|
|
1 | (12) |
|
1.1 Need for Resilience in Infrastructure Systems |
|
|
4 | (1) |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
1.4 Research Hypothesis and Its Implications |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
1.5 Hypothesis Validation |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
1.7 Research Contribution |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
|
8 | (1) |
|
1.9 Dissertation Structure |
|
|
9 | (4) |
|
Chapter 2 Literature Review |
|
|
13 | (18) |
|
2.1 Resilience Definitions |
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
2.2 Resilience in Different Disciplines |
|
|
14 | (2) |
|
2.3 Resilience and Disruptions (Shocks) |
|
|
16 | (2) |
|
2.3.1 Categories of potential disruptions to systems |
|
|
16 | (1) |
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
2.4 Methodologies for Characterizing Resilience |
|
|
18 | (3) |
|
2.5 Resilience Measurement Approaches |
|
|
21 | (2) |
|
2.5.1 Infrastructure resilience metrics |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
2.5.2 Service infrastructures resilience metrics |
|
|
22 | (1) |
|
2.6 Elements of Resilience |
|
|
23 | (2) |
|
2.6.1 Resilience and vulnerability |
|
|
24 | (1) |
|
2.6.2 Resilience and adaptive capacity |
|
|
25 | (1) |
|
2.7 Resilience in Organizations |
|
|
25 | (3) |
|
2.8 Resilience and Risk Management |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
|
29 | (2) |
|
Chapter 3 Relationship Between Reliability, Robustness, Flexibility, Agility and Resilience |
|
|
31 | (18) |
|
|
32 | (3) |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
3.1.2 Reliability metrics |
|
|
33 | (1) |
|
3.1.3 Reliability and resilience |
|
|
34 | (1) |
|
|
35 | (3) |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
3.2.3 Robustness and reliability |
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
3.2.4 Robustness and resilience |
|
|
36 | (2) |
|
|
38 | (4) |
|
|
38 | (1) |
|
3.3.2 Flexibility metrics |
|
|
38 | (2) |
|
3.3.3 Flexibility and robustness |
|
|
40 | (1) |
|
3.3.4 Flexibility and resilience |
|
|
40 | (2) |
|
|
42 | (3) |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
3.4.3 Agility and flexibility |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
3.4.4 Agility and resilience |
|
|
44 | (1) |
|
3.5 Comparing R2FAR in Terms of Type Failures, Uncertainty and Adaptability |
|
|
45 | (2) |
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
Chapter 4 Resilience-Enabling Schemes |
|
|
49 | (14) |
|
4.1 Scheme Identification |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
4.2 Vulnerability Reduction |
|
|
51 | (6) |
|
|
51 | (2) |
|
|
53 | (1) |
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
|
55 | (1) |
|
|
56 | (1) |
|
4.3 Increasing Adaptive Capacity Through Reorganization |
|
|
57 | (4) |
|
4.3.1 Resource allocation |
|
|
57 | (1) |
|
4.3.2 Collaboration --- United we stand |
|
|
58 | (1) |
|
|
59 | (1) |
|
|
60 | (1) |
|
|
61 | (2) |
|
Chapter 5 Measuring the Resilience of Networked Infrastructure Systems |
|
|
63 | (26) |
|
|
64 | (4) |
|
|
64 | (4) |
|
5.2 Networked Infrastructure Resilience Assessment (NIRA) Framework |
|
|
68 | (17) |
|
5.2.1 Boundary definition |
|
|
68 | (3) |
|
5.2.2 Resilience metrics definition |
|
|
71 | (2) |
|
5.2.3 Network resilience and node-to-node resilience |
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
|
74 | (5) |
|
5.2.5 Resilience assessment process |
|
|
79 | (1) |
|
5.2.6 Resilience schemes implementation and simulation |
|
|
80 | (1) |
|
5.2.7 Resilience scheme evaluation |
|
|
81 | (4) |
|
5.3 NIRA Framework: A Systems Approach for Measuring Resilience |
|
|
85 | (2) |
|
|
87 | (2) |
|
Chapter 6 Assessing the Resilience of the Global Internet Cable System |
|
|
89 | (24) |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
6.2 Structure of the Trans-Oceanic Cable System |
|
|
90 | (1) |
|
6.3 Resilience Assessment of the Global Submarine Cable Infrastructure System |
|
|
91 | (20) |
|
6.3.1 Boundary definition |
|
|
92 | (2) |
|
6.3.2 Resilience assessment process |
|
|
94 | (7) |
|
6.3.3 Resilience scheme identification |
|
|
101 | (4) |
|
|
105 | (6) |
|
|
111 | (2) |
|
Chapter 7 Assessing the Resilience of Road Transportation Networks |
|
|
113 | (36) |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
7.2 Resilience Assessment of Boston-New York Corridor |
|
|
114 | (18) |
|
7.2.1 Boundary definition |
|
|
114 | (2) |
|
7.2.2 Resilience assessment process |
|
|
116 | (7) |
|
7.2.3 Resilience scheme identification |
|
|
123 | (3) |
|
|
126 | (6) |
|
7.2.5 Case study conclusion |
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
7.3 Resilience Assessment of Manhattan's Points of Entry |
|
|
132 | (14) |
|
7.3.1 Boundary definition |
|
|
133 | (2) |
|
7.3.2 Resilience assessment process |
|
|
135 | (5) |
|
7.3.3 Resilience scheme identification |
|
|
140 | (2) |
|
|
142 | (4) |
|
7.3.5 Case study conclusion |
|
|
146 | (1) |
|
|
146 | (3) |
|
Chapter 8 Assessing the Resilience of Maritime Transportation Systems |
|
|
149 | (16) |
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
8.2 Resilience Assessment of Main Pacific Ports |
|
|
150 | (14) |
|
8.2.1 Boundary definition |
|
|
151 | (2) |
|
8.2.2 Resilience assessment process |
|
|
153 | (6) |
|
8.2.3 Resilience scheme identification |
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
|
160 | (4) |
|
|
164 | (1) |
|
Chapter 9 Assessing the Resilience of Enterprise Systems --- An ITS Case Study |
|
|
165 | (16) |
|
|
165 | (1) |
|
9.2 Overview of National ITS |
|
|
166 | (2) |
|
9.2.1 The physical architecture |
|
|
166 | (1) |
|
9.2.2 The logical architecture |
|
|
167 | (1) |
|
9.3 Resilience Assessment of the National ITS Emergency Operations |
|
|
168 | (12) |
|
9.3.1 Boundary definition |
|
|
168 | (1) |
|
9.3.2 Resilience assessment process |
|
|
169 | (5) |
|
9.3.3 Resilience scheme selection |
|
|
174 | (1) |
|
|
175 | (5) |
|
|
180 | (1) |
|
|
181 | (14) |
|
|
181 | (7) |
|
|
188 | (2) |
|
10.2.1 Construct validity |
|
|
188 | (1) |
|
|
189 | (1) |
|
|
189 | (1) |
|
|
189 | (1) |
|
10.2.5 Criterion validity |
|
|
190 | (1) |
|
|
190 | (1) |
|
10.3 Research Contributions |
|
|
190 | (2) |
|
10.3.1 Literature synthesis contribution (Chap. 2) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
10.3.2 Conceptual contribution (Chaps. 3 and 4) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
10.3.3 Methodological contributions (Chap. 5) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
10.3.4 Empirical contribution (Chaps. 6-9) |
|
|
192 | (1) |
|
10.4 Research Limitations |
|
|
192 | (2) |
|
10.4.1 Interoperability issue |
|
|
193 | (1) |
|
10.4.2 System modeling approaches |
|
|
193 | (1) |
|
10.4.3 Application of NIRA framework to other types of systems |
|
|
193 | (1) |
|
|
194 | (1) |
References |
|
195 | (18) |
Index |
|
213 | |