Protection of transport infrastructures against major accidents in land use planning policies. A decision support approach

Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 119-129

  Mazri, Ch ^a   Lucertini, G ^b   Olivotto, A ^c   Prod'homme, G ^a   Tsoukias A ^b  

^a INSTITUT NATIONAL DE L ENVIRONNEMENT INDUSTRIEL ET DES RISQUES INERIS   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DAUPHINE   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY IUAV OF VENICE   (Italy)

Author keywords

Decision support; Land use planning; Transport infrastructures protection

Indexed keywords

COST-EFFECTIVE MEASURES; DECISION SUPPORTS; HAZARDOUS PLANTS; LAND USE PLANNING; MAJOR ACCIDENTS; REAL CASE; TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES; TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE;

LAND USE; RAILROAD ACCIDENTS;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

EID: 84892629210     PISSN: 09504230     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2013.11.010     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Aven T. How to define and interpret probability in a risk and safety settings. Safety Science 2013, 51(223):231.
2. Basta C., Neuvel J.M.M., Zlatanova S., Ale B. Risk-maps informing land use planning processes. A survey of the Netherlands and United Kingdom recent developments. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2007, 145:241-249.
3. Christou M., Gyenes S., Struckl M. Risk assessment in support to land use planning in Europe: towards more consistent decisionsα. Journal of Loss Prevention in Process Industry 2011, 24(3):219-226.
4. Diestel R. Graph theory 2006, Springer-Verlag editions, Germany.
5. Duijm N.J. Acceptance criteria in Denmark and EU Report to the Danish Ministry of Environment. Available to download at, Accessed October 2013. http://www2.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2009/978-87-7052-920-4/pdf/978-87-7052-921-1.pdf.
6. Grooijer L., Cornil C., Lenoble C. International benchmark study of a fictitious LPG Plant. A comparison of the QRA approach of HSE (UK), RIVM (NL), INERIS (FR) and FPMs (Wallon region of Belgium). Proceedings of the 13th international symposium of Loss prevention and safety promotion in the process industries 2010, Brugge, Belgium.
7. Reducing risks, protecting people. HSE's decision-Making Process 2001, HSE, UK.
8. INERIS, CETE NC Cahier technique. Solutions de réduction de la vulnérabilité des usages des voies de transport, voies de transport et voies ferrées 2012, Working document.
9. Baromètre IRSN. La perception des risques et de la sécurité par les français. Safety and risk perception by French: the IRSN barometer 2012, IRSN, Paris, France.
10. Johansen I.L., Rausand M. Foundations and choice of safety metrics. Safety Science 2014, 42:386-399.
11. Lakshmanan T.R. The broader economic consequences of transport infrastructure investments. Journal of Transport Geography 2011, 19(1):1-12.
12. Lenoble C., Antoine F., Bolvin C., Kooi E.S., Ujit de Haag P.A.M. Benchmark study of a flammable liquid depot - A comparison of two risk analyses 2010, ESREL proceedings, RODOS, Greece.
13. Lenoble C., Durand C. Introduction of frequency in France following the AZF accident. Journal of Loss Prevention in Process Industry 2011, 24(3):227-236.
14. Mazri C., Chantelauve G., Chevalier M. Guide des pratiques d'association et de concertation dans le cadre des PPRT Available to download at, Accessed October 2013. http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Guide_pratiques__association_concertation_PPRT.pdf.
15. Les Plans de prévention des Risques technologiques. Guide méthodologique 2006, MEDDE, Available to download at, French Ministry of Environment, 12775.html (Accessed October 2013). http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/Maitrise-de-l-urbanisation-PPRT.
16. Okrent D. Risk perception and risk management: on knowledge, resource allocation and equity. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1998, 59(1):17-25.
17. Ostanello A., Tsoukias A. An explicative model of public inter organizational interactions. European Journal of Operational Research 1993, 70:67-82.
18. Prati G., Zani B. The effect of the Fukushima nuclear accident on risk perception, antinuclear behavioral intentions, attitude, trust, environmental beliefs and values. Environment and Behavior 2012, 44(3):1-17.
19. Renn O. Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges. Journal of Risk Research 1998, 1:49-71.
20. Rosenhead J., Mingers J. A new paradigm of analysis. Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited 2004, 1-21. Wiley and Sons, UK. J. Rosenhead, J. Mingers (Eds.).
21. Short J.F. The social fabric of risk: towards the social transformation of risk analysis. American Sociological Review 1984, 49:711-725.
22. Taveau J. Risk assessment and land-use planning regulations in France following the AZF disaster. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 2010, 23(6):813-823.
23. Webler T., Renn O. A brief primer on participation: philosophy and practice. Fairness and competence in citizen participation: Evaluating models for environmental discourse 1995, 17-33. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. O. Renn, T. Webler, P. Wiedemann (Eds.).