Federal Report Provides Framework to Guide Infrastructure Investments – Engineering News-Record

Framework for Resilient Infrastructure Investment Aligned with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: The Infrastructure Deficit and its Impact on Sustainability

A significant deficit in the maintenance and repair of critical national infrastructure presents a challenge to achieving key Sustainable Development Goals. The current state of disrepair, a result of deferred maintenance, directly impacts progress towards SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), which calls for building resilient and sustainable infrastructure. It also threatens the safety and well-being of communities, a core tenet of SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

• According to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), road and transit systems across the United States are in poor condition.
• Over 40,000 bridges are classified as “structurally deficient,” yet they accommodate approximately 171.5 million crossings daily.

This vulnerability is compounded by the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, creating an urgent need for strategic investment in infrastructure resilience to support long-term sustainable development.

The NIST Framework for Prioritization

In response to these challenges, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) has released a report detailing a new framework to guide investment decisions. Titled “Transportation Risk-Recovery Investment: Planning Solutions Optimizing Earthquake Resilience and Functional Recovery of Highways (TRIP$),” the framework provides a methodology for prioritizing infrastructure projects to ensure community safety and functionality during and after disasters.

1. Connects Financial Decisions to Engineering Evaluations: The framework establishes a clear link between investment choices and technical assessments of infrastructure on both system-wide and asset-specific levels.
2. Prioritizes Functional Recovery: It helps authorities identify which assets, such as critical roadways or bridges, must be restored most rapidly following a disaster to ensure public health, safety, and economic continuity.
3. Supports State and Local Resilience Planning: The report empowers local and state officials to make informed decisions about which projects require the highest standards of resilience, optimizing the use of limited funds to achieve maximum impact.

Direct Contributions to Sustainable Development Goals

The NIST framework is a critical tool for advancing several SDGs by embedding resilience into infrastructure planning and investment.

• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure: The report provides an innovative methodology (Target 9.a) to develop quality, reliable, sustainable, and resilient infrastructure (Target 9.1) capable of withstanding shocks and supporting economic development and human well-being.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: By helping communities identify and fortify their most critical assets, the framework directly supports Target 11.5, which aims to significantly reduce economic losses and protect vulnerable populations from the impacts of disasters.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: Although initially focused on seismic hazards, the framework’s modular design allows for its application to climate-related hazards like floods and wildfires, thereby strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity in line with Target 13.1.
• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: Ensuring the rapid functionality of core transportation networks post-disaster is essential for maintaining access to emergency services and managing public health risks, contributing to Target 3.d.

Broader Applicability and Future Directions

The principles outlined in the NIST report are designed for broad application beyond the transportation sector. The modular approach can be adapted to other forms of critical infrastructure and a range of hazards, enhancing its value for comprehensive resilience planning.

• Applicable Infrastructure: The framework can be extended to water and wastewater treatment plants, power generation and transmission systems, and buildings.
• Multi-Hazard Approach: The methodology is designed to incorporate multiple hazards, including floods, wildfires, and earthquakes.

Future research will focus on extending the framework to address cascading scenarios, such as fire following an earthquake. These advancements will improve its applicability to complex, real-world events and strengthen its contribution to the overarching goal of building long-term resilience for America’s infrastructure in alignment with global sustainability targets.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

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

• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

  The article’s central theme is the state of the nation’s critical infrastructure, including roads, transit, and bridges. It explicitly mentions that “much of the nation’s critical infrastructure is in dire need of repair” and discusses the need for resilient infrastructure that can withstand various hazards. This directly aligns with the goal of building resilient infrastructure.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The article focuses on helping “communities identify which projects to prioritize to keep people safe when earthquakes and other disasters strike.” It discusses making investment decisions to ensure critical assets are functional after extreme events, which is a core component of making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  The article connects the need for resilient infrastructure to the increasing frequency and cost of “extreme weather events.” It mentions that the planning framework can be applied to multiple hazards, including “floods and wildfires,” which are often exacerbated by climate change. This highlights the need to strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards.

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

1. Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… to support economic development and human well-being

   The entire article is about improving infrastructure. It discusses the poor condition of roads and bridges (“more than 40,000 bridges… are considered ‘structurally deficient'”) and introduces a NIST framework designed to help officials make decisions about which projects “need to be designed to the highest standards and be able to function effectively under a variety of scenarios.” This directly addresses the need for developing resilient and reliable infrastructure.

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… caused by disasters…

   The NIST report’s purpose is to “help communities identify which projects to prioritize to keep people safe when earthquakes and other disasters strike.” By prioritizing the resilience of the most critical roadways or bridges, the framework aims to ensure public safety and health, thereby reducing the human and economic impact of disasters.

3. Target 11.b: By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards… resilience to disasters…

   The article presents the NIST report as a “first-of-kind framework for states, urban planning officials and the consultants who work with them” to plan for disaster resilience. The report itself is a tool that supports the implementation of integrated policies and plans for disaster resilience at the state and local levels.

4. Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries

   The article notes that “extreme weather events are becoming increasingly costly, and destructive.” The framework discussed is designed to be modular and incorporate “multiple hazards, such as floods and wildfires,” which are climate-related. This directly supports the goal of strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity to such events.

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

1. Indicator for Target 9.1 (Implied)

   The article provides a negative indicator for the quality of infrastructure: the number of structurally deficient assets. It states, “More than 40,000 bridges, for instance, are considered ‘structurally deficient.'” Progress towards Target 9.1 could therefore be measured by a reduction in this number.

2. Indicator for Target 11.5 (Implied)

   The article implies that a key measure of success is the functionality of critical infrastructure post-disaster. Maria Lehman’s comment about getting “the spine up as quick as possible” suggests that an indicator would be the recovery time for essential transportation routes and services after an extreme event. A shorter recovery time would indicate greater resilience and reduced impact on the affected population.

3. Indicator for Targets 11.b and 13.1 (Mentioned)

   The article explicitly mentions the NIST report, “Transportation Risk-Recovery Investment: Planning Solutions Optimizing Earthquake Resilience and Functional Recovery of Highways (TRIP$),” as a tool for resilience planning. The adoption and implementation of such frameworks by “states, urban planning officials and the consultants who work with them” serves as a direct indicator of progress in developing and implementing local disaster risk reduction strategies.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: enr.com