臺灣貨運路網之天然災害風險評估

Disaster Risk Assessment for Taiwan Freight Transportation Network

臧芊

台灣貨運路網 ； 路網脆弱度 ； 暴露度 ； 災害風險 ； 風險評估 ； Taiwan freight transportation network ； risk assessment ； network vulnerability ； exposure ； disaster risk

交通大學運輸與物流管理學系學位論文

2016年

碩士

黃家耀

繁體中文

有鑑於氣候變遷導致全球各地發生嚴重天然災害，又貨運運輸路網肩負著工商原料的供應、經濟發展及地方繁榮，以維持民眾所需，然而災害事件可能影響到路網的通行能力，進而影響日常生活，造成財貨之損失。然而，過去關於貨運運輸路網風險評估的研究，主要針對客運運輸，較少著墨在貨運運輸，此外，在考慮路段失效時，皆為假設路段完全失效，未考慮路段通行能力下降的情況，及路段實際受災害事件影響的機率。 因此本研究目的係界定合適的貨運路網天然災害風險評估模式，並以台灣路網為案例，實證分析成果以供相關單位參考。閱讀並彙整相關文獻，訂定本研究之貨運路網天然災害風險評估模式，亦為天然災害事件如：地震颱風，對貨運運輸系統造成之後果分析；路網脆弱度在探討路段失效情況下，所增加的成本，本研究欲訂定貨運路網脆弱度評估模式，並同時考慮路段完全失效及通行能力下降兩種情況；最後危害分析，代表災害事件致災機率，需同時考慮災害發生之機率與災害實際致災之機率。 由脆弱度分析結果顯示，整體而言台灣西部因為有國道1號及國道3號平行貫穿，因此西部走廊是較健全的，整體脆弱度偏低。然而少數路段受到高雄港暴露度高的影響，其脆弱度高。另外台灣東部走廊路網結構不完整，因此大部分的路段脆弱度結果偏高，主要落在東北半部的台9線蘇花段和北宜段。觀察地震之各路段風險成本，顯示西部走廊高風險及中風險主要分布在高雄港附近之聯外道路及連接台南市之台17線路段。而東部運輸路網主要屬於高風險台9線北宜段。觀察颱風之結果，國道為主的西部走廊幾乎無風險存在。高風險路段發生在台9線蘇花段以及部分北宜段。最後，分區之災害風險評估結果，高屏地區受地震影響，是會落在高風險區域，其他西部地區皆屬於低風險程度的。同時東部地區受到颱風影響較大，因此花蓮及台東地區偏高風險程度。 而透過研究結果，本研究建議相關單位在管理上，可參考以下建議：補強台北港及高雄港聯外道路的連接程度，並加強災害事件之預防工作，如增加高雄港附近之災害應變措施，東部地區之預警系統等。

Taiwan is a highly developed, export-oriented country, where freight transportation plays a significant role for cargo import and export. Taiwan is located in tropical monsoon climate, and faces risks from natural disasters frequently, such as typhoon, heavy rain, flooding, and earthquake. Natural disasters may impose uncertainties to the operation of freight transportation network. Previous studies mainly focused on the passenger transport mode and risks of the business environment. Instead, aim of this research is to assess the risk of freight transportation network from the perspective of vulnerability with emphasis on the impact of natural disaster. Therefore, one of the purpose of this research is to deinfine the disaster risk assessment model for freight transportation network, and utilize the data of Taiwan as empirical results. In this research , risk assessment model is based on the multiplication of vulnerability and hazard assessment. Network vulnerability is to evaluate the generalized cost when disaster risk took place. Moreover, hazard assessment mainly foucses on natural disaster including typhoon and earthquake. The vulnerability empirical result demonstrated that the overall west freight transportation network is less vulnerable than east except the roads connected Kaohsiung port. However, the high risk road is located in the main road of Kaohsiung port which suffer from earthquake. As for disaster risk of typhoon, the high risk result happen in number nine high way. Based on previous result, this research further consolidated into different district to demonstrated the risk level. Kaohsiung and Ping-Tung area are in the high risk category due to earthquake. For west area such as Haualien and Taitung is high risk districk because of typhoon. As from empirical results, this research also suggests related administrations to enhance links between Taipei and Kaohsiung port and boost the disaster prevetion plan for east area in Taiwan in order to mitigate the loss due to typhoon.

1. Adger W.N. (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Change, 16:268–281
   連結：
2. Aven, T. (2010) On how to define, understand and describe risk. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 95, pp.623–631.
   連結：
3. Chen, A., Yang, H., Lo, H.K. and Tang, W.H. (2002) Capacity reliability of a road network: an assessment methodology and numerical results. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 36(3), pp. 225-252.
   連結：
4. Chen, B.Y., Lam, W.H., Sumalee, A., Li, Q., and Li, Z. C. (2012) Vulnerability analysis for large-scale and congested road networks with demand uncertainty. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(3), pp. 501-516.
   連結：
5. Du, Q., Kishi, K., Aiura, N., and Nakatsuji, T. (2014). Transportation Network Vulnerability: Vulnerability Scanning Methodology Applied to Multiple Logistics Transport Networks. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, (2410), 96-104.
   連結：
6. Hsieh, C.H., Tai, H.H. and Lee, Y.N. (2013) Port vulnerability assessment from the perspective of critical infrastructure interdependency. Maritime Policy & Management, pp. 1-18.
   連結：
7. Hsieh, C. H., and Feng, C. M. (2014) Road network vulnerability assessment based on fragile factor interdependencies in spatial-functional perspectives. Environment and Planning A, 46(3), 700-714.
   連結：
8. Hsieh, C.H. (2014) Disaster risk assessment of ports based on the perspective of vulnerability. Natural Hazards, 74(2), pp. 851-864.
   連結：
9. Iida, Y. (1999) Basic concepts and future directions of road network reliability analysis. Journal of advanced transportation, 33(2), pp.125-134.
   連結：
10. IPCC (2007) Fourth assessment report (ar4). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
    連結：
11. Jenelius, E., Petersen, T., and Mattsson, L.G. (2006) Importance and exposure in road network vulnerability analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 40(7), pp. 537-560.
    連結：
12. Jenelius, E. (2009) Network structure and travel patterns: explaining the geographical disparities of road network vulnerability. Journal of Transport Geography, 17(3), pp. 234-244.
    連結：
13. Mine, H. and Kawai, H. (1982). Mathematics for Reliability Analysis. pp.12-14.
    連結：
14. Remondo J, Bonachea J, Cendrero A (2008) Quantitative landslide risk assessment and mapping on the basis of recent occurrences. Geomorphol 94:496–507
    連結：
15. Sussman, J. (2000). Introduction to transportation systems. Artech House. Boston.
    連結：
16. Taylor, M.A., Sekhar, S.V., and D'Este, G.M. (2006) Application of accessibility based methods for vulnerability analysis of strategic road networks. Networks and Spatial Economics, 6(3-4), pp. 267-291.
    連結：
17. Wisner B, Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I (eds) (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters, 2nd edn. Routledge, London.
    連結：
18. 交通部運輸研究所，民國102年，「運輸政策白皮書(運輸安全)」。
    連結：
19. 賴怡心，民國101年，「臺灣西部城際運輸路網脆弱度之評估模式」，國立交通大學運輸科技與管理學系碩士論文。
    連結：
20. 國家災害防救科技中心，民國100年，「台灣氣候變遷科學報告書」。
    連結：
21. 柯旻嬋，民國99年，「都會區公路路網脆弱度之評量模式」，國立交通大學運輸科技與管理學系碩士論文。
    連結：
22. Du, Q. (2015) Vulnerability Scanning Methodologies Applied to Logistics Transportation Network. (Doctoral dissertation, Univeristy of Hokkaido, Japan). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2115/58963
23. Husdal, J. (2004) Reliability/vulnerability versus Costs/Benefits. Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Transportation Network Reliability, Queenstown and Christchurch New Zealand, pp. 367-380.
24. IPCC (2001) Third assessment report (ar3). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
25. Lin Y and Lee T (2012) Assessment of vulnerability and risk of Taijiang coastal areas to climatic changes. Int J Environ Earth Sci Eng 6:20–28
26. Nicholson, A.J. and Dalziell, E. 2003. Risk evaluation and management: a road network reliability study. In The Network Reliability of Transport. Edited by Y. Iida and M.G.H. Bell. Oxford: Pergamon-Elsevier, 45-59.
27. Tai, H.H., Yang, C.C. and Tseng, P.H. (2013) Influential indicators for measuring Kaohsiung port resilience. International Forum on Shipping. Port, and Airports (IFSPA 2013). Hong Kong.
28. UNISDR. (2004) Living with Risk: a Global Review of Disaster Reduction Initiatives, Geneva: United Nations Publication.
29. UNISDR. (2009) Terminology on disaster risk reduction. http://www.unisdr.org/eng/terminology/UNISDRterminology-2009-eng.pdf
30. UNDP. (2010) Disaster risk assessment. UNDP. New York.
31. http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/crisis%20prevention/disaster/2Disaster%20Risk%20Reduction%20-%20Risk%20Assessment.pdf
32. 交通部中央氣象局，民國104年，「天然災害災防問答集」。
33. 交通部統計處，民國104年，「103年公路汽車貨運調查報告」。
34. 交通部運輸研究所，民國104年，「交通路網數值圖」。https://gist-map.motc.gov.tw/Complex/MapTopic
35. 中央氣象局地震測報中心，民國104年，「臺灣地區104年版地震潛勢圖之製作」。
36. 內政部消防署，民國103年，「消防統計年報」。
37. http://www.nfa.gov.tw/uploads/1/201509020204103Y.pdf
38. 交通部運輸研究所，民國102年，「第5期整體運輸規劃研究系列─城際運輸需求模式檢討及參數更新研究(2/3)篇」。
39. 交通部運輸研究所，民國101年，「第5期整體運輸規劃研究系列─城際運輸需求模式檢討及參數更新研究(1/3)篇」。
40. 臺灣公路工程，民國100年，「山區道路崩塌災害潛勢評估」。
41. 交通部國道高速公路局，民國97年，「國道3號(汐止至南港路段)四處交流道運轉功能整合改善工程可行性研究」。
42. 鄧家駒，民國94年，「 風險管理」，華泰文化事业股份有限公司。
43. 宋明哲，蔡政憲，徐廷榕，民國91年，「 風險管理」， 國立空中大學。
44. 凌氤寶，陳森松，民國85年，「人身風險管理」，華泰書局。
45. 交通部臺灣區國道高速公路局「交通資料庫」，http://tisvcloud.freeway.gov.tw/