A study to assess the applicability of using remote sensing to minimize service interruption of Canadian port infrastructure

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2842217/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

A study to assess the applicability of using remote sensing to minimize service interruption of Canadian port infrastructure

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2842217/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 08 Jun, 2023

Read the published version in Journal of Transportation Security →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Remote sensing can be an effective tool for providing early warning of deformations that are difficult or impossible to detect with visual inspections, and can allow infrastructure owners and operators to prioritize key areas for maintenance and assist in more rapid recovery from incidents that cause service interruptions. Canadian Port Authorities (CPAs) do not currently use remote sensing techniques to assess the condition of critical infrastructure despite their application to similar operations such as bridges, pipelines, and dams. Interviews with key informants indicate that there are no technical or scientific barriers to using remote sensing to assess port conditions, and that while the presence of heterogeneous materials and surfaces, restricted air space, and a complex web of interconnected port partners and tenants complicates its use, these are surmountable. Instead, interviews suggest that the primary barrier stopping CPAs from implementing remote sensing is that there is no system-wide formal chain of responsibility and authority and a lack of public sector agency leadership resulting from the commonly used “landlord model” for port operations, which generates fragmented stakeholder interests and inhibits collaboration. Given the emerging challenges of aging infrastructure, climate change-related impacts, and the demands of system-wide business continuity, we argue that a private and public sector collaborative pilot project is needed to test the feasibility of adopting remote sensing for port infrastructure assessment.

ports

critical infrastructure

structure condition assessment

remote sensing

Infrastructure of all types is affected by disruptions like natural disasters, malevolent attacks, human-made accidents, and failures due to age, condition or interdependence. While risk planners were previously concerned with protection and prevention, their interest is increasingly on the ability of infrastructure to withstand and recover from disruptions (Hosseini and Barker, 2016).

Port infrastructure condition and resilience is of paramount importance for supply chain continuity with widespread potential consequences from disruption (Hsieh et al., 2014; Kochersberger et al. 2014; Thekdi and Santos, 2016; Loh and Thai, 2016; and Duo et al. 2018) . Port infrastructure is vulnerable to natural disasters due to coastal exposure and intentional attacks due to critical socioeconomic functions (Cao and Lam, 2019). Mutombo and Olcer (2017) point out that port infrastructure is broadly defined, but physical port infrastructure can be grouped into six categories: berthing structures, protection barriers, port structure, channels and harbours, road, and rail networks. The term port infrastructure in this paper refers to these six categories of assets.

Canadian Port Authorities (CPAs) are responsible for facilitating movement of goods through their ports, and while they have a large network of partners for emergency management, CPAs are responsible for their own efforts related to quickly recovering and continuing service following a disruption. CPA infrastructure is distributed widely across both the West and East coastal areas of Canada, and some are relatively remote. These port facilities may be difficult or dangerous to access even after an emergency has been declared over, so assessing infrastructure condition can be time consuming, thus extending the period that port business is interrupted.

CPAs are financially self-sufficient and operate at arm’s length from the federal government, but with boards of directors partially controlled by the federal Governor in Council political appointment process. CPAs receive no operational federal funding, and they finance capital projects through a combination of their own revenues, partnerships with the private sector, debt financing, and certain federal grants related to infrastructure, the environment, or security. Individual CPAs are landlords and lease their port operations to private enterprise, a model that began with the 1995 National Marine Policy that led to the 1998 Canada Marine Act, which specified a goal of promoting a more competitive, effectively managed, and sustainable port system in Canada. The National Marine Policy’s key principles are accountability to users and the public, business discipline, and self-sufficiency, shifting the burden of port operations from the Canadian taxpayer to port users. Ircha (2001) reviewed the impact of port reform in Canada and warned that landlord CPAs cannot take a passive role in merely providing facilities to private operators but must assist them in enhancing throughput. In Chen’s (2009) review of the evolution of port authority administrative structure worldwide, the model most prominent prior to the 1980s – whereby ports provided both infrastructure and services - was found to “impede achievement of objectives” such as being commercially-oriented entities. Since the 1980s the most common operating framework internationally has become the “landlord model”, in which ports provide land and foundational infrastructure, but lease out operations to the private sector; this model was found to provide financial and operational benefits. Verhoeven (2010) notes the pressure on landlord ports worldwide whereby powerful private operators, such as carriers and terminal operators, gain control, resulting in a “lack of coherence in the port community”. He also observes a global phenomenon whereby landlord port authorities are the focus of criticism when things go wrong even for things outside of their formal responsibility (Verhoeven, 2010). In Canada, Walker et al. (2015) observed that the Federal government as the central authority should have a more supporting function and perform specific harbour- and port-related tasks that cannot or are not performed effectively at the local level.

Traditional physical infrastructure condition assessment has focused on periodic engineering site visits with visual inspection of signs of scouring, corrosion, fatigue, and deterioration, and sometimes using in situ instruments such as accelerometers (Pereira et al. 2016). These inspections and engineering judgment are necessary and invaluable, but are also time consuming, potentially infrequent, sometimes difficult, dangerous, or impractical to complete, and may not be able to visually detect deformations in an early or timely manner (Ayele et al. 2020; Jofré‐briceño et al. 2021; Liu et al. 2020; Tang et al. 2020; Alshammari and Mohammed, 2022). Remote sensing technology helps engineers to be better equipped to predict and prevent structural failure and enable better inspection, operation, and maintenance of infrastructure whereby sensors mounted on remote platforms provide objective and consistent measurement of deformation and other forms of vulnerability (Jofré‐briceño et al. 2021; Liu et al. 2020; Tang et al. 2020; Alshammari and Mohammed, 2022; Singhroy, 2020). Remote sensing, whether satellite, plane, or Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle (UAV)-based, provides a synoptic view of a large geographic area and, depending on the type of platform and sensors used, provides early warning of defects and deformation in steel and concrete elements, enabling quicker situation assessment and decision-making (Singhroy, 2020).

Remote sensing technology could provide flexible, fast, and objective information about the condition of critical infrastructure at CPAs with high spatial resolution data and frequent revisit periods customized to the need and situation. It could provide guidance on where to focus more intense ground-based instrumentation and observation for continuous measurement and monitoring of key areas of deformation and vulnerability. It could be used when conditions are difficult, uncertain, or dangerous and could take on roles that emergency responders and human-operated vehicles cannot or should not. The question is, while other critical infrastructure owners use remote sensing operationally, why don’t CPAs? What barriers need to be removed to enable CPAs to incorporate remote sensing to take advantage of the technology to assess infrastructure condition before and after a disruption to optimize condition assessment and minimize service interruption?

Ellingwood (2005) was an early proponent of bringing the science of remote sensing to the field of infrastructure management and specifically discussed the benefits for condition assessment of civil infrastructure. Ellingwood (2005) emphasized that decisions about maintenance, rehabilitation, and continued use of infrastructure need to be supported by quantitative evidence about factors such as structural strength or stiffness deterioration, and that remote sensing technology can provide information to supplement engineering judgment. Hausamann et al. (2005) also recognized early on the value of remote sensing for pipeline infrastructure, a sector that was an early adopter of the technology for operational condition and threat assessment. Fekete et al. (2015) discuss the value of remote sensing for critical infrastructure disaster risk governance in terms of how it helps with multiple stages of the disaster management cycle: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Fekete et al. (2015)emphasize the importance of having a time series of remotely sensed data such that pre- and post-disaster conditions can be compared. Gomez and Purdie (2016) suggest that, in the context of natural disasters, society expects critical infrastructure to be immediately available, which puts a lot of pressure on emergency and continuity managers, who would benefit from rapid collection of high-resolution geospatial data provided by remote sensing.

Schweizer et al. (2018) argue that while we can’t likely improve our ability to predict the timing and impact of incidents, we can improve our response and preparation and suggest that remote sensing is uniquely valuable since it enables safe access to critical infrastructure post-event and provides a spatially comprehensive, synoptic view. Schweizer et al. (2018) propose, though, that to maximize the unique abilities, rapid deployment is required and for this to happen, people need to have already established their competence and invested in the systems and processes; only then will people be able to rapidly process and disseminate appropriate remote sensing products for efficient and informed decision-making. Stow et al. (2018) identify the factors that hyper-critical infrastructure owners must understand to maximize the benefit of remote sensing: 1. the elements of the system that are indeed critical; 2. the probable failure modes and how hazards and threats will impact the critical infrastructure; and 3. the types of decisions that need to be made and how remote sensing results can inform those decisions.

Singhroy (2020) provides an overview and introduction to current applications of remote sensing of infrastructure with a focus on monitoring deformation of transportation, energy, and mining infrastructure with radar, multispectral and hyperspectral optical, thermal-infrared, and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging). Singhroy (2020) covers the increased use of remote sensing to monitor infrastructure and provides examples of the technology being a powerful tool because of its increasingly high spatial and temporal resolution and ease of integration with other data to improve infrastructure monitoring. There is a recurring theme in Singhroy (2020) of the value of remote sensing in its ability to aggregate cascading hazards that could interact to magnify a disaster, something that individual discrete ground-based measurements and observations might not be able to do as well.

2.1 UAV-based Remote Sensing

Kerle et al. (2019) observe that one of the fastest growing UAV-based remote sensing applications is critical infrastructure monitoring for early warning of vulnerabilities, noting the growth in use for roads, bridges, and tunnels. Neocleous et al. (2016) refer to the challenges of corrosion of coastal urban structures and examined UAV-based remote sensing for its ability to provide early warning for deterioration of reinforced concrete of buildings. Sharma’s book (2019) of case studies demonstrate the use of UAV-based remote sensing for a range of applications, including infrastructure, and Shakhatreh et al. (2019) review the many uses for civil applications, including real-time monitoring, search and rescue, delivery of goods, precision agriculture, and remote sensing for civil infrastructure inspection. Politis et al. (2020)conducted a network-level pavement condition assessment using UAV-based remote sensing to build an index to score overall condition of road network segments. An application of UAV-based remote sensing discussed in Singhroy (2020) was for rail network change detection over time with repetitive, flexible, and inexpensive data acquisition to monitor the speed and acceleration of ground movement, which enabled early identification of displacement-related risk. Pulella and Sica (2021) conducted a study of airport situational awareness with UAV-based remote sensing noting the value of spatial-temporal data to provide insights regarding airport infrastructure condition.

Besada et al. (2018) discuss the continuous market growth of UAV usage due to cost reductions and familiarity with the value of remote sensing, but highlight how UAV-based infrastructure inspection, maintenance, and security applications are complex and challenging. Regardless, because of the increased popularity and demand, more UAV-based remote sensing tools and systems are available to help define the mission scope, select appropriate sensors, and support the integration of the remotely sensed data with other relevant data in a geographic information system (Besada et al. 2021). Notwithstanding the complex mission planning and execution, UAV-based remote sensing provides high resolution data and flexibility for damage mapping and has evolved from simple visual descriptive overviews to more sophisticated sensors and data analysis with multi-temporal and multi-perspective methods (Kerle et al. 2019). Notably, a practical challenge highlighted in the literature is related to training or hiring staff with appropriate skills and experience to implement UAV-based remote sensing for infrastructure monitoring and assessment (Sharma, 2019). Colomina and Molina (2014) recognized this challenge early and discuss the importance of devoting time and expertise to UAV mission planning with respect to sensor choice, flight path and trajectory, wind conditions. Nagasawa et al. (2021) highlight the operational importance of regular practice and innovation with UAV mission planning because a delay is not acceptable when critical infrastructure is disrupted following an incident.

2.2 Remote Sensing of Port Infrastructure

There are very few references in the literature to the use of remote sensing of port infrastructure. Tang et al. (2020) evaluated UAV-based remote sensing for cranes used in a port environment for their flexible maneuverability with respect to assessing the vertical structures for cracks and rust. Both Tang et al. (2020) and Liu et al. (2020) reported that port cranes are good candidates for UAV-based remote assessment because cranes are critical to service and vulnerable to the huge loads, heavy use, and aggressive coastal conditions related to wind, salt, and seawater dynamics; furthermore, both report that remote sensing is attractive since traditional assessment is dangerous, time consuming, and labour-intensive.

Jofre-Briceno et al. (2021) noted that facility management and maintenance in port environments can be difficult due to the harsh coastal dynamics and progressive and variable deterioration of the infrastructure, so they proposed a method for creating a port infrastructure tool that is able to incorporate digital surveys collected via UAV for a baseline elevation model. Alshammari and Mohammed (2022) used UAV-based remote sensing to monitor deformation and stability of a breakwater protecting harbour entry and exit channels and determined that the technology provides crucial information for early warning of vulnerabilities; they also noted that the technology is helpful for gaining a better understanding of failure mechanisms, especially in the context of changing ocean conditions with climate change.

Yang (2019) surveyed port sector executives regarding their intention to use UAV technology for maritime transportation applications and conducted a factor analysis to identify the top expected applications as environmental issue detection and delivery of goods to offshore ships. Poling (2021) provides a comprehensive overview of remote sensing for marine shipping activity surveillance and activity detection.

2.3 Remote Sensing of Bridge Infrastructure

The paucity of work published related to remote sensing of port infrastructure indicates that it is an underdeveloped area of application. Bridges, however, have been a prominent focus for development of methodologies, selection of appropriate sensors, and experimentation with data integration and analysis. Endsley et al. (2012) discussed the value of UAV-based remote sensing for asset management and structural health monitoring of bridges to evaluate indicators for early warning and diagnosis. Harris et al. (2016) suggested that bridge conditions could be assessed more frequently, comprehensively, and with less service interruption by fusing remotely sensed measurements from multiple sources with traditional surveys. Harris et al. (2016) noted that some sensors, such as thermal-infrared, radar and acoustic, can assess the internal condition of bridge components, such as the location of rebar deterioration and corrosion, deformation, and delamination, that are not visible in traditional surveys. Omar and Nehdi (2017) and Mac et al. (2019) further examined thermal-infrared technology for bridge condition assessment via UAV and noted that delamination due to the corrosion effect of steel rebar in reinforced concrete is a dangerous form of deterioration because it is not usually visible, so this type of remote sensing gives early warning and enables proactive maintenance to address infrastructure vulnerability. Mac et al. (2019) determined that cement delamination up to 4 cm below the surface was detectable using UAV-based remote sensing.

In their paper published on crack inspection using UAV-based remote sensing, Ayele et al. (2020) concluded that the technology reduces time and cost of bridge infrastructure inspection. Feroz and Abu Dabous (2021) reviewed 65 journal and conference papers on remote sensing of bridge infrastructure and summarized specific methodologies and sensors used for bridge condition assessment. Aliyari et al. (2022) focused on the use of UAV remote sensing for hazard identification and risk assessment for bridge inspections. Cusson et al. (2021) explored satellite-based remote sensing of infrastructure using Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) and examined integration of the data for 3D visualization and early warning of unexpected bridge displacements. The authors also studied the concept of thermal sensitivity and its use to monitor bridge behavior for early warning of abnormal bridge displacements to help avoid failures (Cusson et al. 2021).

In their investigations of the value of radar remote sensing for monitoring bridge infrastructure, Cusson et al. (2021) suggest that bridges have the benefit over other types of infrastructure of having well defined structures, materials, and designs. There are elements of port infrastructure that may be more heterogeneous than bridges, which could complicate remote sensing for condition assessment, especially as related to port foundation, moisture content, closeness to water body, and type of substrate. Structurally, however, ports are not dissimilar to bridges in that there is extensive and complex use of steel and concrete; it has been demonstrated with bridges that not only can remote sensing technology pinpoint defects like cracks in steel and fractures in concrete, but it can do so earlier than possible with visual inspections.

The aim of this research is to understand the barriers that explain why CPAs have not embraced remote sensing technology for infrastructure condition assessment. Remote sensing technology is a well-established operational tool for application to infrastructure as confirmed by the literature review, so the focus of the research is on understanding attitudes about policy challenges to implementing the technology.

3.1 Research Design

The following hypotheses informed the decisions about how data should be collected and analyzed:

There are no scientific or technical barriers at ports that cannot be easily overcome for operational use of remote sensing for condition assessment
There are some practical and regulatory barriers such as airspace restrictions and personnel expertise that can be overcome
There are legal landlord-tenant and landlord-partner agreements that present non-trivial policy barriers and constrain collaboration
There are no fundamental or philosophical objections to evaluating the feasibility of remote sensing technology for condition assessment of CPA critical infrastructure

The above hypotheses guided the qualitative research methods employed in this study, which explored the opinions and attitudes of key stakeholders regarding the feasibility of the following hypothetical proposal:

A pilot project can be facilitated by some or all the following: Transport Canada, National Aeronautical Surveillance Program, National Research Council, the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, a private sector UAV-based remote sensing company, Defence Research and Development Canada, and a volunteer CPA
A pilot project can demonstrate the logistical requirements, including hardware, software, and internal vs. external human resources and essential knowledge can be transferred to CPA operational staff
With feasibility and value demonstrated through the pilot project, relevant parties will be motivated to explore practical modifications to their legal agreements to enable a collaborative system-wide approach to condition assessment on an operational basis such that it can be immediately and seamlessly utilized in the case of an incident to minimize service interruption

3.2 Sampling Strategy

The data collection took place over the course of six months and can therefore be considered cross-sectional as opposed to longitudinal. The justification for using this time horizon for data collection is that it is current attitudes that are of concern, not change over time. Since the aim is to gather the opinions and attitudes about the use of remote sensing technology at CPAs, personal interviews with individuals, one-at-a-time is the selected approach rather than an impersonal survey. The justification for conducting personal interviews rather than surveys or group interviews is to maximize the likelihood of candid, uncensored, and free flowing conversations and minimize any element of uncertainty if unfamiliar with the technology used by infrastructure peers.

The population from which data was sampled is loosely defined as those who are in key positions to make, influence, or control decisions related to the use of remote sensing technology for condition assessment at Canadian Port Authorities. The population was broken down into the following key stakeholder groups of relevant parties:

The regulator
Potential funding agency
Government agency publishing research papers on remote sensing for infrastructure
Private sector remote sensing operating companies
Private sector terminal tenant of CPA
Private sector customer of CPA
Relevant CPA operational staff
Industry association of CPAs

The population was sampled for the purpose of interviews using practical methods of personal connections, networking, and online open-source research. To maximize candour during interviews, participants were promised anonymity. The individuals interviewed are highly educated, seasoned professionals with deep expertise and broad experience and insights into one or more element of this research.

3.3 Data Collection

With the premise that some interviewees would appreciate an introduction to remote sensing technology and all interviewees would appreciate an explanation of the context, purpose, and scope of the research, a 1-page memo was prepared for interviewees to read prior to the interview. With the premise that it is not the case that CPAs purposefully and willfully avoid the use remote sensing technology for condition assessment, but rather it is the case that CPAs have not considered the technology, open-ended, conversational, probing-type interview questions were prepared. To secure and conduct interviews, the following methodology was followed:

Emailed the memo to potential interview participants and requested an interview, to be conducted remotely either online or by phone
Conducted interviews, during which open-ended conversational questions were used to invite discussion of attitudes about the content of the memo and a potential pilot project
Critically analyzed the responses and considered solutions and next steps to overcome the objections and barriers mentioned

3.4 Methodological Limitations

A significant limitation of the methods chosen is that the results may not be replicable with a different sample of interviewees or with a different sampling strategy. This limitation could be tested with a second set of interviews with people at the same institutions with the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the attitudes expressed. This limitation could also be tested with a second research phase during which a larger number of relevant organizations are sampled and interviews conducted with the same null hypothesis.

Another limitation of the methods is the small number of interviews conducted (eight) with 13 interviewees in total; their opinions and attitudes may not be representative of their firms and agencies. This limitation was mitigated in several instances by the interviewees themselves. Unprompted, perhaps because the topic was unfamiliar to them, several people prepared for the interviews by speaking with colleagues beforehand, thus potentially increasing the likelihood that their comments are more representative of their organization and not exclusively their own opinions. Regardless, this limitation could be overcome in future research by expanding the number of interviews with the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the findings from the current sample and the future, larger, sample. Another way to address this limitation with future research would be to distribute a written survey to a large number of people at the same organizations with the null hypothesis that there is no difference in findings.

This section presents and describes the key qualitative findings from the interviews. Results are categorized according to stakeholder group and subcategorized by theme, maintaining the confidentiality of the interviewees.

The stakeholder categories are:

Regulator perspective
Government agency perspective
Private sector user and service provider perspective
Port authority perspective

The theme subcategories are:

No System-wide Authority Willing to Take Charge
No Technical Barrier Expected
Cooperative Collaboration Desirable

Stakeholder Group #1: Regulator perspective

A. No System-wide Authority willing to Take Charge: Transport Canada is the regulator of CPAs, so the interviewee considered it a conflict of interest to be involved in an effort aimed at assessing the very infrastructure that it regulates. The conflict of interest could be removed, the interviewee said, for a pilot project that focuses on the processes and requirements to implement a remote sensing component to infrastructure assessment. The larger issue, according to the interviewee, is that a system-wide assessment of the condition of port critical infrastructure is outside of Transport Canada’s mandate.

B. No Technical Barrier Expected: The interviewee saw no technical barriers to using remote sensing as a tool to assist with CPA condition assessment and mentioned that CPAs can apply for a waiver of air space restriction via Navigation Canada, which has taken over the role of approving waiver requests from Transport Canada.

C. Cooperative Collaboration Desirable: The interviewee suggested that the National Aeronautical Surveillance Program might be able to be involved in a pilot project to help CPAs establish their remote sensing and mission planning competence.

Stakeholder Group #2: Government agency perspective

A. No System-wide Authority willing to Take Charge: The interviewees expressed surprise that Transport Canada claims that a conflict of interest as the regulator precludes their involvement in the research pilot project. The interviewees expressed concern about system-wide approvals required with respect to unauthorized condition assessment of infrastructure.

B. Cooperative Collaboration Desirable: Interviewees confirmed that remote sensing of port critical infrastructure falls within the mandated scope of the National Research Council (NRC) and pilot projects involving industry are encouraged. Interviewees suggested that expertise from other NRC groups could provide interdisciplinary collaboration in particular an NRC researcher with drone mission planning and data processing expertise.

C. Cooperative Collaboration Desirable: An interviewee from Defence Research and Development Canada confirmed that CPAs and NRC both qualify for pilot project funding if the CPA proposes to address public safety challenges with innovative application of science and technology.

Stakeholder Group #3: Private sector user and service provider perspective

A. No System-wide Authority willing to Take Charge: An interviewee from a private sector port terminal tenant believes that Transport Canada should lead the effort because they have the authority and responsibility to assess the entire transportation infrastructure network. An interviewee from a private sector port terminal operator suggested that CPAs have a vested interest in continuing to download more of their infrastructure monitoring and maintenance responsibilities and liabilities to their tenants.

B. No Technical Barrier Expected: Interviewees from private sector remote sensing service providers expressed keen interest in applying drone-based remote sensing for condition assessment at CPAs and said that there are no foreseeable technical barriers. Interviewees commented that they have mission planning and execution expertise and can provide human, hardware, and software resources for the effort. Interviewees observed the importance of including connected rail infrastructure in the CPA network.

C. Cooperative Collaboration Desirable: An interviewee from private sector marine transportation said that the correct ‘product -market’ fit for drone assisted monitoring would be the entire network of critical infrastructure, disruption of which would significantly impact the supply chain. The interviewee gave an example of a rail bridge that controls marine traffic to oil terminals, which are the source of most of the petroleum products for the region; the impact of vessel wakes and unusually large tidal movements related to climate change would all have an impact on the structural condition of the rail bridge, which could further be affected by a barge or vessel making contact with the bridge structure when passing through. The interviewee also discussed the value of including vessel mooring within the scope of critical infrastructure because when large vessels are moored to the terminals, wire ropes from the vessel are hooked on to bollards and bitts on the dock structure; bollards and bitts are rated for a certain ‘Safe Working Load’, but if the dock structure itself is in poor condition, it can cause the vessel to break mooring and potentially cause a pollution incident and human injury. The interviewee said that the impact of increasing size of vessels, powerful engines, wind, wave, and sea conditions would all have an impact on the port and associated infrastructure and mentioned impacted stakeholders of terminal owners, cargo owners, local municipalities and first nation communities, all of whom he suggested would provide support to a solution to ongoing condition assessment.

Stakeholder Group #4: Port authority perspective

A. No System-wide Authority willing to Take Charge: One interviewee said there is ‘fragmentation’ in jurisdictions around the world where ports are combination of public and private ownership and suggested that because of the intense competition amongst elements of port infrastructure, collaboration is missing. This interviewee shared a comment from a British Columbia Provincial Cabinet Minister that ‘we made a mistake when we downloaded flood management to BC municipalities because there is no systemwide approach’; the interviewee said that this comment resonated with him, and he thinks it applies to ports in that we made a mistake when we downloaded everything to CPAs and other related partners because there is no system-wide, collaborative approach to investment in and application of innovation. The interviewee said that ‘everyone wants to see digitization happen, but no one feels like they have the authority’.

B. No Technical Barrier Expected: One interviewee believes strongly that the technology has great promise for ports and that the reason for slow/lack of use is only because of other priorities and a busy workforce. The interviewee expected that it is not a budget issue because even through the pandemic, revenue and profits were high and growing, but did recognize that this may not be the case for all ports in Canada. The interviewee thinks that if momentum and awareness can be built, ports will embrace and integrate the technology to the betterment of their condition assessment and asset management.

C. Cooperative Collaboration Desirable: One interviewee expressed a ‘fear that we are talking ourselves into a false sense of security that there’s a collaborative and coordinated approach to port emergency management’ and thinks the Provincial and Federal governments need to incentivize innovation through monetary investment, but demand that in exchange there is collaboration.

4.1 Summary of Findings

Three themes were consistently expressed by interviewees from each of the stakeholder categories when asked for their opinions on the barriers that might explain why Canadian ports have not adopted remote sensing for their critical infrastructure condition assessment. The first theme expressed was that there is no system-wide authority willing to take charge of condition assessment of the interconnected web of critical infrastructure that make up Canadian ports. The second theme expressed was that there are no expected technical barriers to using the technology to assess the condition of port infrastructure. The third theme expressed was a desire for cooperative collaboration between the multiple parties across jurisdictions.

Remote sensing technology using a variety of sensors and platforms, everything from thermal sensors mounted on drones to radar sensors mounted on satellite platforms, is used operationally for all forms of critical infrastructure in Canada and globally – except ports. Why not ports? There appears to be no technical or scientific limitations to the use of remote sensing technology for monitoring port infrastructure. What are the policy and practical barriers that might explain why Canadian ports have not adopted remote sensing for their critical infrastructure condition assessment? Are these barriers surmountable, and if so, what is the next step to overcome these barriers and adopt remote sensing technology operationally to reduce service interruption in the case of an incident?

Interpretation of Theme A: No System-wide Authority willing to Take Charge

The interview results suggest that there is no organization that has the authority to conduct a system-wide assessment of the interconnected and interdependent network of port infrastructure. The interview results suggest that the regulator of marine transportation, Transport Canada, does not have the mandate to coordinate a system-wide approach to assessing infrastructure condition on an ongoing basis even though interviewees acknowledged that holistic situational awareness would increase resilience and efficiency of recovery after an incident, thus reducing service interruption.

The interview results confirm that, beyond managing shipping channels, CPAs do not have the mandate to coordinate system-wide port infrastructure condition assessment and that they are not motivated or incentivized to act outside of their mandate on this topic or for this purpose. An insightful comment by one interviewee was that ‘everyone wants to see digitization happen, but no one feels like they have the authority’ suggests that without system-wide leadership and coordination, advancement in using digital tools that other types of critical infrastructure benefit from is not likely to happen.

The analysis of interview results identified “fragmentation” amongst infrastructure owners in jurisdictions around the world where ports are landlords as the explanation for the lack of collaboration between port elements even though they know they are dependent on one another for their success. The results suggest that the landlord port model encourages intense competition amongst elements of port infrastructure and explains why collaboration is missing.

The interview results indicate a conflict in the understanding of the role of Transport Canada as the agency with authority to lead the effort because they have the responsibility to assess the entire transportation infrastructure network. It is not likely that the Marine Act will be revised to expand Transport Canada’s mandate beyond the transportation waterways to include port infrastructure, and nor does it seem likely based on the interview responses that Transport Canada will take action to lead this effort outside of their mandate.

Interpretation of Theme B: No Technical Barrier Expected

While interview results indicate a range of experience and awareness of the operational use of remote sensing technology by critical infrastructure other than ports, all indicated that the technology has great promise for ports and that the reason for slow or lack of use is due to practical and policy barriers. Furthermore, the interview results suggest that there are no significant budget constraints that would explain the lack of operational use. Interview results indicate excitement about the prospect and that ‘if momentum and awareness can be built, ports will embrace and integrate the technology to the betterment of their condition assessment and asset management’.

Interpretation of Theme C: Cooperative Collaboration Desirable

The interview results suggest that all parties have positive ideas about the opportunity for specific collaborations and cooperation with one expressing ‘fear that we are talking ourselves into a false sense of security that there’s a collaborative and coordinated approach to port emergency management’. Interview results identified several potential groups for collaboration including the National Aeronautical Surveillance Program of Transport Canada, several diverse research groups at the National Research Council, Defence Research and Development Canada, and supply chain participants inside and outside the immediate port infrastructure such as oil terminals, rail bridges, vessel mooring structures, cargo owners, local municipalities and first nation communities.

5.2 Recommendations

Policy barriers stop Canadian port networks from operationally benefiting from remote sensing technology, so system-wide condition assessment of critical port infrastructure does not exist. Without situational awareness of the baseline condition and vulnerabilities of the broad and diverse network of infrastructure, service interruption is likely to be longer after a natural disaster, accident, or security incident. If there was system-wide leadership to coordinate a collaborative approach using digital infrastructure condition assessment, then business continuity efforts following a disruption could seamlessly build on the existing baseline situational awareness. In this case, valuable time would be saved because the system-wide effort could immediately prioritize and address infrastructure deficiency and minimize critical infrastructure service interruption.

A pilot project to build awareness and understanding of the available tools and processes would enable leaders within the CPA infrastructure network to determine the logistical details and human and technical investments required. A suggested pilot project includes the following steps:

One CPA agrees to conduct a pilot project guided by the mission planning and instrumentation expertise of collaborators
National Research Council (NRC) Construction Research Centre and other government research scientists with expertise on remote sensing for infrastructure condition assessment agree to collaborate with the CPA on the pilot project
The CPA prioritizes critical infrastructure within their port network that is within their authority and responsibility to monitor and maintain
Collaborators match sensor and mission specification to the expected failure mechanisms of the prioritized critical infrastructure elements
Collaborators determine data capture requirements, data processing requirements (hardware, software, people, data storage), and data analysis requirements
Collaborators determine the specific requirements for ‘product’ creation that will be useful for port system-wide decision makers so they can integrate results into their condition assessment, business continuity, and emergency planning workflows and processes
Collaborators document pilot project lessons learned, limitations of the technology, benefits of the technology, and recommendations for next steps

5.3 Conclusions

In the 1990s, Canada joined the global trend to shift port administration to a landlord model to encourage the facilitation of trade competitively by increasing private sector involvement. The financial performance reported in CPA annual reports suggest that this change has been a success when measured against the intention to facilitate trade. Analysis of the interview results of this study, however, suggests that it has happened at the expense of collaboration and system-wide approaches to addressing problems that cross jurisdictional boundaries such as natural disasters, aging interdependent infrastructure, and intentional threats.

The results of this study indicate that too much responsibility, but no system-wide authority, has been downloaded to a fragmented group of port infrastructure owners and operators and society will pay the price with unnecessarily long service interruptions in the case of an incident. The recommended next step is a pilot project for system-wide digitization of infrastructure condition assessment via remote sensing to supplement and fill the gaps inherent in traditional visual inspection and engineering judgment. The pilot project will identify the human and technical resources required for operational use of remote sensing for ongoing condition assessment across jurisdictions throughout the port network, which is essential for seamless application in the case of an incident. Leadership is required and the results of this study indicate that it will need to emerge from outside of formal existing mandates based on a motivation and vested interest in improving safety and security of the complex and interconnected system-wide port infrastructure network.

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Ethical Approval

The research involved the use of key informant interviews. Ethics approval for the interviews was granted after review by the Carleton university Research Ethics Board (CUREB).

Competing Interests statement

Dane Rowlands and Maha Abdallah have no competing interests. At the time of the research Heather Holden was employed by a firm that exclusively provides satellite remote sensing services; she is no longer employed at this firm. Though an expansion of the market for remote sensing services could benefit the firm indirectly in the future, the firm was not aware of, and had no input into, the research. Heather Holden did not benefit, nor does she stand to benefit, financially or otherwise as a result of this research.

Authors’ contributions

Heather Holden prepared the research proposal and ethics application, undertook the interviews, and wrote the paper draft. Maha Abdallah and Dane Rowlands reviewed and advised on the proposal, ethics application and supervised the research process. Dane Rowlands edited the paper and prepared it for submission.

Funding

There was no funding to this research. Heather Holden undertook the research as a graduate student at Carleton University, and received financial assistance as a student, but not for the project. Maha Abdallah and Dane Rowlands received no funding specific to this research project.

Availability of data and materials

The research is based on key informant interviews. The interviewees remain anonymous; the interview notes are kept secure and are not available as per the ethics review approval.

Aliyari M, Ashrafi B, Ayele YZ (2022) Hazards identification and risk assessment for UAV–assisted bridge inspections, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering 18: 412–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2020.1858878.
Alshammari L, Mohammed O (2022) Monitoring of the Western Breakwater of Al-Faw Grand Port-South of Iraq using Differential InSAR-ISBAS Technique, Geotechnical Engineering and Sustainable Construction, pp. 229–239.
Ayele YZ, Aliyari M, Griffths D, Droguett EL (2020) Automatic crack segmentation for uav-assisted bridge inspection, Energies (Basel) 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13236250.
Besada JA, Bergesio L, Campaña I, Vaquero-Melchor D, López-Araquistain J, Bernardos AM,
Casar JR (2018) Drone mission definition and implementation for automated infrastructure inspection using airborne sensors, Sensors (Switzerland), 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18041170.
Cao X, Lam JSL (2019) A fast reaction-based port vulnerability assessment: Case of Tianjin Port explosion, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 128: 11–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.05.019.
Chen SL (2009) Port administrative structure change worldwide: Its implication for restructuring port authorities in Taiwan, Transport Reviews 29: 163–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640802260248.
Colomina I, Molina P (2014) Unmanned aerial systems for photogrammetry and remote sensing: A review, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 92: 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2014.02.013.
Cusson D, Rossi C, Ozkan IF (2021) Early warning system for the detection of unexpected bridge displacements from radar satellite data. Journal of Civil Structural Health Monitoring 11: 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-020-00446-9
Duo E, Trembanis AC, Dohner S, Grottoli E, Ciavola P (2018) Local-scale post-event assessments with GPS and UAV-based quick-response surveys: A pilot case from the Emilia-
Romagna (Italy) coast, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 18: 2969–2989. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2969-2018.
Ellingwood BR (2005), Risk-informed condition assessment of civil infrastructure: state of practice and research issues, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 1: 7–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732470412331289341.
Endsley A, Brooks C, Harris D, Ahlborn T, Vaghefi K (2012) Decision support system for integrating remote sensing in bridge condition assessment and preservation, in: Sensors and Smart Structures Technologies for Civil, Mechanical, and Aerospace Systems SPIE, 8345: 1181-1195. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.915640.
Fekete A, Tzavella K, Armas I, Binner J, Garschagen M, Giupponi C, Mojtahed V, Pettita M, Schneiderbauer S, Serre D (2015) Critical data source; Tool or even infrastructure? Challenges of geographic information systems and remote sensing for disaster risk governance, ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 4: 1848–1869. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi4041848.
Feroz A, Dabous S (2021) Uav-based remote sensing applications for bridge condition assessment, Remote Sensing 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13091809.
Gomez C, Purdie H (2016) UAV- based Photogrammetry and Geocomputing for Hazards and Disaster Risk Monitoring – A Review, Geoenvironmental Disasters 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-016-0060-y.
Harris DK, Brooks CN, AhlbornTM (2016) Synthesis of Field Performance of Remote Sensing Strategies for Condition Assessment of In-Service Bridges in Michigan, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 30. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cf.1943-5509.0000844.
Hausamann D, Zirnig W, Schreier G, Strobl P (2005) Monitoring of gas pipelines-a civil UAV application, Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology 77: 352–361.
Hosseini S, Barker K (2016) Modeling infrastructure resilience using Bayesian networks: A case study of inland waterway ports, Computers and Industrial Engineering 93: 252–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2016.01.007.
Hsieh CH, Tai HH, Lee YN (2014) Port vulnerability assessment from the perspective of critical infrastructure interdependency, Maritime Policy and Management 41: 589–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2013.856523.
Ircha MC (2001) Port strategic planning: Canadian port reform, Maritime Policy and Management 28: 1464–5254. http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals.
Jofré‐Briceño C, Muñoz la Rivera F, Atencio E, Herrera RF (2021) Implementation of facility management for port infrastructure through the use of UAVs, photogrammetry and BIM, Sensors 21: 6686 https://doi.org/10.3390/s21196686.
Kerle N, Nex F, Gerke M, Duarte D, Vetrivel A (2019) UAV-based structural damage mapping: A review, ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 9: 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9010014.
Kochersberger K, Kroeger K, Krawiec B, Brewer E, Weber T (2014) Post-disaster remote sensing and sampling via an autonomous helicopter, Journal of Field Robotics 31: 510–521. https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.21502.
Liu J, Liu Y, Ke Y (2020) Detection and analysis of a quay crane surface based on the images captured by a UAV, Remote Sensing Letters 11: 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2019.1686779.
Loh HS, Thai VV (2016) Managing port-related supply chain disruptions (PSCDs): a management model and empirical evidence, Maritime Policy and Management 43: 436–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2015.1107921.
Mac VH, Tran QH, Huh J, Doan NS, Kang C, Han D (2019) Detection of delamination with various width-to-depth ratios in concrete bridge deck using passive IRT: Limits and applicability, Materials 12: 3996. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12233996.
Mutombo K, Ölçer A (2017) Towards port infrastructure adaptation: a global port climate risk analysis, WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs 16: 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-016-0113-9.
Nagasawa R, Mas E, Moya L, Koshimura S (2021) Model-based analysis of multi-UAV path planning for surveying postdisaster building damage, Scientific Reports 11: 18588. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-97804-4.
Neocleous K, Christofe A, Agapiou A, Evagorou E, Themistocleous K, Hadjimitsis D (2016) Digital mapping of corrosion risk in coastal urban areas using remote sensing and structural condition assessment: Case study in Cyprus, Open Geosciences 8: 662–674. https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2016-0063.
Omar T, Nehdi ML (2017) Remote sensing of concrete bridge decks using unmanned aerial vehicle infrared thermography, Automation in Construction 83: 360–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.06.024.
Pereira M, Teodoro AC, Veloso-Gomes F, Lima J, Oliveira S (2016) Port Infrastructure Control (Madeira Island, Portugal) through a Hybrid Monitoring System (GNSS and Accelerometers), Marine Georesources and Geotechnology 34: 617–629. https://doi.org/10.1080/1064119X.2015.1054009
Poling GB (2021) Fixing Southeast Asia’s Remote Sensing Blindpots, Naval War College Review. 74: 1–21.
Politis SS, Zhang Z, Kouchaki S, Caldas CH (2020) Framework for network-level pavement condition assessment using remote sensing data mining, Journal of Applied Remote Sensing 14: 024504 https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jrs.14.024504.
Pulella A, Sica F (2021) Situational awareness of large infrastructures using remote sensing: The rome–fiumicino airport during the COVID-19 lockdown, Remote Sensing 13: 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13020299.
Schweizer EA, Stow DA, Coulter LL (2018) Automating near real-time, post-hazard detection of crack damage to critical infrastructure, Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 84: 75–86. https://doi.org/10.14358/PERS.84.2.75.
Shakhatreh H, Sawalmeh AH, Al-Fuqaha A, Dou Z, Almaita E, Khalil I, Othman NS, Khreishah A, Guizani M (2019) Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs): A Survey on Civil Applications and Key Research Challenges, IEEE Access 7: 48572–48634. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2909530.
Sharma J (ed.) (2019) Applications of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Best Practices and Case Studies. CRC Press.
V. Singhroy V (ed.) (2020) Advances in Remote Sensing for Infrastructure Monitoring. http://www.springer.com/series/10182.
Stow DA, Lippitt CD, Coulter LL, Loerch AC (2018) Towards an end-to-end airborne remote-sensing system for post-hazard assessment of damage to hyper-critical infrastructure: research progress and needs, International Journal of Remote Sensing 39: 1441–1458. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2017.1407052.
Tang G, Hou Z, Claramunt C, Hu X (2020) UAV trajectory planning in a port environment, Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 8: 592. https://doi.org/10.3390/JMSE8080592.
Thekdi SA, Santos JR (2016) Supply Chain Vulnerability Analysis Using Scenario-Based Input-Output Modeling: Application to Port Operations, Risk Analysis 36: 1025–1039. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12473.
Verhoeven P (2010) A review of port authority functions: Towards a renaissance? Maritime Policy and Management 37: 247–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088831003700645.
Walker TR, Bernier M, Blotnicky B, Golden PG, Hoffman E, Janes J, Kader A, Kovacs-Da Costa R, Pettipas S, Vermeulen S (2015) Harbour divestiture in Canada: Implications of changing governance, Marine Policy 62: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.08.018.
Yang CS (2019) Investigating UAVs applications and intention to use in the maritime shipping in Taiwan, Maritime Policy and Management. 46: 982–994. https

Competing interest reported. Dane Rowlands and Maha Abdallah have no competing interests. At the time of the research Heather Holden was employed by a firm that exclusively provides satellite remote sensing services; she is no longer employed at this firm. Though an expansion of the market for remote sensing services could benefit the firm indirectly in the future, the firm was not aware of, and had no input into, the research. Heather Holden did not benefit, nor does she stand to benefit, financially or otherwise as a result of this research.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 08 Jun, 2023

Read the published version in Journal of Transportation Security →

Editorial decision: Major revision
10 May, 2023
Reviews received at journal
05 May, 2023
Reviewers agreed at journal
05 May, 2023
Reviewers invited by journal
03 May, 2023
Editor assigned by journal
03 May, 2023
Submission checks completed at journal
24 Apr, 2023
First submitted to journal
20 Apr, 2023

You are reading this latest preprint version

A study to assess the applicability of using remote sensing to minimize service interruption of Canadian port infrastructure

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Remote Sensing Of Infrastructure

3.0 Methodology

4.0 Results

5.0 Discussion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1