist 6:34–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steg L, Gifford R (2005) Sustainable transportation and quality of life. J Transp Geogr 13:59–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tongzon J, Wu H (2005) Port privatization, efficiency and competitiveness: some empirical evidence from container ports (terminals). Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 39:405–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD (2009) Review of maritime transport. United Nations Publication, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • UNISDR (2004) Living with risk: a global review of disaster reduction initiatives. United Nations Publication, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • UNISDR (2005) Hyogo declaration. United Nations Publication, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • UNISDR (2009) Terminology on disaster risk reduction. http://www.unisdr.org/files/7817_UNISDRTerminology-English.pdf

  • Wang XD, Zhong XH, Liu SZ, Liu JG, Wang ZY, Li MH (2008) Regional assessment of environmental vulnerability in the Tibetan Plateau: development and application of a new method. J Arid Environ 72:1929–1939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WEF (2010) Global risks 2010: a global risk network report. World Economic Forum, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2005) Natural disaster hotspots: a global risk analysis. World Bank, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakubu A (2010) Path coefficient and path analysis of body weight and biometric traits in Yankasa lambs. Slovak J Anim Sci 43:17–25

  • Yuen CA, Zhang A, Cheung W (2012) Port competitiveness from the users’ perspective: an analysis of major container ports in China and its neighboring countries. Res Transp Econ 35:34–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the National Science Council, for their financial support of this research under Contract No. NSC 100-2410-H-229-001.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cheng-Hsien Hsieh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hsieh, CH. Disaster risk assessment of ports based on the perspective of vulnerability. Nat Hazards 74, 851–864 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1214-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1214-4

Keywords

Navigation