Building More Resilient Transportation Systems – AASHTO Journal

Report on Integrating Transportation Resilience to Advance Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A knowledge session at the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 2025 Annual Meeting examined the integration of resilience within state Departments of Transportation (DOTs). The discussion highlighted how a comprehensive approach to resilience, encompassing both infrastructure and organizational structures, is critical to achieving several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), notably SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 13 (Climate Action).

Organizational Resilience: A Foundation for SDG 8

Panelists emphasized that resilience extends beyond physical assets to the stability and adaptability of the organization itself. This internal focus is crucial for ensuring the long-term capacity to build and maintain infrastructure, directly supporting SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

• Ed Hassinger of the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) identified “organizational resilience” as a primary concern.
• MoDOT now conducts regular enterprise risk assessments, analyzing broad threats including natural disasters, political climate, and workforce needs.
• Workforce stability and the preservation of institutional knowledge are now considered top-tier risks, underscoring the importance of human capital in sustaining the transportation sector and achieving productive employment goals under SDG 8.

Infrastructure Resilience: Addressing SDG 9, 11, and 13

The discussion linked the development of resilient infrastructure directly to climate adaptation and the creation of sustainable communities, aligning with SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), and SDG 13 (Climate Action).

• Matthew Laufer of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) noted that experience with natural hazards like flooding informs a risk-based approach to system management, a key component of SDG 13 (Climate Action).
• This approach prioritizes key resilience principles for building sustainable infrastructure as outlined in SDG 9:
  1. Redundancy
  2. Robustness
  3. Resourcefulness
• Fostering a culture of resilience encourages collaboration and long-term financial planning, where incremental upfront investments yield significant future benefits, thereby safeguarding community lifelines in line with SDG 11.

Resilience as an Opportunity for Inclusive and Sustainable Development

A proactive mindset that views resilience as an opportunity can drive innovation and inclusivity in infrastructure design, contributing to targets within SDG 9 and SDG 11.

• Nathan Lee of the Utah Department of Transportation advocated for framing resilience as an opportunity to improve systems.
• This perspective opens pathways to enhance infrastructure protection, safety, and robustness.
• It also encourages the development of infrastructure that is accessible to all users, directly supporting SDG Target 11.2, which calls for safe, affordable, accessible, and sustainable transport systems.

Standardizing Resilience Metrics for Economic Sustainability

To effectively integrate resilience into planning and investment, standardized measurement is required. A new initiative aims to quantify the economic value of resilience, reinforcing the financial case for achieving SDG 9 and SDG 11.

• Aimee Flannery of Jacobs reported on the development of a manual to standardize resilience measurement in the transportation sector.
• The methodology focuses on quantifying risk in financial terms, analyzing the “dollars and cents” impact of infrastructure failure on both agencies and travelers.
• By translating risks and resilience benefits into economic terms, this standard will enable a clearer valuation of investments in resilient infrastructure, promoting the development of reliable and sustainable systems as envisioned by the SDGs.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on transportation resiliency connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by focusing on the development of durable infrastructure, organizational stability, and adaptation to environmental challenges.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The article highlights organizational resilience, specifically mentioning “workforce needs” as a primary threat. MoDOT’s Director, Ed Hassinger, states that workforce stability has become the “number one or number two” risk, which connects to the goal of maintaining stable and productive employment.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: This is a central theme. The entire discussion revolves around integrating “resiliency not only into their infrastructure designs but their organizations as well.” The goal is to develop quality, reliable, sustainable, and resilient infrastructure, as discussed by all panelists.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The article addresses the need to make infrastructure safe and robust against natural hazards. NCDOT’s Matthew Laufer discusses resilience in the face of “coastal hazards to inland flooding,” which directly relates to making communities and their connecting infrastructure more resilient to disasters.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: By focusing on strengthening infrastructure against “natural disasters” and “natural hazards,” the article implicitly addresses the need for climate adaptation. The efforts to build resilience are a direct response to the increasing frequency and intensity of climate-related events, which is a core component of climate action.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Specific targets can be identified by linking the article’s key themes to the objectives outlined within the relevant SDGs.

1. Target 9.1: “Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all.” The article’s core subject is the effort by state DOTs to build resilient transportation infrastructure (roads, bridges, culverts) that can withstand various risks and continue to function.
2. Target 11.5: “By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters…” The discussion on analyzing risks from “natural hazards” and measuring the economic impact (“dollars and cents”) of infrastructure failure, such as when a “bridge goes down or a culvert blows out,” directly aligns with this target.
3. Target 13.1: “Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.” The panel’s focus on integrating resilience into infrastructure design and organizational processes to manage risks from events like “inland flooding” is a direct example of strengthening adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards.
4. Target 8.5: “By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men…” The concern raised by MoDOT’s Hassinger about workforce needs being the “biggest threat to our organization” points to the importance of maintaining a stable, skilled workforce, which is essential for achieving productive employment and ensuring the organization can “regenerate itself by bringing in new people and preserving institutional knowledge.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article implies several qualitative and quantitative indicators that could be used to measure progress.

• Indicator for Targets 9.1 and 11.5: The article explicitly mentions the development of a manual to “standardize how resilience gets measured in the transportation sector.” A key proposed indicator is the financial impact of infrastructure failure. Aimee Flannery from Jacobs suggests measuring resilience by focusing on “dollars and cents,” asking, “What does it mean in terms of dollars and cents to an agency when a bridge goes down or a culvert blows out?” This establishes a direct economic loss indicator.
• Indicator for Target 11.5: Another implied indicator is the impact on people. Flannery also poses the question, “What does it mean to the traveler when a section of roadway is shut down for six months?” This suggests measuring the number of people affected or the duration of service disruption as a way to quantify the impact of infrastructure failure.
• Indicator for Targets 11.5 and 13.1: The adoption of formal risk management strategies is an indicator. The article notes that MoDOT now “regularly engages in enterprise risk assessments” that analyze broad issues, including “natural disasters.” The practice of conducting these assessments serves as an indicator of an organization’s commitment to building resilience.
• Indicator for Target 8.5: A qualitative indicator for workforce stability is its position on risk assessments. Hassinger notes that “where ‘workforce’ may have been at the bottom of the list 15 years ago… today it’s like number one or number two.” Tracking the perceived risk level of workforce challenges in enterprise risk assessments can serve as an indicator of organizational health and progress toward workforce stability.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: aashtojournal.transportation.org