Watch out! Travellers’ valuation of reduced avalanche risks on railways and roads

Knut Veisten , Ståle Navrud , Kristin Magnussen
{"title":"Watch out! Travellers’ valuation of reduced avalanche risks on railways and roads","authors":"Knut Veisten ,&nbsp;Ståle Navrud ,&nbsp;Kristin Magnussen","doi":"10.1016/j.trip.2024.101315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In various regions of the World, railway and road sections are affected by avalanches. Protective measures can reduce the risk of casualties as well as the risk of infrastructure closures. This paper explores the identification of additional economic benefits from avalanche risk-reducing measures. E.g., it has been hypothesized that avalanche risk provokes insecurity or worry, due to the avalanche risk as such. If there are additional benefit elements, these need to be assessed together with those impacts that are already accounted for, to avoid potential double-counting of benefits.</div><div>We applied a survey-based discrete choice experiment to a sample of train, bus and car travellers in Norway. They were asked to choose between trip alternatives that were specified by: i) annual frequency of avalanches threatening the infrastructure; ii) average avalanche volume/width hitting the infrastructure; iii) annual no. of infrastructure closures; iv) the decennial no. of casualties for the specified travel mode; v) travel time; and vi) travel cost.</div><div>The models of the choices show significantly negative coefficient signs for all six attributes. Thus, the travellers did on average indicate additional valuation of reducing avalanche frequency and avalanche volume/size, beyond the specified impacts on casualties and closures. When testing the valuation of avalanche frequency/size reduction against latent variables of avalanche insecurity and of neuroticism, using hybrid choice modelling, we find no significant associations. Insecurity/worry is not identified as a principal driver of the valuation of reduced avalanche risk, beyond the reduction in casualties and closures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36621,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","volume":"29 ","pages":"Article 101315"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198224003014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In various regions of the World, railway and road sections are affected by avalanches. Protective measures can reduce the risk of casualties as well as the risk of infrastructure closures. This paper explores the identification of additional economic benefits from avalanche risk-reducing measures. E.g., it has been hypothesized that avalanche risk provokes insecurity or worry, due to the avalanche risk as such. If there are additional benefit elements, these need to be assessed together with those impacts that are already accounted for, to avoid potential double-counting of benefits.
We applied a survey-based discrete choice experiment to a sample of train, bus and car travellers in Norway. They were asked to choose between trip alternatives that were specified by: i) annual frequency of avalanches threatening the infrastructure; ii) average avalanche volume/width hitting the infrastructure; iii) annual no. of infrastructure closures; iv) the decennial no. of casualties for the specified travel mode; v) travel time; and vi) travel cost.
The models of the choices show significantly negative coefficient signs for all six attributes. Thus, the travellers did on average indicate additional valuation of reducing avalanche frequency and avalanche volume/size, beyond the specified impacts on casualties and closures. When testing the valuation of avalanche frequency/size reduction against latent variables of avalanche insecurity and of neuroticism, using hybrid choice modelling, we find no significant associations. Insecurity/worry is not identified as a principal driver of the valuation of reduced avalanche risk, beyond the reduction in casualties and closures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Engineering-Automotive Engineering
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sensitivities of weighting methods in the sustainability assessment of public transport in Latin American cities Citizen-centric design in mHealth: Concept mapping for active transportation promotion Using computer vision and street-level videos for pedestrian-vehicle tracking and behaviour analysis Public transit of the future: Enhancing well-being through designing human-centered public transportation spaces Data linkage between health and compensation systems improves the profiling of transport-related injuries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1