Freight Movement in Emergency Situations

Research Report
AP-R512-16
Freight Movement in Emergency Situations

Prepared by
Publisher
John Dudgeon
Austroads Ltd.
Level 9, 287 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000 Australia
Phone: +61 2 8265 3300
austroads@austroads.com.au
www.austroads.com.au
Project Managers
Simon Grieve and Greg McFarlane
Abstract
About Austroads
This study researches how essential and general freight movement

assists the economic resilience of industry and communities
impacted by emergencies. The literature review confirmed this
premise, as did six public and private sector workshops.
Austroads is the peak organisation of Australasian road

transport and traffic agencies.
Essential freight is defined as goods or services without which

significant further or compounding economic loss would be suffered.
General freight includes important and normally repetitive freight
flows.
For the relatively sparse networks of Australasia, keeping essential
and general freight moving offers high economic benefits for disaster
affected communities. Potentially, an increased focus by government
on this matter could make a worthwhile contribution to the economic,
employment and social resilience of disaster affected communities.
With the new understanding of the importance of economic resilience
during and after emergencies, and the contribution made to this by
essential and general freight movement, change is needed. It is
suggested that the economic resilient objective needs to change from
a helpful reaction to being part of a systematic approach based on
this policy imperative. Many suggestions are made in Chapter Four
for jurisdictional consideration. One is that incidents on key freight
routes likely to disrupt flow for four hours could or should be
managed under emergency processes.
Austroads purpose is to support our member organisations to

deliver an improved Australasian road transport network. To
succeed in this task, we undertake leading-edge road and
transport research which underpins our input to policy
development and published guidance on the design,
construction and management of the road network and its
associated infrastructure.
Austroads provides a collective approach that delivers value
for money, encourages shared knowledge and drives
consistency for road users.
Austroads is governed by a Board consisting of senior
executive representatives from each of its eleven member
organisations:
Roads and Maritime Services New South Wales
At the workshops it was evident that good working relations existed

between the jurisdictional agencies responsible for emergency
management. This provides a sound basis for the suggestions to
progress essential and general freight movement. Care is needed in
maintaining relationships and focus during government
restructurings.
Department of State Growth Tasmania
Australian Government Department of Infrastructure and

Regional
It was also evident that, with exceptions, relationships between the

jurisdictional agencies and the road freight industry stakeholder/s and
operators were not as well maintained. There is much to be gained
by both parties through increased engagement.
Australian Local Government Association
Keywords
Austroads 2016
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under
the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any
process without the prior written permission of Austroads.
Economic resilience in emergencies; Freight movement in

emergencies; Essential and general freight movement; Heavy
vehicles and emergency management; Heavy vehicle detours in
emergencies; Emergency management and State Road Agencies.
Roads Corporation Victoria

Department of Transport and Main Roads Queensland
Main Roads Western Australia
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
South Australia
Department of Transport Northern Territory
Territory and Municipal Services Directorate, Australian
Capital Territory
New Zealand Transport Agency.
ISBN 978-1-925451-04-7
Austroads Project No. FS1808
Austroads Publication No. AP-R512-16
Publication date April 2016
Pages 49
This report has been prepared for Austroads as part of its work to promote improved Australian and New Zealand transport outcomes by
providing expert technical input on road and road transport issues.
Individual road agencies will determine their response to this report following consideration of their legislative or administrative
arrangements, available funding, as well as local circumstances and priorities.
Austroads believes this publication to be correct at the time of printing and does not accept responsibility for any consequences arising from
the use of information herein. Readers should rely on their own skill and judgement to apply information to particular issues.
Summary
The Freight Movement in Emergency Situations study seeks to identify the methods utilised by jurisdictions
to move essential freight and keep general freight moving in emergent situations. Essential freight is defined
as goods or services without which significant further or compounding economic loss is suffered; general
freight includes important and normally repetitive freight flows.
Austroads desired to document member experiences in keeping freight moving and lessons learned from the
multiple cyclone, flood, fire and earthquake emergencies early in the decade. The Austroads brief intimated
any lessons would potentially benefit other road users, as well as improving the social, employment and
economic performance of emergency stressed communities.
The literature review highlighted a key factor in minimising community social, employment and economic
distress during and after emergencies, is ensuring essential and general freight movement, as well as
response heavy vehicle movements. This focus requires a high priority by road agencies working with other
Government agencies during the planning, preparation, response and recovery phases of emergencies.
Six multi-agency public and private sector workshops were held in Queensland, Western Australia, South
Australia, New South Wales and New Zealand during mid-2013, outside the period of most emergencies.
Victoria was affected by an emergency so its workshop was held in June 2014.
The projects continual challenge was to maintain a freight movement focus. Many workshop attendees,
understandably, focussed on their agency roles during the emergency. However, a freight movement focus is
of great importance in ensuring emergency economic resilient outcomes for communities. During an
emergency, governments and the media are focussed on saving lives and preserving property with the
assistance of emergency response freight movements.
The literature review, workshops and project analysis determined that another key focus of road agencies
should be facilitating essential and general freight movement to better maintain economic resilience.
Economic resilience should be incorporated into the highest level of emergency management objectives, as
it is in some jurisdictions already. The Road Freight Risk Conceptual Model, adapted from a Productivity
Commission report, may assist in this.
Workshop attendees generally exhibited an increasing awareness of the community importance of essential
and general freight movement, and the workshops enhanced this. Importantly, the multi-agency and road
freight sectoral workshop approach allowed two-way feedback. Road freight operators discussed agency
performance, including communication, during emergencies and road agencies gave information to the road
freight sector on government obligations, objectives and priorities, resources, issues and improvement
programs. This experience suggests that road freight industry feedback at workshops should be sought
periodically. Such would enable emergency and road agencies to obtain road freight operator feedback on
their performance, communication efforts and issues arising, and address selected matters. Road agencies
could benefit as the road freight industry can assist or harm agencies in its separate meetings with
government.
Australia is a big country with big differences in weather related emergencies and in the density and location
of resilient road freight routes. The need for timely, appropriate information increases significantly in
jurisdictions and areas with sparse road networks, where road freight operators use restricted access
vehicles (RAVs) or in emergencies affecting cross border networks.
Austroads 2016 | page i
Workplace Health and Safety legislation obliges road freight operators to have Continuity Plans (CPs) for
employee/driver security and safety. CPs force road freight operators to defer freight movements if Single
Point of Truth (SPoT) information is not provided within about four hours from an incident occurring. This
seemed not to be appreciated by many government attendees. To alleviate incident economic costs, it is
suggested that the appropriate State agencies consider triggering emergency processes for all incidents
such as crashes, likely to exceed a certain timeframe. The four hour suggestion should be confirmed
following agency and industry dialogue.
Cancellation of freight services is costly. It also mitigates against the emergency economic and community
resilience sought by governments. Road freight operators interrogate many sources of information before
cancelling services. Stranding of vehicles due to road closures causes a higher cost than trip deferrals, so
emergency road closure timings is an important issue for monitoring.
A SPoT jurisdictional communication source is needed by the road freight sector where this is not already
provided. The SPoT source could provide the likely duration of impacts, the available road freight route
detours and forecast the expected re-opening of weather affected road assets. It is acknowledged that these
can all change during an emergency.
In almost all jurisdictions, the road agency has non-emergency communication responsibility for freight (and
passenger) safe movement across road and transport assets, and the related content and systems. Road
users are familiar with their road agency communication role. Road agencies should continue being the
SPoT during emergencies, but with increased focus. The jurisdictional payback for timely SPoT information
for road freight operators should be a reduction in emergency personnel distracted from their primary task by
repeated information requests.
Importantly, emergency and Police agencies are responsible for community safety and emergency
management. Their role need not displace nor detract from road agency responsibilities for essential and
general freight movement (and road user) performance and communication outcomes over impaired assets.
However, it is crucial the relevant agencies focus on their respective accountabilities and work well together,
as seems to be generally occurring.
Every emergency is different and has diverse impacts. Multi-agency planning and preparation, before, during
and after emergencies, are processes that alleviate confusion and mitigate impacts. New Zealand found that
a focussed program of planning and preparation for foreseeable disaster impacts can result in more resilient
road network surviving to perform a role following disasters.
Funding repair clarity for roads damaged during emergencies is another factor affecting their closure and
reopening. Regular workshops would assist in clarifying and refining processes.
During emergencies, clarity in agency accountabilities and their delivery and relevant timely communication
greatly assists the freight transport industry. This is most effectively achieved through modern, common
multi-agency platform IT systems, where prepared traffic management plans (TMPs) for the emergency area
can be deployed and communicated, including for RAVs. It is crucial that government agencies all have
secure access to these platforms.
Jurisdictional road and transport agencies vary in their emergency road related performance,
communication, and use of common IT platforms with other emergency and Police agencies. Consideration
of the project documentation may assist these agencies in considering future actions. Suggestions for
improvement are contained primarily in Section 4.2 of this report.
Report suggestions may assist in a greater awareness and visibility of freight movement, and its
interdependence on the public sector infrastructure and road freight industry performances in collectively
contributing to industry and community economic resilience when disasters and emergencies are
experienced.
Austroads 2016 | page ii
Contents
1.
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1
Learning from Disasters ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1.2
Overview of Road Freight Movement in Australia ............................................................... 1
1.1.3
Damaged Transport Networks and Emergency Response Priorities .................................. 2
1.1.4
Freight Movement for Economic and Social Recovery ....................................................... 2
1.2 Project Purpose, Scope and Outline ................................................................................................ 3
2.
1.2.1
Project Purpose ................................................................................................................... 3
1.2.2
Project Definitions................................................................................................................ 3
1.2.3
Project Scope ...................................................................................................................... 4
1.2.4
Project Administration and Methodology ............................................................................. 4
Literature Review ................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Literature Review Process ............................................................................................................... 5
2.1.1
Literature Review Approach ................................................................................................ 5
2.1.2
Literature Review Methodology ........................................................................................... 5
2.1.3
Out of Scope Literature ....................................................................................................... 6
2.1.4
In-Scope Freight Movement ................................................................................................ 6
2.2 United States of America Literature ................................................................................................. 6

2.2.1
Department of Homeland Security ...................................................................................... 7
2.2.2
Transportation Research Board .......................................................................................... 7
2.2.3
Federal Highways Association .......................................................................................... 10
2.2.4
Washington State Department of Transportation .............................................................. 10
2.3 Japan and New Zealand ................................................................................................................ 13

2.3.1
Japan ................................................................................................................................. 13
2.3.2
New Zealand ..................................................................................................................... 14
2.3.3
Christchurch Earthquake and Focus on Economic Recovery ........................................... 15
2.3.4
Disaster Preparation and Response ................................................................................. 16
2.4 Australian Literature ....................................................................................................................... 18

2.5 Disasters and Mitigation Productivity Commission Report ............................................................ 18
2.5.1
Productivity Commission Report and this Project ............................................................. 20
2.5.2
A Framework for Effective Risk Management ................................................................... 20
2.6 Lessons from the Literature Review ............................................................................................... 21

2.6.1
USA Observations for this Project ..................................................................................... 21
2.6.2
USA Lessons for this Project ............................................................................................. 22
2.6.3
Lessons from Japan and New Zealand ............................................................................. 23
2.6.4
Key Lessons ...................................................................................................................... 23
2.6.5
Next Steps ......................................................................................................................... 24
Austroads 2016 | page iii
3.
Workshops Approach and Conduct................................................................................................... 25

3.1 Intent and Workshop Structure ...................................................................................................... 25
3.2 Preparation ..................................................................................................................................... 25
3.2.1
Project Manager Attendance ............................................................................................. 25
3.2.2
Roles ................................................................................................................................. 26
3.2.3
Invitations and Materials .................................................................................................... 26
3.3 Conduct .......................................................................................................................................... 26

3.3.1
Pilot Workshops................................................................................................................. 26
3.3.2
Typical Workshop Structure .............................................................................................. 27
3.3.3
Workshop Challenges ....................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Workshops ..................................................................................................................................... 28

3.5 Workshop Documentation .............................................................................................................. 28
3.6 Awareness of the Other Party Obligations ..................................................................................... 29
4.
Emergencies and Freight Movement ................................................................................................. 30

4.1 Context ........................................................................................................................................... 30
4.1.1
Jurisdictional Geography Variations .................................................................................. 30
4.1.2
Emergency Economic Resilience and Road Freight Risk ................................................. 30
4.1.3
Leveraging Knowledge ...................................................................................................... 33
4.2 Key Lessons ................................................................................................................................... 33
5.
4.2.1
Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................................ 33
4.2.2
Policy and Legislation ........................................................................................................ 35
4.2.3
Planning ............................................................................................................................. 36
4.2.4
Preparation ........................................................................................................................ 37
4.2.5
Partnering .......................................................................................................................... 39
4.2.6
Technology Platforms and Communication ...................................................................... 40
4.2.7
Funding for Emergency Management and Road Infrastructure ........................................ 41
4.2.8
Liaising and Reviewing ...................................................................................................... 41
4.2.9
Urban Networks and Emergency Freight Movements ...................................................... 42
Discussion and Suggestions .............................................................................................................. 44

5.1 Scope ............................................................................................................................................. 44
5.2 Literature Review Matters .............................................................................................................. 44
5.3 Emergency Economic Resilience ................................................................................................... 44
5.3.1
Emergency Management Progress in Jurisdictions .......................................................... 45
5.3.2
Relationships among the Parties ....................................................................................... 45
5.4 Suggestions .................................................................................................................................... 45

Glossary and List of Acronyms ................................................................................................................. 46
References ................................................................................................................................................... 48
Austroads 2016 | page iv
Tables
Table 2.1:
Table 2.2:
Out of Service Duration by Proportion for Transport Systems following

Christchurch Earthquake ........................................................................................................ 17
Insurances Losses by Disaster and State or Territory ........................................................... 19
Figures
Figure 1.1:
Figure 2.1:
Figure 2.2:
Figure 2.3:
Figure 2.4:
Figure 2.5:
Figure 2.6:
Figure 2.7:
Figure 2.8:
Figure 2.9:
Figure 4.1:
Figure 4.2:
Share of Australian Domestic Freight Tonnes ......................................................................... 1

DHS NPG Recovery Mission Area Targets for Economic Recovery ....................................... 7
Indicative Map of Australias Key Freight Routes .................................................................... 8
USA National Highway Network for Conventional Trucks ....................................................... 9
Urban Road Freight Route in Washington State .................................................................... 12
Widespread Inundation One Month after the GEJE............................................................... 14
Flooding in Rockhampton, Queensland, 3 January 2011 ...................................................... 14
Christchurch Quake Landslide Damage on Port Lyttleton Christchurch Evans
Pass Road, 2011 .................................................................................................................... 15
Canterbury Bridge with Structural Retrofits to increase Resilience to Earthquakes .............. 17
Factors Reducing the Three Disaster Risks .......................................................................... 21
Victorian PBS 2A Road Network Density ............................................................................... 31
The Road Freight Emergency Risk Conceptual Model .......................................................... 32
Austroads 2016 | page v
1. Introduction
1.1
Background
1.1.1 Learning from Disasters

Many Australian jurisdictions and New Zealand have over recent years experienced catastrophic natural
events that have required primacy to be given to response and recovery operations on a damaged transport
system. Rapid and innovative responses were required in order to keep freight moving on damaged or nontypical transport networks.
In the three years prior to 2013, Australasia experienced a severe earthquake decimating the City of
Christchurch, Victorias most tragic bushfires, Category 4/5 cyclones in Queensland and Western Australia
and major general flooding in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria.
Austroads desired to have their experiences documented, and any lessons from them researched. This
would allow jurisdictions to refine processes to respond more effectively to future emergencies.
1.1.2 Overview of Road Freight Movement in Australia

The Centre for Transport, Energy and the Environment (CTEE) synthesises data from the transport, energy
and emission domains to establish the national transport task in Australia.1 Of the five modes reported, the
road mode is most relevant for this commission.
The amount of freight transported within Australia grew by 4.6% in 2012/13 to 4.08 billion tonnes. The share
transported by road was 71.5%, with a further 24.9% by rail. Pipelines catered for the next largest share
(2.3%), followed by sea (1.2%). The Australian domestic freight modal share is depicted in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Share of Australian Domestic Freight Tonnes
Road
Rail
Pipeline
Sea
Air
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Tonnes (million)
Source: Australian Transport Facts (ATF) 2015 by the CTEE
1
The CTEE is owned by Adam Pekol Consulting Pty Ltd, trading as Pekol Traffic and Transport
Austroads 2016 | page 1
On a jurisdictional basis, New South Wales accounted for 26% of the national road freight task (in terms of
tonnes), followed by Victoria with 23%, Queensland with 22% and Western Australia with 18%. The other
States and Territories contribute the remaining 11% of the national total.
Much of the freight task performed by rigid trucks occurs in urban areas. A much smaller proportion of the
freight task carried by articulated or multi-combination vehicles occurs in urban areas.
Rigid trucks travelled 9841 million kilometres in Australia in 2012/13. Of this, 68.2% occurred in urban areas
and nearly a third (31.8%) elsewhere. Even in rural or regional areas, most rigid truck trips are relatively
short distance, with many being operated to service the agricultural sector.
In contrast, the longer distance road freight task in Australia is borne mainly by articulated vehicles. Of the
7267 million kilometres travelled by articulated vehicles in Australia in 2012/13, over two thirds (70.6%) took
place in rural, regional or remote areas. For many of these trips, their exposure to flooding, landslips,
avalanche and fires, is a matter for planning and operational response.
Urban areas in Australasia occupy a small proportion of the landmass, so they may be less likely to
experience disasters than regional and remote areas. Due to the concentration of population and economic
activity in urban areas, they are greatly impacted by disasters when these do occur.
1.1.3 Damaged Transport Networks and Emergency Response Priorities

Transport systems may be vulnerable alongside coastlines (from cyclones and tsunamis), along rivers and
flood plains (from general flooding caused by cyclones and rain depressions), along mountainous terrain and
their nearby creeks and rivers (from landslides, avalanches and flash-flooding) and in earthquake or fireprone areas.
The consequences of these weather or geological risks are that transport networks in many areas of
Australasia are vulnerable to damage and potential closure.
When transport networks are compromised by disasters, the primary need is to find resilient elements that
can be used for emergency response and recovery operations.
During a flood, fire or earthquake, road network requirements can change dramatically. Not only are parts of
the network suddenly and completely unavailable, but the types of freight requiring movement can shift
suddenly from regular, prearranged freight movements to urgent, ad-hoc and difficult ones, to support
communities that are often in sudden need of basic supplies.
The logistics of moving essential goods and equipment freight on a fragmented network to support damaged
or isolated communities requires immediate action. In particular, emergency and road agencies may
implement processes and undertake actions that would not otherwise have been done in normal situations.
1.1.4 Freight Movement for Economic and Social Recovery

Depending on the scale of the disaster, disaster response and recovery traffic movements and preserving
security for damaged towns and dwellings, can overwhelm or constrain the availability of the remaining
transport elements for their normal social and economic use. This can impede the ability to maintain crucial
freight movements required by businesses and for employment.
However, recent research shows that general freight movement is essential for maintaining the economy and
employment of disaster impacted communities, and their social wellbeing.
Jurisdictions have had to develop rapid and innovative responses to keep non-emergency related freight
moving on damaged or non-typical transport networks.
In some cases, these have proven to be successful and are being implemented as standard practice. An
example in Queensland includes stocking stores before the emergency with essential goods that will be
required immediately afterwards, to reduce the subsequent heavy vehicle demand on a damaged system.
But many general freight movements in the agricultural, transport, manufacturing, mining and retailing
sectors are generated continuously irrespective of disasters.
Non-essential freight movements on a fragmented, already damaged network have the potential to cause
significant further damage to newly vulnerable assets. On the other hand, restrictions on general freight
movement have the potential to harm businesses and employment not initially affected by the emergency.
This can also increase the longer run social and economic costs to the emergency affected community.
Emergencies have also highlighted the need to support freight routes that connect communities. While these
routes generally carry lower traffic, and as such often receive less funding allocations, it is in emergency
situations when their function often changes from lower-level freight route to that of a vital link for local
communities when the primary freight route has been damaged or cut.
1.2
Project Purpose, Scope and Outline
1.2.1 Project Purpose

Austroads Project FS1808 seeks to identify the methods utilised by jurisdictions to move essential freight,
and keep general freight moving, in emergency situations such as floods, fires and earthquakes.
1.2.2 Project Definitions

Disaster Types
In this report, an emergency or natural disaster is defined as a naturally occurring, rapid onset event that
causes a serious disruption to a community or region. This could include a flood or flash-flood, bushfire,
earthquake, storm, cyclone, storm surge, tornado, landslide or tsunami.
With respect to essential or general freight movements, emergencies during this project were broadened to
include the impacts of high temperatures and droughts.
Emergency Duration
During the course of the workshops, road freight operators also reported that any event that closed roads for
longer than four hours, for example crashes, initiated similar emergency processes on their businesses, as
did emergencies or natural disasters. While the scale of the impact may be smaller, the impact on the
business was similar.
Freight Types
Essential freight is defined as goods or services without which significant further or compounding economic
loss would be suffered. Examples include movement of:
Grain and additives to poultry farms and cattle feedlots, without which the livestock perishes;
Perishable annual agricultural commodities, such as transporting grapes to wineries;
Fuel, without which road freight cannot move; and
Coal for power generation for refineries, without which the ore will solidify leading to months of lost
production and rectifying effort.
General freight includes important and normally repetitive freight flows. Examples include food, fuel and
water for people, and inputs and production in the agriculture, manufacturing and mining sectors, some of
which may be able to be stored for a period.
It is noted that there is potential overlap of the project scope with emergency management. An example is
the transport of bottled water during emergency response if the local water supply operation has suffered
damage. Although bottled water is routinely supplied in stores, the demand in an emergency situation is
greatly increased. In this eventuality, the supply of bottled and other water for the local population would be a
matter for emergency response.
1.2.3 Project Scope

The scope of this project does not include emergency response and recovery transport. This includes the
significant freight or special purpose heavy vehicle flows generated in the immediate response to
emergencies. These are needed to preserve lives, limit public and private property damage and provide
emergency goods and services to communities. Examples of heavy vehicle responses are the movement of
fire trucks and water carriers to respond to fires, and movement of trucks carrying maintenance equipment
and emergency generated supplies.
Not including emergency response vehicles in the scope is due to these being given priority access generally
by an emergency controller using the powers of jurisdictional emergency legislation. This could occur under
a road authority permit or exemption for RAV access.
The scope of this project includes identifying and documenting the measures jurisdictional road agencies
take to support or reinstate the essential and general freight flows, as defined in sub-section 1.2.2, into and
out of communities. Inbound freight flows may include food, fuel and water; outbound freight flows may
include agriculture, mining and manufactured products.
1.2.4 Project Administration and Methodology

Pekol Traffic and Transport (PTT) was commissioned by Austroads to undertake the FS1808 Freight
Movement in Emergency Situations project. To facilitate its delivery, PTT has worked with the Project
Reference Group (PRG) members of State Road Agencies (SRAs). The guidance and advice of the
Austroads Project Manager, Simon Grieve, who also chaired many of the workshops is gratefully
acknowledged, along with the assistance of Greg McFarlane, the subsequent project manager.
A literature review was conducted to inform the project research. It is noted there are many papers written
and conferences held about emergency response matters, including the excellent Chartered Institute of
Logistics and Transport, New Zealand (CILTNZ) 2012 The Logistics of Natural Disaster Recovery
conference. The literature review was described in Working Paper 1 (WP1) and is reported in Chapter 2.
Workshops were held in many jurisdictions. Multi-agency public and private sector workshops were held in
Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, New South Wales and New Zealand during mid-2013,
outside the period of most emergencies. Victoria remained affected by an emergency so its workshop was
held in mid-2014. While unavoidable, it delayed the project by a year. The workshops were organised by the
jurisdictional PRG members, who also provided advice on organisational involvement. Their assistance was
significant and is appreciated.
The workshops were reported in Working Paper 2 (WP2), which described the various jurisdictional
structures and approaches that may provide lessons for each other. Key points from Chapter 3.
The literature review and workshops provided a basis for analysis of the lessons learned and for suggestions
developed. This analysis is also the subject of this report.
A List of Acronyms and Glossary is provided in this report prior to the References.
2. Literature Review
The aim of this Chapter is to document the literature review process and findings for the project. The
literature review was conducted in mid-2013. It is augmented with selected recent research.
2.1
Literature Review Process
2.1.1 Literature Review Approach

The literature review for this project identified both public and unpublished information.
The first step was to identify and summarise documentation from selected sources, nationally and
internationally, that described actions taken to support the movement of freight in emergency situations.
Additionally, PRG members have identified and provided access to a range of unpublished jurisdictional
material. Such is incorporated judiciously into this Chapter.
A traditional literature search focussed on identifying published disaster/emergency documentation
congruent with the project scope. This involved a process of identifying actions taken to facilitate general
freight movements before and following emergency situations, and/or the lessons learned.
The results of this search are reported in Section 2.2 for the USA, 2.3 for Japan and New Zealand, which
were grouped as the literature revealed their responses to their tragic earthquake disasters, and 2.4 for the
Australian approach. Chapter 2 concludes with the recent Disaster and Mitigation Productivity Commission
Report and discusses the lessons learnt.
2.1.2 Literature Review Methodology

The literature review was conducted by searching a range of websites for English language, non-commercial
documentation relating to the in-project scope movement of freight.
The countries targeted were the USA, Japan and New Zealand, as well as Australia. The USA and Japan
were a focus due to known recent experiences with disasters, including flooding, cyclones (hurricanes) and
earthquakes. As well, research in the USA provides a clearing-house for transport focussed research,
worldwide.
Websites were searched for literature about:
government sector (USA, Japan, New Zealand) planning and management of non-emergency freight
movements during disasters in affected areas
road freight carrier companies of Japan company reports containing information of freight performance
and movements
lessons learnt by these countries, which may be able to be applied to the Before and Recovery stages for
Australias freight movements.
Where documentation was found, associated references were investigated.
2.1.3 Out of Scope Literature

The literature review did not include disaster response considerations, including:
infrastructure assessment and access

evacuation of people and animals
delivery of emergency response personnel
equipment and services food/drink, fuel, sanitary items, waste removal, fuel delivery.
The literature review also discounted the following:
economic data in general, except where this related to in-scope matters

industry data, for example, freight tonne growth
passenger transport
light freight delivery services on the basis that these are more likely to be in urban areas and to be flexible
enough to be quickly re-established
mode freight competitiveness and/or share.
2.1.4 In-Scope Freight Movement

In seeking literature, it was recognised that the four general phases of disaster/emergency management
were important for describing in-scope freight movement, being:
Usual/Before: In-scope freight movement, even at heightened or restricted levels
During: Discounted in-scope freight movement during this period
Response: In-scope freight movement, not or minimally associated with response
Recovery: In-scope freight movement, not or minimally associated with recovery
In particular, literature associated with the movement of heavy or special purpose vehicles preparing for, in
response to and during recovery from disasters, was not included as it is out of scope. This type of excluded
movement included, for example, equipment to remove earth or fallen trees or buildings, assist human rescue, as
well as rebuilding and reconstruction activities, and the resupply of food, water, medical stores and equipment.
In essence, literature describing how the remaining essential and general road freight transport fared during
the disaster phases was sought during this literature review. Supply chain and logistics aspects of road
freight transport were also of interest where these provided context.
2.2
United States of America Literature
The websites of the following were accessed for information:
Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance

American Trucking Associations
Department of Homeland Security
Transportation Research Board, and its National Cooperative Freight Research Program
Federal Highway Administration
Washington State Department of Transportation.
Only the last four are described below; the full literature review is reported in WP1.
2.2.1 Department of Homeland Security

In its September 2011 National Preparedness Goals (NPG), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
states a number of factors that are important in its five mission areas. The DHS mission areas are
Prevention, Protection, Mitigation, Response and Recovery.
Within the Recovery DHS Mission Area, the DHS NPG Goal is:
Recovering through a focus on the timely restoration, strengthening and revitalisation of infrastructure,
housing, and a sustainable economy, as well as the health, social, cultural, historic and
environmental fabric of communities affected by a catastrophic incident.2
To give effect to this goal, the DHS NPG has developed Capabilities and Preliminary Targets for the
Recovery Mission Area. There are eight Capabilities and Economic Recovery is one of these. Its Capability
and Preliminary Targets are illustrated in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: DHS NPG Recovery Mission Area Targets for Economic Recovery
The focus of this project would fall within actions to implement Preliminary Targets 1 and 2 of the DHS NPG.
The next sub-section documents literature illustrating approaches the USA is taking towards these.
2.2.2 Transportation Research Board

A review of the nearly fifty National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) reports revealed little
research directly related to this project.
However, one report provided a good level of information about the quantum of freight movement in the USA
and also the density of its road (and rail and maritime) freight network.
The NCFRP Report 16 of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies entitled Preserving
and Protecting Freight Infrastructure and Routes was published in 2012. It states on page 1:
According to the Commodity Flow Survey, on average, 42 tons of freight worth $39,000 was delivered
to every person in the United States in 2007. When considering the distance involved in transporting
this freight, an average of 11,000 ton-miles (nearly 18,000 tonne-kilometres) was delivered to every
person in the country.
Freight volumes and the transportation of those volumes are driven by consumption. Moreover, a key
determinant of consumption growth is population growth, which makes growth in freight volumes and
the need to transport these increasing volumes a virtual certainty.
This DHS NPG Goal was restated on page 166 of the (Disaster Resilience, 2012) report; and Authors emphasis.
The 2015 Australian Transport Facts 3 report states that in June 2013, Australias population was 23.1 million
people. In the 2012/13 financial year, the national domestic road freight task totalled 2923 million tonnes and
221 billion tonne-kilometres. This equates to 127 tonnes per person (or 72% of the national figure) and 9570
tonne-kilometres per person (or 35% of the national figure).
(When rail, sea and aviation are included, the freight task becomes 4085 million tonnes or 639 billion tonnekilometres. This equates to 177 tonnes and 27 660 tonne-kilometres per person. Much of this increase is due
to rail haulage of iron ore and coal, and the sea transport of bauxite. These three high tonnage, long distance
exports influence or skew the national freight statistics.)
The above figures assume that the total road freight task in Australia is domestic and that all the rail and
maritime freight tasks are international; neither assumption being correct. There will be some balancing
influences from these assumptions, but these are unlikely to be entirely congruent. But even this simplistic
approach indicates that Australia and the USA have similar freight tasks.
A key difference is the density of the Australian and USA National Freight Networks. Australias Key Road
Freight Routes were approved by the Transport and Infrastructure Council of Ministers on 7 November 2014,
which is shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2: Indicative Map of Australias Key Freight Routes
Source: Transport and Infrastructure Council website
The comparative USA National Freight Network is shown on page 3 (NCFRP Report 16, 2012) and forms
Figure 2.3.
Australian Transport Facts, CTEE, 2015.
Visual inspection reveals significantly more opportunities for different road freight trip paths in the USA than
in Australia, should any road link or links be closed by a disaster.
Perhaps in the USA, there is less need to secure general road freight movement across disaster damaged
road links, as other roads can provide this function without too much deviation and cost. This may explain the
USA focus on the economics and community impacts of freight movement disruptions (DHS NPG, 2011).
This reports emphasis is on identifying economic issues and inhibitors and specifying economic recovery
performance in recovery plans.
Figure 2.3: USA National Highway Network for Conventional Trucks
A second relevant report was found on the Transportation Research Board website. The 2012 report was
entitled Disaster Resilience: A National Imperative. It was produced by a consortium of consultants and
academia for the National Academy of Sciences. This report focussed principally on the health impacts and
organisational collaboration and processes that could result in better resilience, with transportation viewed
principally as contributing to resilient outcomes. The report contains some interesting discussion about
secondary economic impacts on business. In a sub-section entitled Geographic Variation in Economic
Losses (p 75), there is discussion that the data gathering processes in the USA under-estimates the total
value of losses because indirect losses and business interruption are not included, for example. Such
indirect losses can be substantial. The report further noted that Indirect flow losses refer to the disruption in
the supply chain for other businesses as a result of the shutdown (a ripple effect caused by the
interconnectedness of many supply chains regionally and globally).
On page 166, it notes that one of the USA DHSs National Preparedness Goals is as stated in sub-section
2.2.1 above.
In summary, the focus of this report (as with most others perused) is on the planning and response to
disasters to ensure greater resilience, with the re-establishment of road freight flows being a mention rather
than even a secondary item or focus.
It is clear that re-establishing the affected economy during the recovery stages is becoming a more
prominent issue. For example, it was accorded secondary consideration, along with other matters in the DHS
NPG.
2.2.3 Federal Highways Association

The Federal Highways Association (FHWA) has a web page specifically for Freight Disruptions: Impacts on
Freight Movement from Natural and Man-Made Events, containing more than fifty reports and articles. Two,
including the Statewide Freight System Resiliency Plan report (SFSRP described below) and one linked to
the Transportation Research Board (of the National Academies) website described in sub-section 2.2.2, are
associated with the concept of freight and economic resilience after disaster/ emergencies.
In 2008, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Transportation and Logistics, produced a
Final Research Report, Development of a Statewide Freight System Resiliency Plan, for the Washington
State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). It states (pages 4 and 6):
Most work, however, has focussed on how an organisation should successfully respond to these
disasters during and in the immediate aftermath in order to save lives. On the other hand, very little
research has been conducted on how organisations or regions should plan to recover economically
from these disasters, and few States have any meaningful recovery plans outlined for their freight
systems.4
Emergency response plans, for example, focus on minimising the immediate loss of life and damage,
are generally incident specific, and are usually considered the responsibility of the public sector.
Longer-term recovery plans, on the other hand, focus on business resumption and stability, are
industry or company specific, and are usually considered the responsibility of each individual company
in the private sector. Collectively, however, this suggests that there is little awareness or visibility of the
interdependence of the public sector infrastructure and the private sector business community. This is
most evident in the general lack of defined plans and priorities for allocation and use of limited public
sector transportation resources post-incident by private sector entities through recovery.
While many companies have embraced these insights [referring to resilience and business continuity
plans/planning (BCP)], the public sector has appeared to lag in the development of resilience and
BCPs. We believe this body of knowledge has fertile application in the freight transportation system
and that many of the lessons can be applied to the freight system of an entire region, State, or country.
On page 8 the report:

Calls for each State to develop a State-specific SFSRP that addresses the recovery of freight systems
in order to preserve the economic viability of the State and region. A standard SFSRP would not be
adequate because each State has a different risk profile where the leading disaster might range from
earthquake, to hurricane, to mudslide, to forest fire. But ... the specific cause of the disaster is less
important than the effect it has on the States transportation network. Viewed from a consequences
rather than a causal perspective then, the multitudes of potential disasters can be classified based on
their impacts on the network and therefore more easily addressed and prioritized.
2.2.4 Washington State Department of Transportation

The SFSRP report develops a framework under which SFSRPs can be developed. But how these concepts
were developed and applied in WSDOT is not entirely clear. Eight reports on the WSDOT website were
perused. Two are discussed with respect to freight system resilience, and a third described, which may
provide a means for prioritisation of freight resilience treatments for the five WSDOT categories of key freight
routes.
In an Appendix from page 100, only four of the 50 States had an economic recovery plan or section in 2008.
Freight Mobility
Following the SFSRP for the WSDOT, that jurisdiction announced incorporation of the concept into its next
iteration of the Highway System Plan. Its FREIGHT MOBILITY: Joint Report5 on Washington State Freight
Highway and Rail Projects, September 2008, stated on page 3 that:
The [next] Highway System Plan update will highlight recommendations for freight system
improvements across the State, and feature new statewide freight corridor classification criteria and a
freight data program to support project prioritisation. It will include a list of high-priority freight highway
system projects and operational improvements. The Department also leads the States freight data and
analytic program, and initiatives to improve freight system operational efficiencies, build a data
framework to monitor system performance, and develop resilient freight systems.6
Page 5 outlined initiatives for establishing Strategic Freight Corridors for road, rail and maritime, which are
discussed further below. The remaining 11 pages of the report are associated with proposed highway and
rail projects, as its title suggests.
Statewide Freight Data Flow Network

The Development and Analysis of a GIS-based Statewide Freight Data Flow Network7 (SFDFN, 2009) by
two universities for the WSDOT was released in November 2009. This research report was the second
phase of the SFSRP report outlined in sub-section 2.2.3.
It restated the concepts of freight resilience and provided performance indicators of the SFSRP as:
the restoration or recovery of the States economy as it is affected, enabled, or disabled by the
performance of the freight system (SFSRP 2008, 10)
how quickly and efficiently the freight transport system can recover from a disruption (SFSRP 2008, 10)
The purpose of the SFDFN research was to:
Understand how disruptions of the States freight corridors change the way trucking companies and
various freight-dependent industries route goods
Plan to protect freight-dependent sectors that are at high risk from these disruptive events
Prioritise future transportation investments based on the risk of economic loss to the State.
The research developed a statewide multimodal freight model for Washington State. It is a GIS-based
portrayal of the States freight highway, arterial, rail, waterway and intermodal network.
Two case studies, potato growing and processing and diesel fuel distribution, were chosen to represent the
agriculture and all industry sectors. These showed that the potato growing and processing sector was heavily
dependent on one Interstate road corridor, while the diesel delivery system is highly resilient and is not
dependent on any one corridor.
Freight and Goods Transportation System

The Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) 2011 Update was released in
March 2012. It is an excellent technical report supported by 16 Appendices. This is the seventh update of the
FGTS since the first report in 1995. The report is used to establish project eligibility for Freight Mobility
Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) grants and fulfil other federal reporting requirements, and supports
planning for mobility improvement. It states variously in the Executive Summary:
This was a joint report between WSDOT and the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board.
Author emphasis.
QTMR has a Road Freight Map that was first produced in 2003, its third iteration is dated 2010.
The FGTS classifies roadways using five truck gross tonnage8 classifications, T-1 through T-5, as
follows:
T-1
more than 10 million tons per year
T-2
4 million to 10 million tons per year
T-3
300,000 to 4 million tons per year
T-4
100,000 to 300,000 tons per year
T-5
at least 20,000 tons in 60 days and less than 100,000 tons per year
WSDOT is aware that gross tonnage data (for roads, rail and freight) is not sufficient to present a
comprehensive view of the States freight system. It does not provide information on the users of the
system, their economic importance, performance requirements, system needs and future trends.
The road freight classification categories were used for investment decision-making, as outlined in the
Business Directions document. No information was discovered on the WSDOT site that these categories
were used to prioritise system resilience or for local government land use planning. Clearly, there is scope
for them to be used also for that purpose.
Figure 2.4: Urban Road Freight Route in Washington State
Source: WSDOT FGTS (2011)
The tonnage estimates for road links were derived for three classes of vehicles using permanent and temporary count sites, inferring
truck proportions where not available and using derived tonnages for three truck classes. The result seems robust and comparable,
sufficient for the purpose of the road freight classification system.
2.3
Japan and New Zealand
The literature relating to these two countries is reported in a single section. This is because most of the New
Zealand literature used by this project corresponds to the Christchurch earthquakes mega-disaster as does
the single source from Japan.
Japan and New Zealands mountainous terrain are subject to landslides, which may be caused by
earthquakes or heavy rain, and to avalanches following snowfalls. Landslides can close or partially close
freight roads, or lead to river flash flooding, when a temporary landslide dam is breached.
Mega Disasters
The two Christchurch earthquakes and especially the second, like the Great East Japan Earthquake, can be
considered to be a mega-disaster from at least two aspects. Firstly, their combined economic impact was
about NZ$8.86 billion (Poulter 2012 p4), nearly 100 times greater than any of the 10 other New Zealand
disasters in the same two years. Secondly, in the second earthquake half of all roads in Christchurch were
damaged, with 54 km of roads significantly damaged, 980 km needing repair along with 600 retaining walls
and 30 bridges and 50 000 road defects (Ladbroke 2012). When there is such damage, the focus of
agencies is towards disaster response and recovery rather than economic resilience, as was found in Japan
(Ochi 2012).
Stephen Sellwood, Chief Executive of the New Zealand Council for Infrastructure Development, provided an
insightful presentation incorporating economic recovery into the suite of planning by government and the
Canterbury Council, but raising issues about organisational roles, financing and debt repayment obligations
over many years. While the scale of the damage is unusual and tragic, the lessons about preparedness and
freight movement facilitation could be applied in all Australian jurisdictions.
This matter is discussed in more detail in subsequent chapters.
2.3.1 Japan
On 7 February 2012, the Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE) struck, causing its corresponding tsunami,
and subsequent nuclear power generator disasters. 15 846 lives were lost and another 3317 people are
missing. Such a disaster can be considered to be a mega-disaster.
Just over a year later, Shigeo Ochi, Director for Earthquake, Volcanic and Large-scale Flood Disaster
Management, Disaster Management Bureau, Cabinet Office gave a presentation (Ochi 2012). While the
scale of such a disaster is virtually unimaginable in Australia (but not in New Zealand), some aspects are
worth reporting to inform jurisdictions, including:
The area of inundation far exceeded that indicated in municipal hazard planning maps:
The effects of inundation are far more significant, but not dissimilar to the effects of flooding in
Australia as shown in Figure 2.5 and Figure 2.6; and
Loss of the telecommunications network restricted emergency operational incoming information and
outgoing instructions, as it did in the Bundaberg flood of 2013.
The total cost of the GEJE was $220 billion (using an exchange rate of $1=\77.07Y) of which $25 billion
was due to agriculture, forestry and fisheries impacts.
Nearly 10 months afterwards, 99% of Nationally controlled roads, 97% of railways but only 68% of ports
had been reinstated:
All Tokyo trains were stopped for six weeks; and

One of the nine overall lessons learned is that in order to prevent economic stagnation due to damage
to key industries, BCPs for disaster response should be formulated and encompass the freight
transport network.
2.3.2 New Zealand

Because New Zealand straddles a plate boundary, it is tectonically active with volcanoes and earthquakes.
The Pacific Plate is colliding with the Australian/Indo Plate at a rate of about 38 mm/year (Thornton, 2009).
New Zealand is subject to more frequent and intense earthquakes than Australia, epitomised by the
Christchurch earthquakes in September 2010 and the more destructive one in February 2011.
Figure 2.5: Widespread Inundation One Month after the GEJE
Source: Ochi (2012)

Figure 2.6: Flooding in Rockhampton, Queensland, 3 January 2011
Source: Stratton (2012)
2.3.3 Christchurch Earthquake and Focus on Economic Recovery

As with the USA literature review, few papers recognised the importance of economic recovery following
disasters. However, a number focussed on disaster preparation and the benefits of this.
The Johnson 2012 presentation at the CILTNZ that stated the Ministry for Transport in New Zealand has an
important focus on economic continuity in its disaster response. He said the role of transport in an
emergency is fundamental to response, but also necessary for the long-term recovery of people affected
and wider economic continuity.
Port of Lyttelton, Christchurch

Stratton 2012 discussed reinstatement of fuel supplies from the Port of Lyttelton.
During the Christchurch earthquake, the Evans Pass Road between Christchurch and its Port of Lyttelton
was damaged, as shown in Figure 2.7. It was closed for over 12 months. This road was used by hazardous
vehicles in order not to have them pass through the alternate tunnel.
Figure 2.7: Christchurch Quake Landslide Damage on Port Lyttleton Christchurch Evans Pass Road, 2011
Source: Stratton (2012)
Thankfully, the tunnel was found to be structurally sound, so that restricted travel was allowed in the
following seven days. In order to provide fuel supplies to Christchurch and surrounding regions, dangerous
goods and heavy vehicles were approved to use the tunnel at night between 1900 and 0630 during full
tunnel closure for other traffic.
The consequences of the closure of Evans Pass are remarkably similar to the landslip disruption and
closures of the seven Great Dividing Range crossings, including two NLTN highways in Queensland in
January 2011. However, the cause was different with the Australian road ranges being closed due to
damage from a rain depression. In Queensland, the two NLTN highway range crossings were reopened on a
one lane basis quickly, but reconstruction of these and the other passes took between many months to well
over a year.
So as with the USA, New Zealand has a focus on the importance of economic recovery following disasters.
The remainder of this section discusses its planning, preparation and response, with particular emphasis on
the Christchurch Earthquakes of September 2010 and February 2011.
2.3.4 Disaster Preparation and Response

Disaster Preparation
New Zealand has well established processes for geological hazards monitoring. This was presented at the
CILTNZ by the departmental head (Gledhill 2012). The work focuses on the:
Long term planning for reduction and readiness:

based on historical data and using scenarios
risk awareness
defences and operational strategies
residual risk
Short term forecasts for response and recovery
Wellington Lifelines Group/ Wellington Region Emergency Management Office (WeLG/ WREMO 2013) has
prepared a Transport Access report on the effects of a major earthquake on Wellington, the capital of New
Zealand. (It followed a related report on lifeline utilities restoration times.)
This report states that access by sea may take 4-5 or 5-7 days following a major earthquake, whereas road
reconnection takes far longer and varies significantly. Depending on the area, intra-city access may be reestablished for some areas within 5-7 days, while other areas may take up to 10 weeks. Reconnection to the
New Zealands national road system may take 120 days.
This report takes an explicit disaster response focus. There is no economic recovery consideration; however,
this was not the focus of the report. For example, there is no analysis of the essential and general freight
requirements that would be generated or required were different proportions of the remaining workforce able
to resume their normal work over different timescales.
The clear lesson is that earthquakes, particularly mega-earthquakes, are at such a catastrophic level that
their economic effects last for months or years, and the financial repercussions may be even longer
(Selwood 2012 refers).
Ochi 2012 has already cautioned that countries and regions need to consider and focus on achieving better
economic recovery from disasters.
Road Asset Preparation and Response

The NZ Transport Agency is responsible for land transport, including the State Highways Network. As part of
its network management role, it conducted a study of the resilience of its bridges in the Canterbury region
using geological sciences input data. Seventeen bridges were retrofitted with structural components at a cost
of $2 million per bridge (or 7% of their replacement value) to increase their seismic resilience. Examples of
the work are shown in Figure 2.8.
Stratton 2012 stated that the seismic retrofit works undertaken prevented more critical damage, and repairs
to these bridges would only cost $6.3 million. This indicates that a focussed program of planning and
preparation for foreseeable disaster impacts can result in more resilient road network surviving to perform a
role following disasters, even those of a Christchurch earthquake scale.
Figure 2.8: Canterbury Bridge with Structural Retrofits to increase Resilience to Earthquakes
Infrastructure Network
Days
1
Weeks
5
Months
4
Years
8
10 11 12
10 11 12
Water Network
Service to 50% of Network
Infrastructure Network
Wastewater Network
Water
Network
Service
to 50% of Network
Days
4
Weeks
3
Months
7
Years
3
Service to
to 90%
50% of
of Network
Network
Service
Service
Service to
to 90%
95% of
of Network
Network
Service
Service to
to 95%
99% of
of Network
Network
Service to
99% of Network
Stormwater
Network
Source:
Stratton
(2012)
Wastewater
Network
Service to
50% of Network
Service
Service to
to 50%
90% of
of Network
Network
Service
to 95%
90%2012
of Network
Network
to
of
The Service
Ladbroke
presentation reported the duration until the elements of the road and transport system
Network
Service
toto95%
99%
ofbrought
Network back into service. This data is presented in Table 2.1.
wereService
ableto
beof
Roads
Stormwater
Network
Service to
50% of Network
Service
to Out
50% of
of
Network
Table
2.1: to
ofNetwork
Service Duration by Proportion for Transport Systems following Christchurch Earthquake
Service
90%
Service
Service to
to 90%
95% of
of Network
Network
Service
to
95%
Service
to 99% of
of Network
Network
Infrastructure
Network
Service to 99%
of Network
Transportation
System
Water Network
Roads
Traffic Management Operations
Service
to
Service
to 50%
50% of
of Network
Network
Airport Operations
at 50%
Service
to
90%
ServiceOperations
to 90% of
of Network
Network
Airport
at 90%
Service to
to 95%
95% of
of Network
Network
Service
Airport Operations
at 99%
Service
to
of Network
Service
to 99%
99%
Network
Rail Network
at of
50%
Wastewater
Network
Transportation
Rail NetworkSystem
at 90%
ServiceManagement
to 50% of Network
Traffic
Rail Network at 99%Operations
Service
to 90% of Network
Airport
Operations
50%
Port Operations
at at
50%
Service
to 95% of Network
Airport
Operations
90%
Port
Operations
at at
90%
ServiceOperations
to 99% of Network
Airport
99%
Port Operations at at
99%
Stormwater
Network
Rail
Network
at
50%
Electrical Power Network
Service
to 50% of Network
Rail Network
Basic
Serviceat 90%
Service
to 90%
Network
Rail
Network
at of
99%
Service to 50%
of
Network
Service
to 95% of
Network
Port
Operations
at
50%
Service
to
99%
of
Port Operations atNetwork
90%
Roads
Port Operations at 99%
Service
to 50%
of Network
Electrical
Power
Network
Telecommunications
Service
to
90%
Basic Service of Network
Basic Cellular Access
Service to
to 50%
95% of
of Network
Network
Service
Cellular Service to 50% of Network
Service
Service to
to 99%
90% of
of Network
Network
Cellular Service to 99% of Network
Transportation
System
Service to 95%
of Network
Basic Local Telephone Access
Traffic Management
Operations
Service
to 99% of Network
Service to 50% of Local Network
Airport Operations at 50%
Telecommunications
Service to 99% of Local Network
Airport
Operations
at 90%
Basic
Cellular
Access
Natural
Gas
Network
Airport Operations
at 99%
Cellular
Service
to
50%
of Network
Source:
Ladbroke
Service
to 50% of(2012)
Network
Rail
Network
at 50%
Cellular
Service
to 99% of Network
Rail
at 90% Access
BasicNetwork
Local Telephone
Service
to 95%
Network
Rail Network
at of
99%
Service
to 50%
of
Local Network
Service
to 99% of
Network
Port
Operations
at
50% Network
Service to 99% of Local
SolidPort
Waste
Network
Operations
at
Natural Gas Network 90%
Service
to 50% of
Port Operations
atNetwork
99%
Service
to 50% of
Network
Days
1
Weeks
5
Months
4
Years
8
10 11 12
NEEDS VALIDATION
NEEDS VALIDATION
NEEDS VALIDATION
NEEDS VALIDATION
NEEDS VALIDATION

NEEDS VALIDATION
NEEDS VALIDATION
For the Christchurch mega-disaster, traffic management was most quickly reinstated followed by airports
with 50% capability within seven days and 100% within four weeks. Roads were next with 50% reinstatement
within three weeks. While rail was slower to this level, it had 99% reinstatement within six months, while
roads took between one and two years to reach this level. Ports were slowest with 50% reinstatement taking
two months and 99% between one and two years, the same repair performance as for roads.
The experience from Japan (Ochi 2012) following the GEJE mega-disaster was different, but followed similar
trends. Nearly ten months afterwards, 99% of nationally controlled roads, 97% of railways, 68% of ports and
99% of the telecommunications network had been reinstated.
Partnering for Recovery

Of all the documentation found during the literature review, the joint Solid Energy and Kiwi Rail presentation
(Russell 2012) contained key lessons in recovering the economic function of freight transport. The aim was
to re-establish the rail link and Port of Lyttelton for international coal export contracts after it was severely
damaged by the September 2010 and February 2011 earthquakes.
The key lessons are information and communication with customers, and working together using well
practised and rehearsed preparatory plans for emergencies.
It was noteworthy that these companies also provided practical support (structural checks of employees
homes) and soft support through an employee assistance program.
2.4
Australian Literature
Until 2014, very little comparable information was found in the Australian literature.
For example, the Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure 2013, National Land Freight Strategy: A
place for freight, states that transport and logistics share of GDP (Australias gross domestic product) could
be as much as 14% and the transport sector directly employed over half a million people. So the economic
importance of freight and logistics is acknowledged.
However, in spite of the multiple disasters affecting most states between 2010 and 2012, nowhere in the
report is the issue of economic resilience preparation, and economic recovery and the movement of road
freight after disasters, mentioned as one of Australias six key issues.
2.5
Disasters and Mitigation Productivity Commission Report
On 28 April 2014 (after all but one workshop had been conducted), the then Treasurer of the Australian
Government requested the Productivity Commission to examine natural disaster funding arrangements. It
produced a two volume draft report in September 2014.
As a context for this project, this section quotes extensively from the Volume 1, Draft Report, Natural
Disaster Funding Arrangements, Productivity Commission, September 2014.
Natural disasters are an inherent part of the Australasian landscape. Since 2009 in Australia, natural
disasters have claimed more than 200 lives, destroyed 2670 houses and damaged a further 7680, and
affected the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of Australians.9
Over the past 40 years, storms have been the most frequent disasters causing insured property losses.
Floods have also been frequent and, when they occur, are typically the most expensive events. Bushfires are
less frequent, but account for most fatalities. Across the country, accumulated insurance losses have been
greatest in New South Wales (mostly hail and storms), followed by Queensland (mostly floods and cyclones).
Volume 1, Draft Natural Disaster Funding Arrangements, Productivity Commission, September 2014.
Table 2.2:
Insurances Losses by Disaster and State or Territory
Source: Table 1, Volume 1, Draft Natural Disaster Funding Arrangements, Productivity Commission, September 2014
In approximate per capita terms, the Northern Territory and Queensland suffered the highest losses, followed
by Western Australia, New South Wales and Victoria.
The highest property losses occurred from hail and storm, and it is likely that the insurance loss size is highly
correlated with urban areas. Storms and hail generally do not affect large areas or have the same level of
impacts on the transport system or businesses as do cyclones, floods, some bushfires or major earthquakes.
Insurance losses from natural disasters exceeded $29 billion over the period 1970 to 2013 (in 2011 dollars),
or an average of $670 million each year. However, the bulk of these losses arose from a relatively small
number of events - indeed, only 10 per cent of natural disasters accounted for 80 per cent of recorded
insurance losses.
However, the costs of natural disasters go beyond insured losses. Disasters impose a range of economic,
social and environmental costs on governments, businesses, households and communities. These include:
direct market costs caused by the physical event, such as damage to private properties and public
infrastructure;
indirect market costs, such as disruptions to economic activity; and

non-market costs, such as deaths and injuries as well as impacts on social wellbeing and the natural
environment.
The Productivity Commission states that the economic costs of natural disasters are difficult to measure.
There is some data on the direct market costs of natural disasters, but only limited data on the indirect and
non-market costs. Further, the economic impacts of natural disasters are likely to be nonlinear - that is, as
the size of a natural disaster increases, its disruptive effect is amplified.
These natural disasters have also had a significant financial impact on the Australian, State, Territory and
Local Governments. For the financial years ending 2010 to 2016, the Productivity Commission estimated that
the Australian, State and territory governments have or will have spent nearly $20 billion on funding the
impacts of natural disasters.
It stated Government investment in mitigation tends to be outweighed by post-disaster expenditure. For
example, Australian Government mitigation spending was only three per cent of what it spent post-disaster in
recent years.
The Productivity Commission reported a longstanding concern that governments under-invest in mitigation
and spend too much on recovery, leading to higher overall costs for the community.
2.5.1 Productivity Commission Report and this Project

Selected Draft Productivity Commission Recommendations
Australia is exposed to natural disasters on a recurring basis. Effective planning and mitigation of risks is
an essential task for governments, businesses and households.
Governments generally overinvest in post-disaster reconstruction, and under-invest in mitigation that

would limit the impact of natural disasters in the first place.
Governments can also do better in terms of policies that allow people to understand natural disaster risks
and have incentives to manage them effectively.
Information is critical to understanding and managing natural disaster risk. Information on hazards and
risk exposure has improved significantly in recent years, but there are opportunities to improve its
consistency, sharing and communication.
Project Context
The scope of this project places it within two of the Productivity Commission concepts, being:
indirect market costs, such as disruptions to economic activity; and

disaster mitigation, rather than post-disaster expenditure.
This project is not concerned with the direct market cost category of property and infrastructure damage that
generates the need for emergency response and recovery actions. Nor is it directly concerned with nonmarket costs. An indirect consequence to the latter may be that as jurisdictions improve their essential and
general freight emergency management, it will result in an improvement on social and economic wellbeing
and reduce non-market costs after emergencies.
The project uses post-disaster information gained through a literature review and private and public sector
workshops to develop suggestions on how jurisdictions are and could improve essential and general freight
management processes in order to mitigate the impacts of future emergencies.
2.5.2 A Framework for Effective Risk Management

The Productivity Commission 2014 describes an effective risk management process. This is adapted by this
project as described in Figure 4.2 and related discussion. It states:
Natural disasters pose risks to community living standards - potential damage that could occur in the
future (Box 1.2). As such, natural disaster funding is not a traditional service delivery activity, but
essentially a risk management activity. Risk management is a process that can reduce the impact of
risks, including by managing the consequences when they occur. Even when little can be done to
reduce the probability of natural hazards, it is possible to reduce the exposure and vulnerability of the
community, and hence natural disaster risk.
The reports Box 1.2 is reproduced as Figure 2.9.
Figure 2.9: Factors Reducing the Three Disaster Risks
Source: Box 1.2, Volume 1, Draft Natural Disaster Funding Arrangements, Productivity Commission, September 2014
In terms of jurisdictional road assets, exposure can be mitigated by the location of those assets to be, where
possible, away from areas affected by storm surges, flooding and landslips. Where altering the location is not
possible and ranges and rivers have to be crossed, the vulnerability of the road assets can be reduced by
appropriate planning, design, construction and maintenance.
Box 1.2 is directly applicable for terminals and warehouses associated with road freight operations for
essential and general freight movement.
In terms of road freight operations, timely information about likely impacts on the road assets during a
hazard, can reduce significantly, or eliminate, heavy vehicle and driver exposure.
2.6
Lessons from the Literature Review
2.6.1 USA Observations for this Project

A number of observations are derived from the USA literature review, being:
Disaster Management literature did not have a focus on economic recovery 20 years ago, merely noting it
as a consequence in an Appendix (Auf der Heide, 1989);
Communities are unable to survive for extensive periods without road transport services. Some important
local supplies can be exhausted in as little as a day or two, and can become critical within a week to a
month (Hu, 2008);
The USA freight task is growing along with its population (NCFRP Report 16, 2012). It is not dissimilar to
Australias (ATF, 2015), but the density of its freight road network far exceeds that of Australias (NCFRP
Report 16, 2012 and NLFS, 2013);
The economic function of freight movement has long been understood, but not always appreciated
(FGTS, 2011 and NCFRP Report 16, 2012). It appears to be under-reported (Disaster Resilience 2012),
with States having to specify a freight route hierarchy:
WSDOT has a five level road freight hierarchy (also rail and maritime) and this information is used for
planning and investment (FGTS, 2011 and Business Directions, 2008); and
Recently, disaster resilience has become a national focus, and national preparedness goals include
economic recovery as a secondary item (DHS NPG, 2011) (albeit with an economic (Disaster Resilience,
2012), planning and performance measurement focus):
The FHWA has a web page specifically for Freight Disruptions: Impacts on Freight Movement from
Natural and Man-Made Events;
There does not appear to be the same focus at State level with only four of 50 States having recovery
plans in 2008 (SFSRP, 2008);
WSDOT has a strong freight movement/economic focus, but even it appears to not have integrated as
yet the resilience, economic recovery and freight movement emphases into its transportation business
and highway planning (all documents in section 3.4 refer), even though this is a focus of its freight
planning;
The (SFSRP, 2008) report recommended the State and public sector should adopt BCPs in the same
way that the private sector has;
In the second stage of this research, WSDOT developed (SFDFN, 2009) a statewide GIS multi-modal
freight model and used it to assess the resilience of an agricultural and industry sector supply chain;
and
It planned to release its Freight Mobility Plan and updated Highway System Plan by end 2013.
This USA literature provides a framework within which this project can potentially make a compelling
contribution.
2.6.2 USA Lessons for this Project

In the USA, there is a growing national focus on disaster resilience, including economic resilience and
recovery, and the importance of freight transport to that. Australia does not appear to have the same
economic resilience and recovery focus in its national planning for freight (NLFS, 2013).
Freight movement is recognised as being critical for the USAs economic sustainability. From this aspect it is
increasingly being recognised as a core issue for disaster management, with State disaster and
transportation planning being updated to encompass this aspect.
Although USA freight movement planning is integrated into investment decisions and highway planning, the
important focus of reinstating freight movement in the recovery phase of disasters remains an emerging
trend.
Even with the USAs far greater network density, some agricultural and manufacturing industries, with cotton
being an example, rely on the resilience of one Interstate highway (SFDFN, 2009).
Australias national freight network is much less dense than that of the USA. It has only one national freight
level, irrespective of the volume and value of freight being moved. By comparison in the USA, Washington
State alone has a six level road freight and five level rail freight hierarchies, all based on freight volumes.
Given Australias sparse freight network compared with that of the USA, it is likely to be comparatively less
economically resilient. This will have flow-on effects on Australias export and domestic industries.
It would seem axiomatic that a framework for this project should consider freight corridors with high volumes
or values of freight and with a greater propensity for disaster impacts.
Perhaps Australias sparse freight network and propensity for disaster damage can provide a focus for
cooperation between the private and public sectors in the early reinstatement of essential and general freight
movement on roads damaged by disasters.
In this context, the goal of this project to document actions taken by jurisdictions to support essential and
general freight movement in the recovery phase of disasters is consistent with, but seems to be in advance
of, efforts in the USA.
However, there are many more opportunities for different road freight trip paths in the USA than in most
Australian jurisdictions, should any road link or links be impacted by a disaster. Perhaps the USA has a
reduced need to secure general road freight movement across disaster damaged road links, as other roads
can provide the freight movement without too much deviation and cost.
The results of this project could be used by jurisdictions to prepare BCPs for important economic sectors, as
recommended by USA documentation.
2.6.3 Lessons from Japan and New Zealand

While the scale, impact and tragic death toll is different from most other disasters, a number of lessons can
be discerned from the Japanese and New Zealand earthquake experiences, including:
Telecommunications are vital to the immediate response and their recovery through interim power and
network reinstitution can be relatively quick compared with other transport networks:
It may be that the initial telecommunications loss has less impact on economic recovery than the loss
of physical transport infrastructure.
Planning and preparedness can pay significant dividends in:

ensuring the resilience of road, rail and port infrastructure and the re-establishment of economic
supply chains;
making interim arrangements to re-establish critical fuel supply chains, which also drive economic
recovery; and
supply chain management, which is a key issue for business recovery.

Aside from the reporting of changed travel demand in Christchurch (Stratton 2012), there is limited evidence
of economic recovery being a focus of both mega-disasters, although (Ochi 2012) reports that it is one of
nine key lessons learnt in Japan from the GEJE.
2.6.4 Key Lessons

The key lessons learned have been summarised in this sub-section. No literature found correlates with the
research Austroads is conducting in this project, but the USA in particular seems to be developing a strong
focus on the economic resilience and recovery following disasters. However, this seems yet to be
encompassed fully in the planning and funding of road networks.
The key categories could be grouped as:
Mega disasters and disasters Japan and Christchurch

road and transport vulnerability
Economic recovery
maintaining freight flows for economic resilience
reinstating freight flows
Planning and Preparedness

resilient Infrastructure
planning and Funding Resilient Infrastructure
Contingency Planning
Communications
2.6.5 Next Steps

The overseas literature confirmed that this Austroads project is well aligned with the international themes of
economic and infrastructure resilience, and economic recovery following disasters.
No literature was found that was similar to this project, which is to outline what jurisdictions have done, are
doing or intend to do to assist essential and general road freight movement following disasters. Perhaps this
project has potential for ground-breaking significance.
Chapter 3 outlines the workshop approach, and Chapter 4 synthesises the key lessons for the consideration
of Austroads and jurisdictions.
3. Workshops Approach and Conduct

This Chapter describes the approach used in preparing for and conducting the six workshops.
3.1
Intent and Workshop Structure
The aim of each workshop was to:
Describe and reinforce the project focus, being researching essential and general freight movements
during emergencies and the lessons learned. At the same time emphasising that the emergency
response and recovery task is not within the scope of this project;
Have jurisdictions describe how it seeks to manage the essential and general freight task, aside from their
normal focus on the emergency response task;
Have jurisdictions describe how they experience the private sectors freight function role during
emergencies and its desire for timely, accurate emergency information;
Have the road freight industry sector describe how it views governments management of the essential
and general freight task, as distinct from emergency response and recovery; and
Have all attendees suggest issues arising, and make suggestions for improvement by both sectors, with a
focus on what each could do better and what they need from the other party.
In order to achieve the workshop aims, it was crucial to have a mix of attendees from both jurisdictions and
the road freight industry from:
across government, including the State Road Agency and Transport Agency, the Police and Emergency
Services, and possibly Local Government; and
freight transport peak stakeholders and representative road freight operators.

Also, workshops were planned to be held for sufficient time, generally a full half day, and with a defined
structure to elicit the co-operation and interaction of attendees.
In order to maximise the likelihood and focus of attendees, the workshops were planned to be outside the
likely disaster seasons. In Australia this was generally the summer period, during which rainfall generated
flooding in northern Australia is most likely along with fire activity in southern States. As a result, the
workshops were concentrated in one late Autumn and mid-Spring season for the planned project.
All workshops were held in the capital city of the jurisdiction to maximise attendee opportunities.
3.2
Preparation
3.2.1 Project Manager Attendance

Due to the workshop importance in achieving project outcomes, it was considered important that both the
Project Manager and the consultant attend all workshops. The reasons included:
Two senior people at a workshop allowed better facilitation, clarification, discussion and recording. While
one was facilitating the other could be assessing reactions and reporting.
The first Austroads Project Manager attending also:

increased the project credibility for attendees compared with two consultants;
allowed presentation of jurisdictional material by the Project Manager that broadened attendees
perceptions and exampled the discussion sought by the workshops;
provided continuity for the project; and

eased pressure on the local PRG member for the conduct of their State or New Zealand workshop.
3.2.2 Roles
The role of the PRG member was to organise the workshop, facilitate the participation of State and private
sector attendees and introduce the study team (if the local Freight Program Manager was unavailable). Many
also provided information about State processes, played an active role in discussions and reviewed project
documentation.
The Austroads Project Manager was responsible for liaising with the jurisdictional Freight Program Manager,
introducing the Project, describing its focus and expectations, presenting material on the Western Australian
situation, facilitating the workshop and clarifying matters arising.
The Consultant was responsible for developing the agenda and introductory material, liaising with the PRG
member on organisational details, conducting a workshop presentation, assisting workshop facilitation and
following up on workshop materials.
3.2.3 Invitations and Materials

The workshop timing was set following discussion by the Austroads Project Manager, the PRG Member and
consultant. The jurisdiction provided the workshop venue and refreshments.
Prior to the workshop, an agenda and background information were produced by the consultant, and refined
by the local PRG member before sending invitations. The Austroads Freight Program member generally
signed the invitation. The first invitation was followed up by a second mail-out and/or by telephone contact.
The list of invitees was prepared by the jurisdiction following discussion between the consultant and PRG
member. More invitations were sent by the PRG member than the desired number of about a dozen
attendees. This number facilitated interaction, but the actual numbers were affected by the number of
agencies involved. It was also recognised that it was crucial to have sufficient road freight operators
attending.
3.3
Conduct
3.3.1 Pilot Workshops

It was agreed that the Queensland and Western Australian workshops would be a pilot for the remaining
workshops. These were chosen as one of the two facilitators was familiar with the local issues and knew the
people attending. This knowledge allowed the facilitators to trial workshop processes, and to develop and
trial potential interventions.
The lessons learned from the pilot workshops and incorporated into subsequent workshops, were:
The type of emergency did not really affect the planning for and management of essential and general
freight movements. In both Queensland and Western Australia, the importance of planning for freight
route options and communication about available routes was required, irrespective of whether the
emergency was a cyclone, flood or fire.
Attendance by the private sector and their willingness to be open about the problems experienced in
seeking information was a key issue for the State agencies understanding the impact of their actions,
including timely communication of these actions.
Once these two matters were understood, the other workshops focus on the disaster type was substantially
reduced. It was still discussed so that participants could draw a quick conclusion that the type of disaster was
not material, but the actions taken were. As well, this ameliorated the focus on any particular incident that
may or may not have been well managed.
Secondly, both the private and public participants were educated that a key part of the workshop was
listening to what others had been dealing with and trying to manage, while also presenting how the actions of
the others had affected what they were trying to do.
The Queensland and Western Australian workshops were also conducted as regular workshops.
3.3.2 Typical Workshop Structure

A typical workshop was introduced by the jurisdictional Freight Program Member or the PRG member. This
was followed by the Austroads Project Manager stating the workshop purpose, explaining its scope,
describing some types of fire and cyclone emergencies in Western Australia and discussing their
experiences in managing these.
At each workshop, the consultant presented the Literature Review in a power point format. The density and
hierarchy of the transport and road networks in the USA was contrasted with Australia. This allowed one of
the key lessons from the GEJE and Tsunami that so damaged Japan to be introduced. This is one of the
nine overall lessons learned is that in order to prevent economic stagnation due to damage to key industries,
BCPs for disaster response should be formulated and encompass the freight transport network. The
presentation showed that in Australia, keeping essential and general freight moving is both the focus of this
project and crucial for social and economic resilience after disasters.
These introductions were followed by the opportunity for a presentation or discussion by the State agencies
present about how they were managing or seeking to manage essential and general freight movement in
emergency situations.
Participants then addressed the main focus of the workshop being the interventions of importance. The
following headings were used for guidance, with the facilitators eliciting discussion from as many of the
participants as possible, especially the different experiences of the State agencies and freight transport
operators:
Planning and Preparation

Communications different types
On ground information and decision-making
Data collection and Information
Post audit successes and lessons.
Following this session, the workshop typically closed after the jurisdictional leader and two facilitators
addressed the following topics:
Key Workshop Lessons

Summary
Further follow-ups and documentation
Thanks.
3.3.3 Workshop Challenges

Two consistent challenges experienced at all workshops emerged during the pilot workshops.
Firstly, where the parties had recently experienced a distressing disaster, statements about this needed to be
and were expressed. The challenge was to avoid any particular disaster becoming the sole focus of the
workshop in case the experiences from other emergencies were not heard. As stated above, the pilot
workshops were crucial in the facilitators learning how best to manage this.
It was important that the workshop was conducted in a way that facilitated people expressing diverse or
different viewpoints. It was equally important for this to be done respectfully, whence the focus on what each
agency or operator could do better and how other parties and the private sector could help.
As would be expected, the conduct of the workshops seemed to improve as the facilitators became more
aware of the issues likely to arise, and how best to manage them. This was important as the active
involvement by attendees and their openness to two-way communication was crucial to workshop successes
and project outcomes.
3.4
Workshops
The location and dates of the project workshops are:
Brisbane:
30 May 2013
Perth:
1 August 2013
Adelaide
27 August 2013
Sydney
23 October 2013
Wellington 24 October 2013

Melbourne 11 June 2014
3.5
Workshop Documentation
A standard approach was developed for documenting each workshop. This was:
Workshop and Attendees

Disaster Impacts
Policy, Roles and Responsibilities
Organisations
Traffic Management in Emergencies
Planning for Emergencies
Private sector
State Agencies
Emergency Communication and Technology
Preparation
Freight Movement during Emergencies
Freight Movement and Matters Arising
3.6
Awareness of the Other Party Obligations
In general, it was noticeable that those in the private sector were less aware of the:
Constraints on government officers in seeking to both manage the emergency and keep essential and
general freight moving. Such constraints could include:
lack of jurisdictional focus for emergency planning, delivery and mitigation;

funding; and
information system dissonance between government agencies.
Work being done by and across government to:
improve the quality of cross-government emergency preparation and liaison;
accommodate real time emergency responses as emergency situations changed in their scale,
intensity and area of impact; and
meet the resulting challenge of the communication response.

A focus by the emergency services on saving lives, which may be a legislated imperative.
Equally, in many workshops it was noticeable that government had had insufficient contact with road freight
operators to appreciate fully the private sectors increasing need for real time communication due to:
its focus on saving the lives of their employees and contractors;

timely, accurate communication of government decisions affecting their freight movement continuity;
the impact of occupational health and fatigue management laws; and
the business implications of penalties in standard customer contracts.
A legacy of the workshops may be increased respect among participants for the motivations and skills of the
other parties in seeking improved management of essential and general freight movements to enhance
economic resilience. This increased respect would also derive from a shared desire by both the State
agencies and the private sector attendees to save lives and make communities resilient.
Both parties also gained a new appreciation of the need for timely, two-way communication about road
closure decisions, the detours available for heavy freight vehicles and the importance of the road re-opening
decision.
4. Emergencies and Freight Movement

4.1
Context
4.1.1 Jurisdictional Geography Variations

Australia and New Zealand have widely varying geological conditions, weather systems, road networks and
economic production and consumption areas.
The geology in Australia is relatively stable on its Australian/Indian plate; Australia rarely suffers from major
earthquakes and active volcanoes are unknown. The converse exists in New Zealand.
New Zealand has to plan for avalanches; these do not affect Australian key freight routes. Both countries
have mountain ranges, and these can suffer high precipitation with any resulting landslides impacting on key
freight routes.
Northern Australia is affected by the monsoon and cyclones in summer, routinely cutting key road freight
routes. Southern Australia has winter rainfall with fewer floods, but potential for horrific fires.
Australia has internationally significant iron ore and coal extraction areas, with rail the landside mode for their
connection to export ports. If the iron ore and coal component of rail freight tonnage was to be removed from
Figure 1.1, the rail tonnage proportion would reduce significantly. For this reason, rail has not been within
scope for freight movement. Notwithstanding, the conceptual approach described in the next sub-section
could be easily adapted and applied to rail freight movement.
Both countries have important agricultural areas. Most economic activity and domestic consumption occur in
cities and towns. Both countries have key road freight routes connecting the important economic production
areas to manufacturing and/or domestic consumption and to export ports.
Figure 2.2 shows Australias key freight routes. Outside the urban areas, these have a low density. Aside
from Victoria, which is shown in Figure 4.1 below, it is noticeable that the key freight routes form corridors
rather than components of a network. This means that Australia is quite susceptible to road freight
disruptions caused by emergency damage. New Zealands geography means that it is equally or even more
susceptible.
As well as emergencies, key road freight routes can also be impacted by road crash delay, especially if
fatalities, injured livestock, chemicals or explosives are involved.
All these factors form the context for descriptions of the inter-relationship between emergencies, economic
resilience and risks to essential and general freight movements being stopped.
4.1.2 Emergency Economic Resilience and Road Freight Risk

Many factors influence the safe and secure passage of road freight during emergencies.
Emergency affected communities may be at risk of economic harm from potential impacts on essential and
general freight movement. Future economic activity is highly correlated with freight movement; any reduction
in the latter leads to reductions in the former.
Figure 4.1: Victorian PBS 2A Road Network Density
Source: NHVR Journey Planner
In order to provide a road freight and emergency risk conceptual framework to aid discussion, Figure 4.2 has
been adapted from the Figure 2.9 of the Productivity Commission 2014 report.
The hazard risk can be one of the types mentioned in sub-section 4.1.1 or earlier in this report. The hazard
type, intensity, duration and impact area determines its significance and zone of exposure.
If the exposure zone is remote from economic development, the risk to freight movement volumes will be
small; the converse applies where the exposure zone has economic sectors of significant number and/or
size. A hazards exposure can be reduced if:
early information is communicated effectively to communities; and

risk to freight movement reductions can be mitigated by early application of policy, plans and prepared
interventions.
Figure 4.2: The Road Freight Emergency Risk Conceptual Model
THE ROAD FREIGHT EMERGENCY RISK TRIANGLE

The disaster/ emergency affected community freight movement economic risk arises from the interaction of
three elements: the probability of a natural hazard type and zone of impact occuring, the exposure of the
transport element to the hazard and its vulnerability to the impacts.
INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION

MITIGATION
Policy, Planning,
Preparation
Economic Sector
and Size
Exposure
FREIGHT
MOVEMENT
RISK
Vulnerability
Network Density
Vulnerable Asset
- Range Crossing
- Bridge
HAZARD
Type and Impact Area
Source: Adapted from Box 1.2, Volume 1, Draft Natural Disaster Funding Arrangements, Productivity Commission,
September 2014
The risk to freight moving on a road network depends on its vulnerability. Vulnerability is influenced by the
network density in the hazard impact zone, and also to the weakest transport element.
A high density of freight network, where freight routes are configured to carry freight vehicles, results in a low
risk to essential and general freight movement stoppages. In many jurisdictions, RAVs require a standard of
road that has low network densities.
Road (and rail) elements most at risk are range crossings, which are vulnerable to landslides, or bridges,
culverts and roads near water, which may be destroyed by floods or earthquakes. As well, seaside freight
roads can be closed by tsunamis.
In the long term, road vulnerability can be significantly improved by relocating or rebuilding, or by investment
in higher resilient road infrastructure.
Even without resilience investment, much can be done to mitigate impacts due to foreseeable events such
as cyclones, monsoonal flooding, and fires, before and after emergencies. This includes:
Government agencies preparing appropriate policy and plans that can be implemented. This can include,
for example, pre-stocking of retailers, and adequate stocks of fuel for road freight companies, emergency
response and airports; and
Road freight operators having BCPs that they can enact.

After emergencies, freight movement can be assisted by:
SRAs having prepared traffic management plans for route diversions for different types of light vehicles,
heavy vehicles and RAVs. This maintains a level of network connectivity, and current information needs
to be disseminated to road freight operators; and
Businesses implementing their post emergency BCPs, which facilitates their economic activity, their
employees pay and the community economic wellbeing.
Fortunately, volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunamis are not as frequent, nor as predictable, with the current
state of knowledge. This makes pre-stocking of supplies and equipment wasteful. Preparations for
interventions after the disaster can pay significant dividends in alleviating community distress and increasing
economic resilience.
4.1.3 Leveraging Knowledge

Relationships among the Parties
Unlike many government activities, emergency management relies on co-operation between a number of
agencies each with their own objectives and culture. It is important for advancing emergency outcomes that
there is sufficient knowledge among the parties of the objectives, policies and culture of each other. This
requires the development of good working relationships between experienced people in each of the parties,
and across the private and public sectors.
At the workshops it was evident that good working relations existed between the SRAs and other
jurisdictional agencies responsible for emergency management. Some provided examples of having
negotiated information technology arrangements or resolved accountabilities for some of the challenges in
dealing with emergencies, including information provision to road users and the road freight operators.
Evidence of working across agencies provides a sound basis for anticipating that progressing essential and
general freight movement could be advanced.
It was also evident that, with exceptions, relationships between the jurisdictional agencies and the road
freight industry stakeholder/s and operators were not as close. The knowledge and experience in each of the
parties of the effect of the others actions would add value in achieving increased economic resilience for
disaster affected communities.
Restructuring Government Agencies and Objectives

During the project timeframe, more than half of the Australian jurisdictions were reviewed or restructured.
Restructuring introduces an increased risk to emergency management because of its cross agency nature.
Where personnel transition with the same objectives, functions and similar resources, or there is an
increased emphasis on achieving economic resilience as part of emergency management, this can have
positive outcomes. However, restructuring introduces potential for a loss of focus, cross agency relationships
disruption, leading to a reduced emergency management performance.
4.2
Key Lessons
Analysis of the literature review, workshop outcomes and the road freight emergency risk framework of
Figure 4.2 was used to derive the following key project lessons. These are presented within similar headings
used to document the six workshops, acknowledging the geographical variation across Australia and New
Zealand.
4.2.1 Roles and Responsibilities

Promoting Economic Resilience in Emergency Management
The literature review found that having economic resilience as one of the central goals of emergency
management benefits affected communities. It also discovered that keeping essential and general freight
moving is a key action in achieving that goal.
In sub-section 1.1.2, essential freight is defined as goods and services without which significant further or
compounding economic loss would be suffered. Four examples were provided. General freight movements
include important and normally repetitive freight flows. Examples include inputs and production outputs in the
agriculture, manufacturing and mining sectors, some of which may be able to be stored for a period.
The roles and responsibilities of the partnering Emergency, Police and Road (or Transport) in managing
emergencies are generally embodied in their separate jurisdictional legislation.
The objectives, policy, processes and systems of the National, State and Territory Road agencies are the
most relevant for this projects aims. This is because the project aim is related to emergency management,
being the objective of keeping essential and general freight moving to achieve community economic
resilience.
Victorias emergency agency has a unit to deliver business and community resilience outcomes.
When major emergencies are triggered under the relevant legislation, jurisdictions generally adopt an
Incident Controller model operating from a jurisdictional control centre. Similar processes apply at a regional
or local level for less severe emergencies.
These control centres operate with clear objectives and under defined processes to deliver government
objectives, including minimising the risk of harm to people. Having an explicit economic resilience goal in
emergency management is important. Otherwise roads may be closed too early to avert any possibility of a
safety risk prior to cyclonic conditions or in the vicinity of fires, without considering the resulting potential to
detract from community economic resilience. This matter was discussed at more than one workshop.
With quality agency co-operation, planning and preparation, emergency managements principal focus of
saving lives and preserving property need not detract entirely from achieving an economic resilient outcome
for the movement of essential and general freight.
As outlined in sub-section 4.1.2 and discussed below, agency policy and processes during the emergency
management planning, preparation and response stages significantly affect the quality of life of communities
and their local economies once the immediate hazard is over.
Local Governments
It was indicated that there were cases when local governments could and were frustrating the use of their
roads in emergencies. This viewpoint is understandable when States make emergency decisions that lead to
a low quality seal being badly damaged.
However, as well as potentially suffering infrastructure damage, local communities can be a beneficiary
through maintaining community economies and jobs through the maintenance of essential and general
freight flows.
Planning and preparation is the key to making progress, together with a robust funding arrangement
between all Governments. A related matter is that many local roads in some jurisdictions are recognised as
having B Double access under jurisdictional and National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR)-endorsed access
arrangements.
The potential use of a gazettal mechanism for agreed use of local government roads in emergencies only
may be a practical way forward, as discussed in the NSW workshop.
Other Emergency Management Related Parties

In some circumstances, the rail mode and ports have key roles in maintaining community economic
resilience. This is particularly so for exporting resources, but also for pre-stocking emergency materials and
goods and importing fuel. There are examples of these pre-emergency functions in Queensland and New
Zealand.
The Road Freight Industry also plays a crucial role maintaining community resilience. The projects joint
workshops indicate that sharing between the jurisdictional emergency agencies and road freight industry
delivers new insights benefiting both sectors. Many approaches to emergency management programmes
may benefit significantly by involving road freight operators and their stakeholders to achieve jurisdictional
economic goals.
Relevant parties should be included in emergency management discussions and processes.
4.2.2 Policy and Legislation

Policy, and potentially legislation, needs to reflect consideration of the following key matters.
Setting an Emergency Economic Resilience Goal

Chapter 2 outlined the increasing understanding of the importance of economic resilience to disaster
affected communities. It also described the key role that keeping essential and general freight moving on
disaster degraded road networks and possibly ports have in achieving that. The longer term impact of the
GEJE and related tsunami on Japans economy and its severely affected communities was a painful lesson
for Japan.
Participants at five of the six workshops acknowledged that a broadening of the emergency management
focus to include local resilience and recovery through keeping essential and general freight moving was an
important lesson.
All jurisdictions should establish an economic resilience goal, and the resulting practices should be
integrated into emergency management processes.
Developing economic resilience planning and processes, and preparing the appropriate agencies for their
application during emergencies are the necessary subsequent stages. Such changes require understanding,
long term road agency management commitment and funding. Economic resilience delivery will manifest as
community resilience, which is a core emergency management outcome in many jurisdictions.
Western Australias six key emergency factors fundamental to the wellbeing of the State 10 are the potential
impacts to the People, Economy11, Social Setting, Governance, Infrastructure and Environment. Its State
Emergency Management Commission (SEMC) has conducted risk assessment workshops to analyse the
risks posed from seven natural hazards to Western Australia. Based on the scenarios reviewed, cyclone,
flood, storm and bushfire pose the greatest risks to the State.
Its highest risks were identified as stemming from an extreme to severe cyclone event in the north and from
a major bushfire event in the South West. The next highest risk for the State relates to heatwaves. In
recognition of the emerging status of heatwave in Western Australia, it was added to regulation as a
prescribed hazard in 2012. 12
Subsequently, the SEMC Secretariat initiated in 2013 a three year project for all public hazard management
agencies, combat agencies and local governments to gain a comprehensive understanding of the risks from
hazards for which they are involved and the potential impacts to the Core State Objectives as they apply in
their agencys context.
Broadening of Emergency Management to Include Major Crashes

The road freight industry suggested at four of the five Australian workshops emergency management, or its
processes should be utilised for major crashes on key freight routes.
10
Western Australian State-Level Risk Assessment, State Emergency Management Commission of WA, December 2013.
11
Authors emphases.
12
The Queensland workshop noted the heatwave induced day time closure of the Great Northern Line between Townsville and Mt Isa.
This was suggested because their CPs, prepared to be congruent with legislation, require all road freight
operators to focus on the wellbeing of their staff and drivers. Road freight operators, under legislative
imperatives for workplace safety and fatigue management, must cancel freight movements to avoid any
potential for workplace harm. Consequently, long distance road freight movements are terminated if there is
not a viable, available route within a certain timeframe. This was mostly commonly stated as being four
hours, but there was one instance of six hours.
Therefore, crashes on major freight routes and highways are a high risk freight movement priority. The
economic cost of crashes is known to be significant.
It was appreciated that having to provide reliable information about potential road closures and re-openings
within less than four hours is a challenge. For many road crashes it takes time to detect, learn about, reach
and assess the severity of the incident. This is particularly so for a fatality, when evidence for possible
charges may have to be collected. Such road crashes can make incident decision-making, including
implementing Standard Operating Procedures and information dissemination within a four hour timeframe,
challenging and problematic.
Improved processes and co-operation will be required between State agencies in order to manage major
crashes on key freight routes, using emergency management processes. Information about crashes should
be incorporated into emergency management policy and processes, including the heavy vehicle
communication and advice channels.
Road agencies should confirm the accuracy of the four hour decision period for shutting down road freight
movements. They need to research with their heavy vehicle operators the circumstances (type of trip and
vehicle used, desired route, and the like) in which this may apply.
Single Point of Truth Communication for Road Users (SPoT)

National media and SRAs routinely supply road users with travel information. Road users, the media and
content aggregators are aware of and use these information channels.
Heavy vehicle and RAVs may have separate road agency communication channels for their particular needs.
A significant level of resources is required to develop and maintain the many communication channels.
During emergencies the workshops generally considered the SRA is best placed to be used as the SPoT for
heavy vehicle (and road user) communication.
A proviso is that the road agency is integrated into the emergency management processes and systems and
fully aware of unfolding events and existing and likely road impacts. Based on most workshop discussions,
this seems to be the case.
4.2.3 Planning
Planning for emergencies needs to encompass two matters.
Freight Movement and Emergency Planning

Maintaining essential and general freight movement should be incorporated in emergency planning,
including for crashes.
This planning could include for the different hazards in different areas in emergencies as the Western
Australian SEMC does. The road freight risk model outlined in sub-section 4.1.2 may provide a framework
and guidance.
This planning should include operational planning for the development of emergency traffic management
detour plans, including for RAVs. Gazettal of agreed emergency detours was mentioned in sub-section 4.2.1
as a possible practical regulatory mechanism, in order to facilitate this matter. Dissemination of operational
advice during emergencies is crucial as discussed later.
From the context of this project, planning for essential and general freight movements deserves a high
priority, as the discussion below supports.
Integrating the Important Economic Area/Transport Links Concept into Emergency Planning
The second matter involves planning in a jurisdictional context of their Important Economic Areas and the
transport links connecting them.
The basis for this approach is that some regional communities and the transport links serving them are far
more critical to Australias economic importance than many others. The corollary is that these areas can
have more widespread and wide-ranging economic impacts on all Australias communities. Important
Economic Areas and their transport links should frame the priorities of government efforts in the freight
movement emergency planning outlined in sub-section 4.2.2.
To illustrate: The Queensland Agricultural Land Audit by the Queensland Department of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries (QALA 2013) report identified the concept of Important Agricultural Areas. The major
highway/s (and potentially rail lines) servicing Important Agricultural Areas and equivalent areas for the other
economic sectors could be investigated for their resilience to their potential hazards. Figure 2.9 may provide
some strategic guidance for this.13
The relevance of this approach is supported in an Australian Transport Research Forum paper (Dudgeon
2015). He found significant differences in road freight commodity flows between a coastal highway (Bruce
Highway) serving more than 0.5 million people, and an east-west Queensland highway (Warrego Highway)
connecting the Surat Basin (thermal coal) Region and the Eastern Darling Downs Important Agricultural Area
to Brisbane and the Port of Brisbane.
Jurisdictions working with the Commonwealth Government could consider this suggestion and, if warranted,
progress it.
The November 2014 Transport and Infrastructure Council adoption of key road freight routes 14 and ports into
the NLTN provides an excellent starting point for considering key freight routes from an economic resilience
viewpoint. Jurisdictional freight models and data would be needed as well.
It is understood that Austroads is initiating a related research project.
While many in road agencies correctly view the key road freight routes and ports from a planning and
investment, or high productivity vehicle perspective, their utility in times of emergency is crucial. This is
because rail cannot replace the key road freight route function on short notice. 15
Any efforts to prioritise key freight route security during emergencies could leverage any national security
work that may have already considered this matter.
4.2.4 Preparation
Mega-disasters, such as the GEJE or the Christchurch earthquakes, have such significant impacts that a
National response is required.
Australia is such a large country that even major disasters have mainly regional impacts. When these
regions have economic production critical to the national economy, State and Federal planning is important.
Without local governments having direct access to taxpayer funding, it is important that State jurisdictions
manage emergencies in co-operation.
13
It is noted that the WA SEMC process may approach or encompass this suggested approach.
14
New Zealands Roads of National Significance are significant parts of its strategic freight network currently being focused on in order
to upgrade them to deliver a Level of Service that reflects their strategic function.
15
Related workshop discussion where an attendee had previously tried to do so, without recognising rollingstock and other limitations.
Regional Capability and Road Availability Decisions

The larger the jurisdiction or country, the less likely government will understand all the regional economies,
their road resilience levels and each roads utility in serving the regional community. In these situations,
emergency controllers can close roads too early, open them too late and fail to communicate to the stranded
heavy freight vehicles (or other road users) the process and timing of their decision-making. At one workshop
an early road closure stranding heavy vehicles carrying essential emergency pre-stocking supplies to
communities was described. This circumstance was only just averted.
Roads being closed too early was a repeat complaint by road freight operators in several workshops. Some
of these employed fleet managers with far more experience of regional road conditions in emergencies than
those making decisions about regional road closures and openings. Of course road operators have a conflict
of interest in keeping freight moving, but they also have a duty of care to their staff and businesses. Both
need to be taken into account by government in two-way engagement. When an operator can quote credibly
about earlier and earlier road closures for a number of cyclones over many years, SRAs need to consider the
matter.
It was acknowledged that forecasting cyclone progress has improved, but it is still subject to error.
Reopening of roads was discussed in all Australian workshops. The Road Manager, the agency or entity
controlling a road in Australia, or Road Controlling Authority, the New Zealand term, has to make sure that
the road infrastructure still exists and is safe for use. As well, the potential risk of damage by heavy vehicles
using weather-weakened pavements is significant. Many regions have people capable of making these
decisions. But they may be over-whelmed by the emergency generated workload, distracted by
communication imperatives within the road agency, unable to reach the road to conduct an inspection, or
their advice not actioned in a timely way.
Pre-staffing regions (similar to pre-stocking goods) prior to emergencies with experienced staff may provide
one opportunity to speed up the road re-opening process. Perhaps road agencies could consider this
suggestion or initiate a process to generate others.
Road freight operators make decisions about dispatching general and essential freight to potential
emergency affected areas based on an assumption about consistency in jurisdictional decision-making in the
circumstances. They are also seeking to pre-stock their customers or to take their output, both of which
contribute to the affected communitys economic resilience post emergency.
It is important that the parties continue to engage to improve performance in road closure and re-opening
decision-making.
Pre-positioning Goods Before Emergencies

Since 2008, the Emergency Management and Transport Security Office (EMTSO) in the Queensland
Department of Transport and Main Roads (QTMR) has tried to mitigate the effects of impending disasters. It
has found it is more effective and cheaper to pre-position rather than post-position goods.
During the high risk season, QTMR supplies monthly bulletins to hundreds of addressees both within QTMR
and externally. It plans and conducts exercises with members of the Queensland Trucking Association and
the National Retailers Association among many others.
When a risk seems imminent, EMTSO facilitates pre-positioning (supplying and stocking) by the private
sector of essential disaster supplies within the likely disaster-affected areas, using both rail and road.
EMTSO works (on a first name basis) with freight forwarders and road and rail freight transport operators.
The approved list of essential emergency supplies includes such products as:
bottled water and foods not requiring refrigeration

common pharmaceuticals
baby products such as nappies
cleaning products for use after the emergency

fuel supplies.
These products may be sent by train to north Queensland before cyclones so the major retailers (all
members of the EMTSO process) can pre-stock their stores before emergencies. An example is ensuring
Melbourne manufactured cleaning products can be pre-positioned, while complying with national security
defined Dangerous Goods limits. While noteworthy, this product list is regarded as emergency materials for
freight transport and is not considered further by this report.
EMTSOs experience mirrors that of the Japan after the GEJE confirming that community and economic
resilience is a key government policy. EMTSO is knowledgeable of the different essential needs for different
areas so that the impacts of disasters on the State economy is minimised.
One example is pre-stocking Avgas and propellers in St George and Roma so that regional cotton crops can
continue to be sprayed and are not lost to insect infestation following flooding.
A second example is pre-stocking of fuel in areas that may be cut-off. While this is helpful for emergency
response and recovery, it also has an important economic component for the continuation of mining
operations.
The regional economy driven EMTSO processes are directly relevant to this project and could be considered
by jurisdictions with seasonal hazards.
Training and Exercising

While the above matters may be important, much of the preparation task will remain the training and
exercising of staff and the many volunteers in the processes and systems of emergency management.
Low Cost Asset Suggestions

In QTMR, selected regions prepare for the wet season by stockpiling materials and sometimes plant on
areas of hard-standing adjacent to bridges, fords and range crossings. These were then able to be used by
QTMR staff and contractors for any repair works necessary following an emergency.
In discussions outside workshops, some attendees noted their jurisdictions did likewise. This type of
standard operating procedure can significantly improve the economic resilience of regional and remote
communities and their economies, especially the mining and agricultural sectors. This type of action
contributes materially to Australias exports.
A second helpful workshop suggestion relates to the location and design of Heavy Vehicle Rest Areas
(HVRAs) to facilitate fatigue management. In remote areas where there are limited refuelling opportunities,
trucks reach a point where they cannot turn around, and have to reach their destination to refuel. When
flooding threatens road closure, there is generally no opportunity to turn double and triple road trains around
without their becoming bogged.
Judicious placement and construction of HVRAs provides opportunity for double and triple road trains to turn
around and travel back to the nearest town, where there may be facilities for refuelling, and where livestock
for example can be fed. This was also important for refrigerated perishable cargoes where the risk of running
out of fuel and the load being lost would be averted.
4.2.5 Partnering
It was noticeable that at all workshops the attending representatives of the Emergency Services, Police and
SRAs were well known to each other. This is a credit to the agencies, its management and to the people.
As well, these relationships are crucial in emergencies and important if any of the suggestions in this report
are to be considered, allocated accountability, planned and actioned by different jurisdictional agencies. This
includes the importance to governments of the economic resilience of disaster affected communities, and the
suggestions for potential improvements to facilitate this.
As well, the action of road freight operators to attend workshops at their own cost demonstrates their concern
about emergency related matters. It also shows their community spirit.
4.2.6 Technology Platforms and Communication

Modern technology and communication systems create much of the potential for improvement in emergency
management and community resilience. Many further improvements are becoming available, including
Secure Web Technology Systems.
Such technology needs to encompass and be available to the partnering State agencies in emergencies. It is
crucial for keeping general and essential freight moving, which will improve the economic resilience of
disaster affected communities
Secure Web Technology Systems

During the Western Australian workshop, (the late) Jim Burnett made a presentation of Main Roads Western
Australias (MRWA) web-based, Emergency Operations Centre (WEBEOC) software support package. This
was developed in the USA after 911 and has a high encryption rate. It is used by the Central Intelligence
Agency and US Defence, for example.
WEBEOC is a freeshare product so that innovations can be introduced and shared among users. In WA
WEBEOC is coronially approved.
The WEBEOC software enables real time, two-way, input/output communication between the Police, Fire
and Emergency Services and MRWA Departments and local governments, via computers, tablets and
mobiles. It may also be able to be used by Qantas and the WA Health Department if a Notice of Emergency
is declared.
WEBEOC can be used also for Planned Events, such as fun runs, but its primary purpose is for Unplanned
Events such as emergency response where it has significant cross government and road user management
capabilities.
At the Victorian workshop, their technology emergency capability was demonstrated. It enables the road
agency to provide information both to the partnering agencies and to form the basis of community and road
freight operator advice. The latter includes emergency TMP deviations for both light and heavy vehicles of
certain classes. This system facilitated significantly improved information flow, the availability of detours for
all traffic classes, the delivery of detours and their signage and consequently road freight movement.
An issue in all jurisdictions is the need for management commitment and funding to roll out such systems
across agencies and in regions. The Police and VicRoads consider having a common emergency
information system, and the relevant parties having approved, certified access, was a noteworthy
achievement.
Communication to Road Users

Timely and accurate communication to road users, and especially road freight operators, is of utmost
importance in achieving emergency economic resilience.
The private sector gave high priority to having a single point of truth for road information for heavy,
restricted access and Oversize Over mass (OSOM) vehicles. Currently, a number of sites and sources were
monitored by them. The longstanding role of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation in providing rural and
remote emergency road closure information, over radio and on web-sites was mentioned, along with other
media.
The great majority of road freight operators play an intra-state function. For interstate operators, or when
emergencies are cross border events, two or more jurisdictional information systems and the related media
channels must be accessed.
There is obvious potential to have a national information system, with its information content provided by
accountable jurisdictional processes. Such a system would require assessment.
It was suggested that the NHVR had potential to supply the information system, perhaps by adapting their
journey planner to incorporate advice road closures and re-openings, and on emergency detour routes for
RAVs. This needs to be included in considerations, and SRAs and the NHVR have mechanisms to consider
this matter.
The intention of the agencies to further develop real time multi-media SPoT information including interactive
RAV maps was noted. How a road freight requirement could be integrated with any need for an Australian
SPoT for other road users was also noted. In Western Australia, for example, there are 11 different mediums
or channels to communicate with road users, including TV, radio, emails, posts on websites, twitter and
others. It also operates a call centre and web service for heavy vehicles and RAVs.
Remote Area Communication

It is noted that remote areas of Australia still require satellite phones for communication. This may end with
progress in the National Broadband Network roll-out.
4.2.7 Funding for Emergency Management and Road Infrastructure

Competition for government funding is intense. With the sporadic nature and timescales of major disasters it
requires good government and departmental governance to secure funding to protect lives and property
during emergencies.
It may be post emergency funding of government enquiries would not have been necessary if mitigating
funding had been available for known initiatives, as workshop conversations and the Productivity
Commission indicated. Road Network Incidence Response Plans apply to high usage elements of selected
jurisdictional road freight networks. They seek to make best use of still open secondary roads. This and the
matters outlined in the Chapter may well have averted the tragedies that gave rise to the inquiries.
The matter of emergency budgets by governments is outside the scope of this report. However, the good
work already occurring and the suggestions made to continue improvements rely on it.
The Productivity Commission 2014 noted that mitigation expenditure is about 3 percent of all emergency
expenditure. It stated that There is a longstanding concern that governments under-invest in mitigation and
spend too much on recovery, leading to higher overall costs for the community. Addressing the repetitive
emergency outages of susceptible road infrastructure is outside the scope of this project.
4.2.8 Liaising and Reviewing

National Liaison
Jurisdictional Emergency Departments meet regularly to plan, prepare and optimise resource use.
Jurisdictional Emergency Departments share resources domestically and internationally during emergencies.
This has a high media profile and approval.
Emergency agencies and the Police meet regularly at a national level to share lessons and improve cooperation and planning.
With a renewed focus on emergency economic resilience, it is time for the jurisdictional road agency
emergency units to do likewise. This could occur as an adjunct to the jurisdictional Emergency Departments
meeting.
Jurisdictional Road Agency and Freight Operator meetings

Based on the workshop experience, regular, non-frequent workshop meetings between the emergency and
heavy vehicle units within jurisdictional road agencies, and also with road freight stakeholders and selected
operators could be fruitful.
Such mechanisms would inform each party about the developments, issues and opportunities for cooperation to manage emergencies better.
It is understood that most if not all jurisdictional road agencies meet with a wider range of peak stakeholders.
An option is to add emergency matters to this meeting as an agenda item. As this may not generate the
informed two-way discussion between the best set of people, this option is regarded as a second best
solution.
Reviewing Emergency Processes

Western Australias SMEC is an interesting model. It was outlined in sub-section 4.2.2. SEMC seeks to
review emergency management processes at arms-length from government. The work it is doing seems
impressive and it seems to enjoy credibility with its other jurisdictional agencies. (It may be more effective
and cost effective also than post-emergency Commissions of Inquiry).
Jurisdictions may care to assess and consider this approach, where a similar model does not already exist.
4.2.9 Urban Networks and Emergency Freight Movements

In all five Australian workshops there was a lack of discussion on Capital City and other urban networks and
emergency management. This may have reflected the absence of recent incidents of major disaster types,
such as cyclones, floods, fires or earthquakes on Australias capital cities, or possibly the higher network
densities in cities, which is discussed below.
The Brisbane workshop occurred about two years after its 6th highest flood on record on Thursday 13
January 2011. Its peak of 4.46 metres is the largest flood peak recorded since the January 1974 flood when
the Brisbane River reached 5.45 metres; albeit nearly 4 and 3 metres respectively below the 1841 and 1893
floods.16
The lack of discussion of urban networks at the Queensland Workshop may have been due to many parts of
Brisbane remaining unaffected by that event, which was of a very short duration during a single high tide.
Water and electricity supplies were not interrupted except to flooded areas and nearby, and most suburbs
were able to trade unaffected.17
The lack of discussion may also be due in part to the density of urban road freight networks. As found in
Chapter 2, with the exception of the Mississippi River Basin, there seems not to be research reported on
freight movement in emergency situations in the USA. The density of its road networks may be a reason.
On the other hand, discussion at the New Zealand workshop about the impact of its earthquake on the
Christchurch urban network was extensive.
16
Known Floods in the Brisbane and Bremer River Basins, Bureau of Meteorology, sourced 20150405.
17
On the other hand, the widespread flooding across Queensland during December 2010 and January 2011 caused loss of life (38
dead and nine missing) and Statewide road closures. Some roads (and rail lines) were fully or partially closed for many months and
discussion of this was protracted at the Queensland workshop.
So while the density of networks may be a factor in maintaining essential and general freight movements,
when urban networks are extensively damaged by mega disasters the impacts may be even greater than
when disasters damage regional and remote road networks.
5. Discussion and Suggestions

5.1
Scope
For this project, the freight movements required during the response and recovery stages of disasters was
out-of-scope.
Essential freight is defined as goods or services without which significant further or compounding economic
loss would be suffered. Examples include movement of:
Grain and additives to poultry farms and cattle feedlots, without which the livestock perishes;
Perishable annual agricultural commodities, such as transporting grapes to wineries;
Fuel, without which road freight cannot move; and
Coal for power generation for refineries, without which the ore will solidify leading to months of lost
production and rectifying effort.
General freight includes important and normally repetitive freight flows. Examples include food, fuel and
water for people, and inputs and production in the agriculture, manufacturing and mining sectors, some of
which may be able to be stored for a period.
5.2
Literature Review Matters
The literature review confirmed the premise of this project. This is that contributing to the economic resilience
of disaster affected communities by facilitating essential and general freight movement is crucially important.
It is also gaining increasing international profile.
While economic resilience is increasingly recognised, keeping essential and general freight moving has a low
profile. One reason may be that the density of road freight networks is far higher internationally than in
Australia, as compared in Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3. Australia also has a higher proportion of its sparse
network accessible by high productivity RAVs than many other countries.
It follows that for the relatively sparse networks of Australasia, keeping essential and general freight moving
offers significant economic benefits for disaster affected communities.
Potentially, an improved focus on this matter could make a worthwhile contribution to the economic,
employment and social resilience of disaster affected communities.
5.3
Emergency Economic Resilience
The workshops and the unpublished documentation by jurisdictional road agencies revealed that this
projects focus did not enjoy a high priority until the recent emergency events.
Understandably, SRAs have been concerned about further damage to already weakened roads, and the
Emergency and Police Departments were focussed on minimising the risk to lives, even if this meant road
closures affecting freight movement and commerce.
With the new understanding of the importance of emergency economic resilience, and the contribution made
to this by essential and general freight movement, change is needed.
5.3.1 Emergency Management Progress in Jurisdictions

At every jurisdictional workshop road agency representatives described improvements recently made,
lessons learned and their positive plans for the future. This was impressive. There would be value in sharing
the jurisdictional planning and programs among all the jurisdictional road agency emergency units in
Australasia.
At almost all workshops road agency members provided examples of assistance to heavy vehicle operators
so that local economic activity would not suffer. Some examples are described in section 5.1.
Suggestions have been made to change this from a helpful reaction to being part of a systematic planned
approach based on a policy imperative. The Queensland EMTSO example illustrates how this can be carried
out, but it requires continuing attention over many years.
5.3.2 Relationships among the Parties

At the workshops, it was evident that good working relations existed between the jurisdictional agencies
responsible for emergency management. This provides a sound basis for the suggestions to progress
essential and general freight movement. Care is needed in maintaining relationships and focus during
government restructurings.
It was also evident that, with exceptions, relationships between the jurisdictional agencies and the road
freight industry stakeholder/s and operators were not as well maintained. There is much to be gained by both
parties through increased engagement.
5.4
Suggestions
Many suggestions to facilitate essential and general freight movement in emergency situations have been
made, particularly in Chapters 2 and 4, and Section 4.2 of this report. These may be considered by
Austroads members and other relevant parties.
These suggestions may assist in a greater awareness and visibility of freight movement, and its
interdependence on the public sector infrastructure and road freight industry performances in collectively
contributing to industry and community economic resilience when disasters and emergencies are
experienced.
Glossary and List of Acronyms

In this report, terms and meanings are as described in the AP-C-87_15_sixth Edition Glossary of Austroads
Terms. Other terms used in this report are defined in the Table below.
Acronym or Term
Term or Meaning
Explanation
BCPs
Business Continuity Plans
CILTNZ
Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, New

Zealand
CPs
Continuity Plans
CTEE
Centre for Transport, Energy and the Environment
DHS
Department of Homeland Security
EMTSO
Emergency Management and Transport Security Office in

QTMR
FGTS
Freight and Goods Transportation System
In the United States of America
FHWA
Federal Highways Association
FMSIB
Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board
GEJE
Great East Japan Earthquake
GIS
Geographic Information System
HVRA
Heavy Vehicle Rest Area
MRWA
Main Roads Western Australia
NCFRP
National Cooperative Freight Research Program
NHVR
National Heavy Vehicle Regulator
NLTN
National Land Transport Network
NPG
National Preparedness Goals
PBS
Performance Based Standards
PRG
Project Reference Group
PTT
Pekol Traffic and Transport
QTMR
Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads
RAV
Restricted Access Vehicle
SEMC
State Emergency Management Commission
SFDFN
Statewide Freight Data Flow Network
SFSRP
Statewide Freight System Resiliency Plan
SPoT
Single Point of Truth
SRA
State Road Agency
TMP
Traffic Management Plan
USA
United States of America
WEBEOC
a secure, web-based, Emergency Operations Centre

technology platform developed as freeware following the
911 terrorist incident
WeLG
Wellington Lifelines Group
WP1
Working Paper 1 of this project
WP2
Working Paper 2 of this project
WREMO
Wellington Region Emergency Management Office
Acronym or Term
Term or Meaning
WSDOT
Washington State Department of Transportation
Explanation
Natural disaster
A naturally occurring rapid onset

event that causes a serious
disruption to a community or
region, such as flood, bushfire,
earthquake, storm, cyclone,
storm surge, tornado, landslide
or tsunami.
Hazard
A source of potential harm or a

situation with a potential to
cause loss
Exposure
People, property or other

elements present in hazard
zones that are subject to
potential losses.
Risk
The combination of the

probability of an event and its
negative consequences.
Mitigation
Measures taken in advance of

disasters to reduce their impacts
Resilience
The ability of communities to

continue to function when
exposed to hazards and to
adapt to changes rather than
returning to the original predisaster state
Response
Actions taken in anticipation of,

during, and immediately after an
emergency to minimise its
effects
Recovery
Actions to support affected

communities to restore
damaged property and
economic activity, as well as
physical and psychological
health and wellbeing.
References
Auf der Heide Erik 1989, Disaster Response: Principles of Preparation and Co-ordination, Center for
Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance (COE-DMHA)
Austroads 2015, Austroads Glossary of Terms, sixth edition, AP-C87-15, Sydney, New South Wales
Centre for Transport, Energy and the Environment (CTEE) 2015, Australian Transport Facts (ATF), Pekol
Traffic and Transport, Brisbane, Queensland. <http://www.ctee.com.au>
Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport in New Zealand (CILTNZ) 5 7 March 2012 The Logistics of
Natural Disaster Recovery Conference, Wellington New Zealand
Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) 2013, Queensland Agricultural Land Audit (QALA)
Department of Homeland Security September 2011, National Preparedness Goals
Dudgeon et al 2015, High Productivity Vehicle Factors, Commodity Characteristics and Route Choice,
Australian Transport Research Forum, University of New South Wales, Sydney
Federal Highway Administration March 2011, Freight Analysis Framework version 3, (FAF3) Freight Traffic
Analysis, Battelle and submitted to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the Federal Highway
Administration
Glavovic Bruce 2012, Rethinking Recovery Infrastructure and Logistics: Lessons from Greater Christchurch,
EQC Chair in Natural Hazards Planning, CILTNZ
Gledhill Ken 2012, Early Warning Systems: Geological Hazards Monitoring in New Zealand, GeoNet Project
Director and Chair, Pacific Tsumami Warning and Mitigation System, GNS Science, New Zealand,
CILTNZ
Hu Shiyin June 2008, Estimation of Economic Impact of Freight Disruption due to Highway Closure, Master
of Science in Transportation thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Johnson Bruce 2012, Transport Sector Resilience: Transport Co-ordination and the role of the Ministry of
Transport, (ppt) General Manager, Aviation and Marine, Ministry of Transport, CILTNZ
Ladbroke Warren August 2012, Infrastructure Resilience, Christchurch Earthquake Reconstruction Authority,
presentation to the Engineering and Technology Forum, Brisbane
National Academy of Sciences 2012, Disaster Resilience: A National Imperative, Committees on Increasing
National Resilience to Hazards and Disasters and Science, Engineering and Public Policy, The National
Academies Press, Washington DC
National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) Report 16 2012, Preserving and Protecting
Freight Infrastructure and Routes, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC
Ochi Shigeo 2012, The Lessons of the Great East Japan Earthquake 2011: and the countermeasures
against earthquakes and tsunamis in the future, Director for Earthquake, Volcanic and Large-scale Flood
Disaster Management, Disaster Management Bureau, Cabinet Office
Poulter Murray 2012, Early Warning Systems: Predicting Storms and Floods, Chief Scientist, Atmosphere,
Natural Hazards & Energy, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), CILTNZ
Productivity Commission 17 December 2014, Natural Disaster Funding Arrangements, Inquiry Report no. 74
Russell Chris and Odonoghue Jed 2012, Re-establishing the Rail Link and Port for Coal Exports A Supply
Chain that was Severely Affected by the Earthquake Involving International Contracts, Solid Energy New
Zealand and KiwiRail, CILTNZ
Selwood Stephen 2012 Infrastructure Challenges, CEO, NZ Council for Infrastructure Development, CILTNZ
Standing Council on Transport and Infrastructure 2013, National Land Freight Strategy: A place for freight
(NLFS), Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory
Stratton Barry 2012, Maintaining Road Infrastructure, Senior Asset Manager, NZ Transport Agency,
Christchurch, CILTNZ
Thornton Jocelyn 2009, The Field Guide to New Zealand Geology, Penguin Group (NZ)
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) 2008, Development of a Statewide Freight
System Resiliency Plan, Final Research Report, MIT Center for Transportation and Logistics
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board
(FMSIB) September 2008, FREIGHT MOBILITY: Joint Report on Washington State Freight Highway and
Rail Projects
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) September 2008, 2009-2015 Strategic Plan
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) March 2012, Washington State Freight and
Goods Transportation System (FGTS) 2011 Update
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) November 2009, Development and Analysis of a
GIS-based Statewide Freight Data Flow Network (SFDFN), by the University of Washington and
Washington State University
Wellington Lifelines Group/ Wellington Region Emergency Management Office (WeLG/WREMO) March
2013, Restoring Wellingtons transport links after a major earthquake, Initial Project Report

Freight Movement in Emergency Situations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Freight Movement in Emergency Situations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Report