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

IF 3.8 Q2 TRANSPORTATION Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-26 DOI:10.1016/j.trip.2024.101315
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":3.8000,"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":"2024/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","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
小心!旅客对铁路和公路上减少雪崩风险的评估
在世界许多地区,铁路和公路路段都受到雪崩的影响。保护性措施可以减少人员伤亡的风险以及基础设施关闭的风险。本文探讨了雪崩风险降低措施的额外经济效益的识别。例如,有人假设雪崩风险会引起不安全感或担忧,因为雪崩风险本身。如果存在额外的利益因素,则需要将这些因素与已经考虑到的影响一起进行评估,以避免可能重复计算利益。我们对挪威的火车、公共汽车和汽车旅行者进行了基于调查的离散选择实验。他们被要求在以下几种旅行方案中做出选择:i)威胁基础设施的雪崩的年度频率;Ii)撞击基础设施的平均雪崩量/宽度;Iii)年度编号基础设施关闭;(四)十年期第。伤亡人数为指定的出行方式;V)旅行时间;vi)旅行费用。选择的模型对所有六个属性都显示出显著的负系数符号。因此,除了对人员伤亡和封闭的具体影响外,旅行者确实平均指出了减少雪崩频率和雪崩体积/大小的额外评估。当使用混合选择模型测试雪崩频率/规模减少对雪崩不安全感和神经质的潜在变量的评估时,我们发现没有显著的关联。除了减少人员伤亡和关闭外,不安全感/担忧并未被确定为雪崩风险降低估值的主要驱动因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Children’s transport mode choice for active school trips in Switzerland: An exploratory approach using national census data Variety seeking route choice behavior of commuting e-cyclists retrieved from GPS data Parallel agent-based modeling for improving traffic flow simulation Editorial Board Dar es Salaam’s Bus-Rapid-Transit system in view of systemic criticality
×
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:604180095
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