Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 -- 2286 2022-05-16 07:47:34 |
2 Format Correct -2 word(s) 2284 2022-05-16 08:01:57 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Ji, T.; , .; Deng, S.; Zhu, Y. Climate Change Impact Urban Transportation Resilience. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 25 June 2024).
Ji T,  , Deng S, Zhu Y. Climate Change Impact Urban Transportation Resilience. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed June 25, 2024.
Ji, Tao, , Shejun Deng, Yunqiang Zhu. "Climate Change Impact Urban Transportation Resilience" Encyclopedia, (accessed June 25, 2024).
Ji, T., , ., Deng, S., & Zhu, Y. (2022, May 16). Climate Change Impact Urban Transportation Resilience. In Encyclopedia.
Ji, Tao, et al. "Climate Change Impact Urban Transportation Resilience." Encyclopedia. Web. 16 May, 2022.
Climate Change Impact Urban Transportation Resilience

Global warming, sea-level rise, and rapid urbanization all increase the risk of compound extreme weather events, presenting challenges for the operation of urban-related infrastructure, including transportation infrastructure. In this context, some questions become important.

transportation resilience climate change weather events

1. Introduction

Global climate change will increase the occurrence of extreme weather events such as typhoons, storm surges, heavy rains, floods, high temperatures, heat waves, and droughts. The processes that cause these extreme weather events usually interact and depend on each other in space or time [1]. In recent decades, researchers have also witnessed compound events such as high-temperature heat waves, droughts, and typhoon storm surges with heavy rain and flooding [2]. Such instnces of two or more extreme weather events occuring simultaniously or successively are called extreme compound weather events. [3][4]. Compared with extreme weather events that occur in isolation, the damage to socioeconomic and ecological systems of such compound extreme weather events tends to be greater [5].
Global warming, rising sea levels, and rapid urbanization have made coastal cities vulnerable to heavy rains and floods, especially during typhoons and storm surges. The risks of compound extreme weather events (typhoon surges, heavy rainfall, and flooding) are increasing, severely challenging the operation of urban infrastructure [6]. Events such as Super Typhoon Meranti landed in Xiamen in 2016, Super Typhoon Mangkhut hit Guangzhou in 2018, and Super Typhoon Lekima struck in Taizhou in 2019. After these typhoons made landfall, they caused disasters such as storm surges, heavy rains, and floods, which damaged urban transportation infrastructure, blocked roads, and paralyzed bus lines [7][8][9]. This reveals the vulnerability of the transportation system to compound extreme weather events. In the next few decades, transportation infrastructure may face huge challenges due to climate change because these transportation systems have been designed for historical conditions and predictability [10].
UT resilience reflects the ability of the transportation system to maintain its basic functions and structure through its resistance, mitigation, and absorption under extreme conditions (such as public incidents, terrorist attacks, and natural disasters), called static resilience, or the ability to restore the original equilibrium or a new equilibrium state within a reasonable time and cost, called dynamic resilience [10][11]. Currently, there is, however, no reliable method that can accurately reveal the spatiotemporal evolution of UT resilience when subjected to compound extreme weather events and scientifically clarify the impact of global climate change (the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events caused by climate warming) on UT resilience. Therefore, reviews the existing research on UT resilience, summarizes the research progress on UT resilience, identifies the deficiencies in the existing research, and proposes the countermeasures for future complex extreme events under conditions of climate change. The recommendations on UT resilience research provide new ideas for future research.

2. Overview of  Urban Transportation  resilience Research

The research on UT resilience began in the 1970s [12], and the research on transportation system resilience has been steadily increasing since the 1990s. Based on transportation resilience papers published by Web of Science over the years (Figure 1), there has been a definite increase in the number of published papers, from a few in 2000 to 278 in 2020, and the percentage of publications has also jumped from less than 1% to about 25%, especially since 2010. From 2014 to 2020, research papers on transportation resilience showed explosive growth, which further reflects that with the deepening of research, the importance of transportation resilience is increasingly being recognized.
Figure 1. Time series distribution and percentage of transportation resilience-related research publications over the years. The purple trend line indicates the period of the rapid growth of research papers on transportation resilience.
The current research on UT resilience mainly focuses on conceptual frameworks, indicator systems, quantitative evaluations, and emergency and disaster response to extreme weather events and has achieved fruitful research results in related fields [10]. The above research involved the construction of a transportation resilience index system, analysis of the impact mechanism of extreme weather events on transportation resilience, exploration of the relationship between climate change and UT resilience, and the evaluation and prediction of the intensity of transportation resilience. The following is a description of the domestic and foreign research present situation from the above aspects.

2.1. Constructing the Transportation Resilience Index System

Urban transportation systems are always disturbed by extreme events such as natural disasters (typhoons, storm surges, heavy rains, floods) or man-made events (terrorist attacks, cultural incidents, strikes, and system failures caused by human mismanagement). The impact on urban transportation system functions may be the same as that of other urban system functions [13][14][15]. Due to the increased risk of extreme events in cities, the resilience of urban transportation systems has become the focus of transportation resilience [16][17]. The resilience of the transportation system not only refers to the ability to prevent the system from malfunctioning due to interference but also refers to the ability of the system to avoid, adapt to, and reduce the impact of catastrophic local events or the failure of the entire system [10]. During the construction of the transportation resilience-measurement system, it should be considered that the resilience of the transportation system should reflect the system’s ability to mitigate the impact of extreme weather events and maintain its own functions. In addition, the time it takes for extreme weather events to disrupt the full function of the transportation system and the time it takes for the system to return to normal function should also be considered.
The indicator research on the definition of transportation resilience is a necessary step to construct a measurement system. Relevant research has adopted a series of concepts and definitions, which play a crucial role in the construction of the measurement system. The transportation resilience index system mainly includes the Redundancy, Adaptation, Efficiency, Robustness, Interdependence, Preparedness, Flexibility, and Rapidity of the system. Redundancy refers to the replaceable components of the system with the same function, such as the ability of certain components to take over the failed components without compromising the function of the system itself [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. Adaptation refers to the system’s ability to flexibly adjust its form, structure, or function according to changes in the external environment to deal with new pressures [25][26][27][28][29][30]. Efficiency refers to the ability to maintain the level of service and connectivity during an extreme event causing a system interruption [18][27][31][32][33]. Robustness refers to the ability of the system to resist and respond to external shocks [16][25][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44]. Interdependence is the connectivity between system components, including the connectivity of the relational network between system components [45], while preparedness is the ability to prepare certain measures before the system is destroyed and to enhance the resilience of the system by reducing the potential negative effects of destructive events [22][29][46][47]. Flexibility refers to the ability of the system to respond to the impact of emergencies and adapt to changes through contingency plans after the system is interrupted. It is also called the ability to reconfigure resources to deal with uncertainties [16][19][23][34][39][45]. Rapidity is the ability of the system to achieve the goal of controlling losses promptly in accordance with priorities and avoiding future system outages [16][25][48][49]. Most of the above research only uses one or several of these concepts as the evaluation indicators of transportation resilience. Moreover, travel time and traffic flow (driving speed, etc.) are the main performance variables that reflect the above indicators, and they are also important measurement variables for changes in UT resilience under external and internal threats [10][50].

2.2. Analysis Mechanism of the Impact of Extreme Events on Transportation Resilience

Extreme weather events have many adverse effects on the transportation system, including high social, economic, and environmental costs [26]. Due to global climate change, extreme weather events occur more frequently than decades ago [51]. In this context, the ability of the transportation system to adapt to extreme weather becomes important [52]Table 1 shows the possible direct physical impacts of extreme weather events on transportation infrastructure.
Table 1. The possible direct physical impact of extreme weather events on transportation infrastructure (from [16]).
Currently, scholars study the damage and loss (quantitative and economic quantitative analysis), reliability, and vulnerability of urban transportation system facilities to various extreme events (earthquakes, tsunamis, typhoons, rainstorms, floods). Extreme events damage transportation infrastructure, impact commuting time and cost and cause road congestion, traffic accidents, and casualties [64][65][66][67][68][69]. Even though the abovementioned analysis is quantitative, it essentially only measures the vulnerability of the transportation system rather than its resilience [51]. Current transportation resilience research focuses on the impact of extreme events on traffic volume, mileage, punctuality, and driving costs, as well as the time required for the transportation system to return to equilibrium or the speed of recovery after extreme events [19][27][70][71].

2.3. Mining the Relationship between Climate Change and Transportation Resilience

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Clime Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report once again pointed out that over the past 100 years, the global climate system has experienced significant changes from global warming, which has increasingly affected human survival and development [72]. In the coming decades, transportation infrastructure (and other infrastructure systems) may face major challenges: they are largely unable to adapt to changes in external conditions and adjust their subsequent financial support, their use often far exceeds their expected lifespan, and they are becoming increasingly interconnected and complex [6]. The unstable changes of the global weather patterns due to climate change may exacerbate transportation infrastructure challenges (including aging, insufficient funding, historical conditions, and predictability), thereby seriously threatening the transportation infrastructure [55]. Although uncertain about the impact of future climate change, climate models indicate that extreme events and gradual changes in climate and hydrology may become more severe even under conservative scenarios, even with a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the short term [72][73]. Complicating this challenge is the inability to predict current or future conditions based on past trends [74]. Research has, however, been conducted on the robustness of the transportation system in response to climate change by strengthening its ability to adapt to climate change and other threats, and improving its control, prevention, and consolidation capabilities to prevent the destruction of transportation infrastructure [55][58][75]. A small number of scholars have also evaluated the impact of extreme weather events on UT resilience under the influence of climate change (the resilience recovery rate) and prediction studies and proposed standard indicators for the impact of climate change. These studies help researchers understand the influence of weather on transportation infrastructure and operations, how climate change will change the frequency and magnitude of these extreme events, and how synchronized technological and socioeconomic development may shape the future transportation network and improve or exacerbate the impact of climate change [76].

2.4. Evaluation and Prediction of Transportation Resilience Features

The analysis of the temporal and spatial evolution of UT resilience and intensity features relies on data sets with high precision, high resolution, and complete temporal and spatial coverage. Current research on the impact of extreme weather events on transportation resilience mainly focuses on the use of topological methods to quantify the resilience of the transportation system [77][78][79]. Topological resilience research usually simulates transportation resilience scenarios by continuously deleting nodes in the traffic network according to various scenarios in which extreme weather events occur and then measuring its resilience by the degree of node deletion for each scenario. Based on this research, it was found that the resilience of the transportation system can still be maintained at a high level when the traffic nodes are randomly deleted, but when the traffic nodes are deleted under specific extreme weather events, the resilience of the transportation system is reduced. Data-driven analysis is another important and effective method for studying UT resilience after extreme weather events. Big traffic travel data (such as taxi trajectory data and public transportation travel data) can be used through traditional statistical models, frame calculations, and emerging big data mining technologies to construct and evaluate internal threats based on urban traffic (such as traffic accidents and man-made technical failure) of the transportation resilience process. Analyzing the formation and development process of traffic resilience under the abovementioned specific events is currently common practice [20][30].
Recently, Deep Learning technology has shown great potential for predicting traffic resilience. It has performed well in transportation research because of its flexible model structure and powerful learning capabilities [80][81][82]. The recurrent neural network method has proved itself to be excellent in capturing long-term time dependence and has been widely used in daily traffic and transportation forecast analysis [81][82][83][84][85]. However, the recurrent neural network model ignores the proximity factors in the transportation system and cannot represent the spatial correlation. A convolutional neural network prediction model that can extract spatiotemporal features and consider the Euclidean space in grid structure data (such as images) is therefore proposed for prediction [86][87]. The traffic volume in the transportation system contains complex non-Euclidean and directional correlations and, at the same time, has stronger topological characteristics instead of general European space dependence. For this kind of spatial structure data, the original convolutional neural network method is not applicable. To solve the above problems, a graph convolutional neural network was developed to extend the convolution operator to any grid image. The graph of the convolutional neural network is applied to daily traffic predictions, such as the traffic speed in the traffic sensor network, the station-level demand in the shared bicycle network, and the real-time parking occupancy rate in the parking fee network, have achieved good results [88][89][90][91].


  1. Zscheischler, J.; Westra, S.; Van Den Hurk, B.J.J.M.; Seneviratne, S.I.; Ward, P.J.; Pitman, A.; AghaKouchak, A.; Bresch, D.N.; Leonard, M.; Wahl, T.; et al. Future climate risk from compound events. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018, 8, 469–477.
  2. Hao, Z.; Singh, V.P. Compound Events under Global Warming: A Dependence Perspective. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2020, 25, 03120001.
  3. Hao, Z.; Hao, F.; Singh, V.P.; Xia, Y.; Shi, C.; Zhang, X. A multivariate approach for statistical assessments of compound extremes. J. Hydrol. 2018, 565, 87–94.
  4. Tavakol, A.; Rahmani, V.; Harrington, J., Jr. Probability of compound climate extremes in a changing climate: A copula-based study of hot, dry, and windy events in the central United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 104058.
  5. Ridder, N.N.; Pitman, A.J.; Westra, S.; Ukkola, A.; Do, H.X.; Bador, M.; Hirsch, A.L.; Evans, J.P.; Di Luca, A.; Zscheischler, J. Global hotspots for the occurrence of compound events. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 5956.
  6. Chester, M.V.; Allenby, B. Toward adaptive infrastructure: Flexibility and agility in a non-stationarity age. Sustain. Resilient Infrastruct. 2018, 4, 173–191.
  7. Zhang, L.J.; Li, L.S. People-oriented emergency response mechanism—An example of the emergency work when typhoon Meranti stroked Xiamen. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 38, 101185.
  8. Yang, J.; Li, L.; Zhao, K.; Wang, P.; Wang, D.; Sou, I.M.; Yang, Z.; Hu, J.; Tang, X.; Mok, K.M.; et al. A Comparative Study of Typhoon Hato (2017) and Typhoon Mangkhut (2018)—Their Impacts on Coastal Inundation in Macau. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 2019, 124, 9590–9619.
  9. Zhou, C.; Chen, P.; Yang, S.; Zheng, F.; Yu, H.; Tang, J.; Lu, Y.; Chen, G.; Lu, X.; Zhang, X.; et al. The impact of Typhoon Lekima (2019) on East China: A postevent survey in Wenzhou City and Taizhou City. Front. Earth Sci. 2021, 16, 109–120.
  10. Gonçalves, L.; Ribeiro, P. Resilience of urban transportation systems. Concept, characteristics, and methods. J. Transp. Geogr. 2020, 85, 102727.
  11. Wang, H.-W.; Peng, Z.-R.; Wang, D.; Meng, Y.; Wu, T.; Sun, W.; Lu, Q.-C. Evaluation and prediction of transportation resilience under extreme weather events: A diffusion graph convolutional approach. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2020, 115, 102619.
  12. Holling, C.S. Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1973, 4, 1–23.
  13. Bollinger, L.A.; Bogmans, C.W.J.; Chappin, E.J.L.; Dijkema, G.P.J.; Huibregtse, J.N.; Maas, N.; Schenk, T.; Snelder, M.; Van Thienen, P.; De Wit, S.; et al. Climate adaptation of interconnected infrastructures: A framework for supporting governance. Reg. Environ. Chang. 2014, 14, 919–931.
  14. Cao, M. Transportation Resilience: A summative review on Definition and Connotation. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Automation, Mechanical Control and Computational Engineering, Changsha, China, 24–25 October 2015.
  15. Pregnolato, M.; Ford, A.; Wilkinson, S.M.; Dawson, R.J. The impact of flooding on road transport: A depth-disruption function. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2017, 55, 67–81.
  16. Markolf, S.A.; Hoehne, C.; Fraser, A.; Chester, M.V.; Underwood, B.S. Transportation resilience to climate change and extreme weather events—Beyond risk and robustness. Transp. Policy 2019, 74, 174–186.
  17. Pregnolato, M.; Ford, A.; Robson, C.; Glenis, V.; Barr, S.; Dawson, R. Assessing urban strategies for reducing the impacts of extreme weather on infrastructure networks. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2016, 3, 160023.
  18. Zhang, W.; Wang, N.; Nicholson, C. Resilience-based post-disaster recovery strategies for road-bridge networks. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2017, 13, 1404–1413.
  19. Chan, R.; Schofer, J.L. Measuring Transportation System Resilience: Response of Rail Transit to Weather Disruptions. Nat. Hazards Rev. 2016, 17, 05015004.
  20. Donovan, B.; Work, D.B. Empirically quantifying city-scale transportation system resilience to extreme events. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 79, 333–346.
  21. Rashidy, R.A.H.E.; Grant-Muller, S. A composite resilience index for road transport networks. Transport 2017, 172, 174–183.
  22. Liao, T.-Y.; Hu, T.-Y.; Ko, Y.-N. A resilience optimization model for transportation networks under disasters. Nat. Hazards 2018, 93, 469–489.
  23. Aydin, N.Y.; Duzgun, H.S.; Wenzel, F.; Heinimann, H.R. Integration of stress testing with graph theory to assess the resil-ience of urban road networks under seismic hazards. Nat. Hazards 2018, 91, 37–68.
  24. Xiangdong, X.; Anthony, C.; Sarawut, J.; Chao, Y.; Seungkyu, R. Transportation network redundancy: Complementary measures and computational methods. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2018, 114, 68–85.
  25. Leobons, C.M.; Campos, V.B.G.; Bandeira, R.A.d.M. Assessing Urban Trans-portation Systems Resilience: A Proposal of Indicators. Transp. Res. Procedia 2019, 37, 322–329.
  26. Nogal, M.; O’Connor, A.; Martinez-Pastor, B.; Caulfield, B. Novel Probabilistic Resilience Assessment Framework of Transportation Networks against Extreme Weather Events. ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertain. Eng. Syst. Part A Civ. Eng. 2017, 3, 04017004.
  27. Aydin, N.Y.; Duzgun, H.S.; Heinimann, H.R.; Wenzel, F.; Gnyawali, K.R. Framework for improving the resilience and recovery of transportation networks under geohazard risks. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2018, 31, 832–843.
  28. Yazicioglu, A.Y.; Roozbehani, M.; Dahleh, M.A. Resilient Control of Transportation Networks by Using Variable Speed Limits. IEEE Trans. Control Netw. Syst. 2017, 5, 2011–2022.
  29. Engler, E.; Gewies, S.; Bany, P.; Grunewald, E. Trajectory-Based Multimodal Transport Management For Resilient Trans-portation. Transp. Probl. 2018, 13, 81–96.
  30. Qing-Chang, L. Modeling network resilience of rail transit under operational incidents. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2018, 117, 227–237.
  31. Chopra, S.S.; Dillon, T.; Bilec, M.M.; Khanna, V. A network-based framework for assessing infrastructure resilience: A case study of the London metro system. J. R. Soc. Interface 2016, 13, 20160113.
  32. Ganin, A.A.; Kitsak, M.; Marchese, D.; Keisler, J.M.; Seager, T.; Linkov, I. Resilience and efficiency in transportation net-works. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1701079.
  33. Ilbeigi, M. Statistical process control for analyzing resilience of transportation networks. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 33, 155–161.
  34. Alipour, A.; Shafei, B. Seismic Resilience of Transportation Networks with Deteriorating Components. J. Struct. Eng. 2016, 142.
  35. Duan, M.; Wu, D.; Dong, B.; Zhang, L. Quantitatively Measuring Transportation Network Resilience under Earthquake Uncertainty and Risks. Am. J. Civ. Eng. 2016, 4, 174–184.
  36. Adjeteybahun, K.; Planchet, J.L.; Birregah, B.; Chatelet, E. Railway transportation system’s resilience: Integration of operating conditions into topological indicators. In Proceedings of the Network Operations & Management Symposium, Istanbul, Turkey, 25–29 April 2016.
  37. Kim, S.; Yeo, H. A Flow-based Vulnerability Measure for the Resilience of Urban Road Network. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 218, 13–23.
  38. Kim, H.; Kim, C.; Chun, Y. Network Reliability and Resilience of Rapid Transit Systems. Prof. Geogr. 2015, 68, 53–65.
  39. Soltani-Sobh, A.; Heaslip, K.; Scarlatos, P.; Kaisar, E. Reliability based pre-positioning of recovery centers for resilient transportation infrastructure. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2016, 19, 324–333.
  40. Soltani-Sobh, A.; Heaslip, K.; Stevanovic, A.; El Khoury, J.; Song, Z. Evaluation of transportation network reliability during unexpected events with multiple uncertainties. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2016, 17, 128–136.
  41. Deloukas, A.; Apostolopoulou, E. Static and dynamic resilience of transport infrastructure and demand: The case of the Athens metro. Transp. Res. Procedia 2017, 24, 459–466.
  42. Wang, J.W.; Wang, H.F.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, W.J. On an integrated approach to resilient transportation systems in emergency situations. Nat. Comput. 2017, 18, 815–823.
  43. Calvert, S.C.; Snelder, M. A methodology for road traffic resilience analysis and review of related concepts. Transp. A Transp. Sci. 2018, 14, 130–154.
  44. Junqing, T.; Rudolf, H.H.; Xiaolei, M. A resilience-oriented approach for quantitatively assessing recurrent spatial-temporal congestion on urban roads. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0190616.
  45. Jin, J.G.; Tang, L.C.; Sun, L.; Lee, D.-H. Enhancing metro network resilience via localized integration with bus services. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2014, 63, 17–30.
  46. Faturechi, R.; Miller-Hooks, E. Travel time resilience of roadway networks under disaster. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2014, 70, 47–64.
  47. Azadeh, A.; Atrchin, N.; Salehi, V.; Shojaei, H. Modelling and improvement of supply chain with imprecise transportation delays and resilience factors. Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl. 2013, 17, 269–282.
  48. Zobel, C.W.; Khansa, L. Characterizing multi-event disaster resilience. Comput. Oper. Res. 2014, 42, 83–94.
  49. Ye, Q.; Ukkusuri, S.V. Resilience as an Objective in the Optimal Reconstruction Sequence for Transportation Networks. J. Transp. Saf. Secur. 2014, 7, 91–105.
  50. Balakrishnan, S.; Zhang, Z.; Machemehl, R.; Murphy, M.R. Mapping resilience of Houston freeway network during Hurricane Harvey using extreme travel time metrics. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2020, 47, 101565.
  51. Zhou, L.; Chen, Z. Measuring the performance of airport resilience to severe weather events. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2020, 83, 102362.
  52. Schlögl, M.; Laaha, G. Extreme weather exposure identification for road networks—A comparative assessment of statistical methods. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2017, 17, 515–531.
  53. Akbari, H.; Menon, S.; Rosenfeld, A. Global cooling: Increasing world-wide urban albedos to offset CO2. Clim. Chang. 2008, 94, 275–286.
  54. Asaeda, T.; Ca, V.T.; Wake, A. Heat storage of pavement and its effect on the lower atmosphere. Atmos. Environ. 1996, 30, 413–427.
  55. Meyer, M.D.; Weigel, B. Climate Change and Transportation Engineering: Preparing for a Sustainable Future. J. Transp. Eng. 2011, 137, 393–403.
  56. Taylor, M.A.; Philp, M.L. Investigating the impact of maintenance regimes on the design life of road pavements in a changing climate and the implications for transport policy. Transp. Policy 2015, 41, 117–135.
  57. Rattanachot, W.; Wang, Y.; Chong, D.; Suwansawas, S. Adaptation strategies of transport infrastructures to global climate change. Transp. Policy 2015, 41, 159–166.
  58. Camp, J.; Abkowitz, M.; Hornberger, G.; Benneyworth, L.; Banks, J.C. Climate Change and Freight-Transportation Infrastructure: Current Challenges for Adaptation. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2013, 19, 363–370.
  59. Mitsakis, E.; Stamos, I.; Diakakis, M.; Grau, J.M.S. Impacts of high-intensity storms on urban transportation: Applying traffic flow control methodologies for quantifying the effects. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 11, 2145–2154.
  60. Vajjarapu, H.; Verma, A.; Allirani, H. Evaluating climate change adaptation policies for urban transportation in India. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2020, 47, 101528.
  61. Serrao-Neumann; Silvia; Choy, L.; Darryl; Staden, V. Climate Change Impacts on Road Infrastructure Systems and Services in South East Queensland: Implications for Infrastructure Planning and Management. In Proceedings of the State of Australian Cities Conference, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 1 January 2011.
  62. Suarez, P.; Anderson, W.; Mahal, V.; Lakshmanan, T. Impacts of flooding and climate change on urban transportation: A systemwide performance assessment of the Boston Metro Area. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2005, 10, 231–244.
  63. Zhu, Y.; Xie, K.; Ozbay, K.; Zuo, F.; Yang, H. Data-Driven Spatial Modeling for Quantifying Networkwide Resilience in the Aftermath of Hurricanes Irene and Sandy. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2017, 2604, 9–18.
  64. Faturechi, R.; Miller-Hooks, E. Measuring the Performance of Transportation Infrastructure Systems in Disasters: A Com-prehensive Review. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2015, 21, 04014025.
  65. Wan, C.; Yang, Z.; Zhang, D.; Yan, X.; Fan, S. Resilience in transportation systems: A systematic review and future directions. Transp. Rev. 2017, 38, 479–498.
  66. Zhang, W.; Wang, N. Resilience-based risk mitigation for road networks. Struct. Saf. 2016, 62, 57–65.
  67. Shafieezadeh, A.; Burden, L.I. Scenario-based resilience assessment framework for critical infrastructure systems: Case study for seismic resilience of seaports. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2014, 132, 207–219.
  68. Balijepalli, C.; Oppong, O. Measuring vulnerability of road network considering the extent of serviceability of critical road links in urban areas. J. Transp. Geogr. 2014, 39, 145–155.
  69. Li, T.; Rong, L.; Yan, K. Vulnerability analysis and critical area identification of public transport system: A case of high-speed rail and air transport coupling system in China. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2019, 127, 55–70.
  70. Henry, D.; Ramirez-Marquez, J.E. Generic metrics and quantitative approaches for system resilience as a function of time. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2012, 99, 114–122.
  71. Janić, M. Modelling the resilience, friability and costs of an air transport network affected by a large-scale disruptive event. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2015, 71, 1–16.
  72. Stocker, T.F.; Qin, D.; Plattner, G.K.; Tignor, M.; Allen, S.K.; Boschung, J.; Nauels, A.; Xia, Y.; Bex, V.; Midgley, P.M. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of IPCC the In-tergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 159–254.
  73. Melillo, J.M.; Richmond, T.; Yohe, G. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. Eval. Assess. 2014, 61, 46–48.
  74. Milly, P.C.D.; Betancourt, J.; Falkenmark, M.; Hirsch, R.M.; Kundzewicz, Z.W.; Lettenmaier, D.P.; Stouffer, R.J. Stationarity Is Dead: Whither Water Management? Science 2008, 319, 573–574.
  75. Woods, D.D. Four concepts for resilience and the implications for the future of resilience engineering. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2015, 141, 5–9.
  76. Jaroszweski, D.; Hooper, E.; Chapman, L. The impact of climate change on urban transport resilience in a changing world. Prog. Phys. Geogr. Earth Environ. 2014, 38, 448–463.
  77. Aksu, D.T.; Ozdamar, L. A mathematical model for post-disaster road restoration: Enabling accessibility and evacuation. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2014, 61, 56–67.
  78. Kepaptsoglou, K.L.; Konstantinidou, M.A.; Karlaftis, M.G.; Stathopoulos, A. Planning Postdisaster Operations in a Highway Network: Network Design Model with Interdependencies. Transp. Res. Rec. 2018, 2459, 1–10.
  79. Testa, A.C.; Furtado, M.N.; Alipour, A. Resilience of Coastal Transportation Networks Faced with Extreme Climatic Events. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2015, 2532, 29–36.
  80. Sun, L.; Yin, Y. Discovering themes and trends in transportation research using topic modeling. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 77, 49–66.
  81. Huang, X.; Sun, J.; Sun, J. A car-following model considering asymmetric driving behavior based on long short-term memory neural networks. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2018, 95, 346–362.
  82. Hao, S.; Lee, D.H.; Zhao, D. Sequence to sequence learning with attention mechanism for short-term passenger flow prediction in large-scale metro system. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2019, 107, 287–300.
  83. Ma, X.; Zhang, J.; Du, B.; Ding, C.; Sun, L. Parallel Architecture of Convolutional Bi-Directional LSTM Neural Networks for Network-Wide Metro Ridership Prediction. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2018, 20, 2278–2288.
  84. Wu, Y.; Tan, H.; Qin, L.; Ran, B.; Jiang, Z. A hybrid deep learning based traffic flow prediction method and its understanding. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2018, 90, 166–180.
  85. Wang, H.; Li, X.B.; Wang, D.; Zhao, J.; Peng, Z. Regional prediction of ground-level ozone using a hybrid sequence-to-sequence deep learning approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 253, 119841.
  86. Ke, J.; Zheng, H.; Yang, H.; Chen, X. Short-term forecasting of passenger demand under on-demand ride services: A spa-tio-temporal deep learning approach. Transp. Res. 2017, 85c, 591–608.
  87. Guo, S.; Lin, Y.; Li, S.; Chen, Z.; Wan, H. Deep Spatial-Temporal 3D Convolutional Neural Networks for Traffic Data Fore-casting. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2019, 20, 1–14.
  88. Zhang, Y.; Cheng, T.; Ren, Y. A graph deep learning method for short-term traffic forecasting on large road networks. Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2019, 34, 877–896.
  89. Zhang, Z.; Li, M.; Lin, X.; Wang, Y.; He, F. Multistep speed prediction on traffic networks: A deep learning approach con-sidering spatio-temporal dependencies. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2019, 105, 297–322.
  90. Lin, L.; He, Z.; Peeta, S. Predicting station-level hourly demand in a large-scale bike-sharing network: A graph convolutional neural network approach. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2018, 97, 258–276.
  91. Yang, S.; Ma, W.; Pi, X.; Qian, S. A deep learning approach to real-time parking occupancy prediction in transportation networks incorporating multiple spatio-temporal data sources. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2019, 107, 248–265.
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : , , ,
View Times: 548
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 16 May 2022
Video Production Service