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

IF 3.9 Q2 TRANSPORTATION
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.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信