Freight

Cover of Identification of a Risk Indicator to Support 'Life Line' Freight Routes
Identification of a Risk Indicator to Support 'Life Line' Freight Routes
  • Publication no: AP-R525-16
  • ISBN: 978-1-925451-26-9
  • Published: 12 August 2016

This report summarises and presents the Risk Indicator, a tool designed to identify and support investment in ‘Life Line’ freight routes.

‘Life Line’ freight routes are roads that may not deliver highly positive outcomes in traditional upgrade project priority assessments based on AADT measures, but have high value to the communities and regions they support. The Risk Indicator considers factors relevant to determining priority for road upgrade investment including the:

  • size and needs of the communities serviced
  • availability of alternative routes
  • length and convenience of any alternative routes
  • historic incidence of events that have closed the route
  • assessment of responses to previous events, including cost and impacts in the regions serviced.

The report includes instructions for using the Risk Indicator tool. The tool has been developed for use by road managers to establish:

  • whether a route is a ‘Life Line’
  • which routes have the greatest claim for project funding based on ‘Life Line’ needs.

The Excel tool can be downloaded from the supporting documents tab.

  • Summary
  • Glossary of Terms
  • 1. Introduction
    • 1.1. Background
  • 2. Current Practice - Identification and Investment in Freight Routes
    • 2.1. Australian Federal Government
      • 2.1.1. Context
      • 2.1.2. Identification of Freight Routes
      • 2.1.3. Assessing Infrastructure Investments
      • 2.1.4. Freight and Emergency-Related Measures
    • 2.2. Australian State and Territory Governments
      • 2.2.1. Australian Capital Territory
      • 2.2.2. New South Wales
      • 2.2.3. Northern Territory
      • 2.2.4. Queensland
      • 2.2.5. South Australia
      • 2.2.6. Tasmania
      • 2.2.7. Victoria
      • 2.2.8. Western Australia
    • 2.3. Local Government
    • 2.4. New Zealand
      • 2.4.1. Project Context
      • 2.4.2. Identification of Freight Routes
      • 2.4.3. Assessing Infrastructure Investments
      • 2.4.4. Information on Road Closure Events
  • 3. International Best Practice for ‘Life Line’ Routes
    • 3.1. World Bank
      • 3.1.1. Armenian Lifeline Road Improvement Project
      • 3.1.2. The Rural Access Index
      • 3.1.3. Africa Transport Policy Program
    • 3.2. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
      • 3.2.1. United States
      • 3.2.2. Canada
      • 3.2.3. Japan
    • 3.3. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
  • 4. Risk Indicator Data Sources
    • 4.1. Australian Federal Government
    • 4.2. State and Territory Jurisdictions
    • 4.3. Local Governments
    • 4.4. Bureau of Meteorology
    • 4.5. New Zealand
  • 5. Implications of Research for Risk Indicator Design
  • 6. Developing the ‘Life Line’ Risk Indicator
    • 6.1. The ‘Life Line’ Risk Indicator tool
    • 6.2. Structure and Approach of the ‘Life Line’ Risk Indicator Tool
  • 7. Initial Testing of the ‘Life Line’ Risk Indicator Tool
    • 7.1. Approach and Routes Used
    • 7.2. Outcomes from Initial Testing
  • 8. How to Use the ‘Life Line’ Risk Indicator tool
  • References
  • Appendix A Routes with ‘Strong’ Life Line Characteristics Nominated by the Reference Group
  • Appendix B Routes with Lesser Life Line Characteristics Nominated by the Reference Group
  • Appendix C Route Closure Data Provided by Reference Group Members
  • Appendix D NZTA State Highway Resilience Assessment
  • Appendix E Measuring The Economic Costs of Route Disruption