Content uploaded by Adam Widera
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Adam Widera on Oct 12, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
© AET 2016 and contributors 1
ASSESSMENT OF LOGISTICS AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
TOOL SUITES FOR CRISIS MANAGEMENT
SandraDetzer,GabyGurczik
GermanAerospaceCenter(DLR)
AdamWidera
UniversityofMünster(WWU)
AnnikaNitschke
GermanFederalAgencyforTechnicalRelief(THW)
1. INTRODUCTION
In the last years Europe was troubled by several (natural) disasters, which
seem to become more frequent and causing more damage. For example, in
June 2013, extraordinary flood extremes occurred in the German river basins
caused by continuous rainfall over several days. The major rivers and its
tributaries of Southern and Eastern Germany reached their banks and flooded
adjacent areas. Most affected rivers were Danube and Elbe, but also
numerous other waters in the states of Bavaria, Baden-Wuerttemberg,
Saxony, Thuringia, Brandenburg, Lower Saxony and Hesse. The
consequences were spacious floods, population evacuations of enormous
proportions and great damage i.e. to the transport infrastructure. These and
other flood disasters in Germany as well as in whole Europe have shown that
tens of thousands of emergency forces (e.g. police, fire and rescue services)
are needed to assist the affected areas. The mere fact that the services (e.g.
more than 8.000 emergency services of the German Federal Agency for
Technical Relief (THW) solely along the Elbe during the flood in 2013) have to
be coordinated, hosted and catered calls for logistics excellence.
In a crisis situation, the transportation system is a crucial infrastructure and of
outstanding importance for the mobility and the supply of the population.
Anyhow, the transportation system often collapses first in an event of crisis
(e.g. natural disaster). This in turn has an impact on professional responders
who depend on functioning and reliable transportation infrastructures in order
to reach the corresponding action places, to ensure evacuation and to provide
the affected population as well as the emergency services with goods and
services.
Within the framework of the EU project “Driving Innovation in Crisis
Management for European Resilience” (DRIVER) emerging solutions for
© AET 2016 and contributors 2
professional responders are evaluated in three key areas: civil society
resilience, responder coordination as well as training and learning. One of the
aims of the project is to create an evaluation framework by means of
developing test-bed infrastructure and methodology to test and evaluate novel
solutions in order to improve the coordination of the response effort. In this
context, a joined experiment between the DLR, the University of Münster
(WWU) and the THW was carried out. The purpose of that experiment was to
explore a logistics and a traffic management tool suite developed by DLR and
WWU. The tool suites provide relevant information for crisis managers to cope
challenges within the logistics and transport chain during the planning and
response phase in the crisis management cycle. The experiment was about
modelling and simulating several setups which occur normally during a flood
in order to validate the performance of first responder operations with or
without the support of the tool suites and to gather feedback on the solutions.
Therefore, research questions were formulated on the ability of the solutions
to support the practitioners work as well as on their potential to improve the
operation process.
Each solution brought its specific contribution and benefit from possible
interworking on different levels. The provided systems exchanged information
directly between each other and the output supported professional logisticians
in taking informed decisions.
Beside the challenges posed by increasing examples of extreme weather
conditions in the context of logistics and traffic management, a description of
the experiment and the tool suites used in the experiment is included in the
paper. Within the paper, we will deal with two assumptions: first, the provided
tools lead to time savings in the fulfilment of the tasks in a crisis situation, and
second, the usage of the tools facilitates the execution of the tasks.
The experiment was done by a table top exercise where a series of simulated
use cases performed by THW volunteers provided insights in improvement
potentials by analysis of current logistics and traffic situation as well as by
simulating the transport of resources. For the experiment a simplified network
and relief operation was modelled and performed in the experiment to reduce
complexity. The combination of one specific crisis scenario (flood in the city of
Magdeburg), the network of one relief organization (THW) and the supply of
different types of (relief) goods and services (sandbags, food, volunteer units)
was used to test several configurations, like effects of prepositioning or
different transportation modes. The whole relief chain from procurement up to
© AET 2016 and contributors 3
the distribution in the last mile was depicted. The experiment was conducted
in a training academy of THW in Germany.
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European
Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under Grant
Agreement n°607798.
2. GENERAL OVERVIEW
Crisis situations like Europe-wide power failure, floods or earthquakes can
have devastating effects and can affect large areas. They require numerous
safeguards to protect people, buildings and infrastructures. Also chemical
accidents, fires or incidents at major events place enormous challenges on
the involved organisations.
Existing projects offer a variety of solutions most of which deal with the
provision of relevant information for private users or for organisations and
operators in charge of highly specialised use cases. In this context, the
objective of the demonstration project SECUR-ED (SECUR-ED 2014), for
example, was to provide a set of tools to improve urban transport security,
especially at European big-city train stations. Almost simultaneously, the
project PROTECTRAIL (PROTECTRAIL 2014) addressed the security issues
associated to the mainline rail system. According to the security aspect,
threats ranging from daily crime and anti-social behaviour, such as group
violence, vandalism and graffiti, to serious crime using arms and firearms, as
well as terrorist activities involving explosives or toxic materials were in the
focus of both projects.
Moreover, current solutions differ very much on their operating range within
the crisis management cycle (cf. Figure 1). In the literature different definitions
of the emergency management process exist (Steenbruggen et al. 2012).
According to the CRISMA Catalogue (CRISMA 2015) the disaster
management is mainly defined by four phases: Mitigation (in the EU often
replaced by Prevention), Preparedness, Response and Recovery.
© AET 2016 and contributors
4
Figure1:Crisismanagementcycle(accordingtoCRISMA2015)
Mostly, the Preparedness and Response phases are of particular interest for
R&D. For example, the project ELITE (ELITE 2014) aimed to establish a web-
based ‘living document’ for knowledge gathering, categorisation, analysis and
evaluation. The intention was post-crisis lessons learning and use of this
learning in practice to define the need of a Community of Practice (CoP) for
crisis response. In contrast, the CRISMA project (CRISMA 2015) developed a
simulation-based decision support system for modelling crisis management to
improve action and preparedness. The CRISMA System facilitates simulation
and modelling of realistic crisis scenarios, possible response actions and the
impacts of crisis depending on both the external factors driving the crisis
development and the various actions of the crisis management team. Another
project in the context of Preparedness is FORTRESS (FORTRESS 2015).
Given the increasing interdependencies between different infrastructural
sectors and between different countries, FORTRESS aims to improve crisis
management practices by identifying the diversity of cascading effects due to
the multiple interrelations of systems and systems of systems and by
designing an incident evolution tool that will assist in forecasting potential
cascading effects. Within the Response crisis management phase, projects
such as KOKOS (KOKOS 2015) invent methods, technical concepts and IT
tools to involve the active participation of the general public for self-help
activities and communities integrated in processes of authorities. To enable
the interoperability between first responders and police authorities during
crisis situations or disasters, the project SECTOR (SECTOR 2015) aims at
establishing a secure European common information space (CIS). The CIS
should give continuous and shared access to all necessary data and
information, besides the use of collaboration process models to support
coordination and cooperation between the organisations.
Response
Recovery
Mitigation/
Prevention
Preparedness
Crisis
© AET 2016 and contributors 5
Nevertheless, the following aspects are neglected in all those projects
especially with regard to crisis response:
Tools for tasking and resource management,
Demand and needs assessment,
Capability and capacity mapping,
Analysing current logistics and traffic situations,
Providing real time information,
Infrastructure assessment,
Forecasting potential bottlenecks,
Tools for effective route planning.
Therefore, the DRIVER experiment “Transport & Logistics Management” aims
to highlight and illustrate the benefits of a logistics and traffic management
tool suite that provides relevant information for crisis managers to cope
challenges within the logistics chain during the planning (preparedness) and
response phase. In order to achieve this objective three different topic areas
operated together within the experiment: Logistics, Traffic Management as
well as Satellite and Airborne Imaging.
3. TOOL SUITES
Within the experiment three different tool-suite solutions were used, validated
and demonstrated – a fourth one (U-Fly/3K) was involved to gather airborne
imagery information, but is no tool being used by first responders themselves
and therefore not evaluated and listed below:
HumLog,
KeepOperational,
ZKI-Tool.
In Figure 2 the interaction between these tools in connection to the
experiment design is depicted. Thus, ZKI extracts crisis information from
satellite and aerial imagery (e.g. flood layers, flood impacts) and provides 2-D
and interactive 3-D cartographic solutions (map products and video
animations) for the first responders in order to optimize situational awareness,
support damage and needs assessment and to facilitate decision making
processes. Moreover, the extracted crisis situation information is directly
shared with KeepOperational. If airborne imagery (provided by the tool U-
Fly/3k) of the affected area is collected in advance of the experiment, the
imageries and extracted traffic as well as crisis information can be forwarded
to KeepOperational. KeepOperational uses the provided information of the
© AET 2016 and contributors 6
airborne imagery, the input from ZKI tools as well as traffic data information
from other sources to provide for example route options for emergency
vehicles by considering current traffic situation and infrastructure or a traffic
prediction done by simulation. The gathered traffic and routing information can
be shared with the logistics support tool HumLog which provides a
multimethod simulation environment to evaluate different scenarios and
network settings (e.g. material flow calculation, procurement analysis,
scheduling, bottleneck analysis, cascading effects). In the following sections
the three tool suites will be introduced (cf. SECTION 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3).
Figure2:ExperimentDesign
3.1 HUMLOG
The HumLog solution developed by the University of Münster comprises three
components: HumLog[em], HumLogBSC and HumLogSim.. HumLog[em] is a
meta-modeling tool used to model humanitarian supply chain processes,
including the actions in logical and sequential order, as well as important
information and data for such activities. It contains a humanitarian logistics
reference model developed with over 30 humanitarian organizations (Blecken
2010; Widera and Hellingrath 2011a). HumLogBSC is a balanced score card
approach for the performance measurement of humanitarian supply chain
processes and hence influenced the design of the simulation model in
HumLogSim (Widera and Hellingrath 2011b; Widera and Hellingrath 2016).
HumLogSim is a simulation environment allowing a multi-method (discrete
event, agent based, system dynamics) simulation.
Within the experiment, HumLog was used for the modelling, simulation and
analysis of the network structure and the logistics processes of the relief
© AET 2016 and contributors 7
chain. As a result, the simulation model contained organization specific
process models (HumLogEM) and key performance indicators (HumLogBSC)
for the particular organization. The logistics performance of the network within
the experimented case was then analysed with the simulation tool
HumLogSIM.
3.2 KEEPOPERATIONAL
KeepOperational is a web-portal developed by the German Aerospace Center
(DLR). With KeepOperational the current traffic situation is visualized by
usage of different traffic sources. The traffic data can be used as basis to
simulate and predict traffic and to support the decision process for traffic
management actions (e.g. routing) in case of an incident. KeepOperational
also involves SUMO – a microscopic and open source road traffic simulation.
Within the experiment, KeepOperational provided transport and traffic
information for emergency services, e.g. current traffic situation, routing
advice, traffic prediction, scenario modelling, presentation of the timely
reachability in dependency of the current traffic situation or display of aerial
images derived from the DLR Institute of Flight Guidance.
3.3 ZKI-TOOL
The Center for Satellite Based Crisis Information (ZKI) presents a service of
the German Remotes Sensing Data Center (DFD) at DLR. It provides a 24/7
service for the rapid provision, processing and analysis of satellite imagery
during natural and environmental disasters, for humanitarian relief activities
and civil security issues worldwide.
Within the experiment, it provided flood impact information, e.g. water masks
or affected infrastructures derived from aerial and satellite imagery.
Furthermore, it is used to generate input data for the traffic management and
logistics support tool suites as well as the provision of 3-D visualization and
GeoPDF which allows first responders to perform own measurements (e.g.
measurements of required length of embankments during floods).
4. EXPERIMENT
The aim of experiment has been the highlighting and illustration of the benefits
of a logistics and traffic management tool suite that supply relevant
information for crisis managers. Specifically, the considered solution involves:
© AET 2016 and contributors 8
a logistics framework (HumLog) that will assist decision makers in
identifying and reacting coherently to future and emerging threats and
crisis situations, including the elaboration of recommendation actions to
logistics stakeholders and public entities,
a transport management tool that will assist decision makers in
managing efficiently the required rescue logistics and the nearby traffic
flow even under extreme conditions, thereby enabling emergency
services to rapidly reach the locations where they are needed,
the demonstration of the usability and added value of the tools provided
for end users (emergency services).
A pre-defined set of all in all five goals was established:
Goal#1: Testing and demonstrating tool functionalities,
Goal#2: Testing of interoperability of the tools,
Goal#3: Measurement of tool performance,
Goal#4: Preparation for upcoming experiments,
Goal#5: Identification of gaps (lessons learned).
The EXPE44 was conducted on THW’s platform in Neuhausen (Germany)
with 19 participants (including 11 volunteers from THW) from 07th to 09th
March 2016. The premises near Stuttgart are one of two training academies
that THW runs in order to train and educate its full time and volunteer staff.
4.1 EXPERIMENT DESIGN
The experiment design was based on THW volunteers completing several
tasks to validate and evaluate the provided solutions for transport and logistics
support during a crisis.
The underlying hypotheses behind the experiment were:
Hypothesis #1: The demonstrated set of solutions would lead to
increased effectiveness of the relief operation during a crisis situation.
Hypothesis #2: The demonstrated set of solutions would facilitate crisis
managers the completion of tasks.
To answer these hypotheses, the experiment was conducted in form of a table
top exercise based on a simulated realistic crisis scenario (Elbe flood from
2013 in Germany; cf. SECTION 4.2).
During the experiment, feedback from observations, questionnaires and
discussions have been collected to get both qualitative and quantitative data.
© AET 2016 and contributors 9
In this connection, qualitative data describes the participating THW volunteers’
feedback and thoughts concerning the usability of the provided solutions.
Therefore, the debriefing questionnaire and comments from the discussions
are considered as qualitative data. Quantitative data such as logistics data
quality, routing quality and processing times to handle the different tasks were
used in conjunction with the qualitative data to assess the experiment
objectives.
The following assessment methods and techniques were used:
1. Time Measurement
2. Flash Feedback
3. Feedback from discussions
4. Observation
5. Data logging
6. Two tailor-made questionnaires (One questionnaire directly after the
experiment, one questionnaire three months after the experiment)
Some data were recorded using electronic devices, whereas the
questionnaire is a paper-and-pencil instrument. Some analyses were
qualitative or purely descriptive, but quantitative statistical analyses using well
established methods were performed as well. The inputs to the analyses were
the logged experiment data (e.g. processing times), the observation results as
well as the questionnaire and flash feedback responses. Given the scope and
the design of the trials with only a small sample size and therefore reduced
statistical power, most analyses were descriptive or were using non-
parametric tests.
The first questionnaire was semi-structured. Some questions were open
questions with a text box or Likert-Scale and some questions implied closed
questions. The questionnaire was handed out after the experiment execution.
The questions relate to the solutions and not to the whole experiment. All 10
THW participants answered the questions under the perspective of their role.
Hence, we received four completed questionnaires from the tool group
perspective, four completed questionnaires from the control group perspective
and two completed questionnaires from the control centre perspective.
The second questionnaire was send to the volunteers after three months of
the experiment and focused a final feedback and remarks, which may come
up during the three months. With one exception all questions were open
questions with text boxes.
© AET 2016 and contributors 10
4.2 SCENARIO DESIGN
The scenario was based on a river flooding event in the city of Magdeburg,
capital of the Federal State Sachsen-Anhalt in Germany (cf. Figure 3). After
continuous rainfall over several days the major rivers and its tributaries of
Southern and Eastern Germany have reached their banks and are in danger
of flooding adjacent areas. The city expects the prospect of a major flooding of
large parts of the city area and has started emergency preparations for the
event. The civil protection agency identifies the endangered areas and
affected population as well as the critical infrastructure of the city.
Figure3:DisasterareainMagdeburg
Since the scenario was a purely table top exercises, it was completely
simulation-based. The data used were either archive/recorded data (e.g. THW
network setting, satellite imagery, aerial imagery) or simulated data. A series
of simulated use cases which depended on each other were designed and
subdivided into five inter-related segments. Each segment included sequential
THW related micro-tasks, which occur during a flood on a regular basis: (cf.
Figure 4):
Segment 1: Reporting Office (Set Up)
Segment 2: Transformer Substation (Exploration)
Segment 3: Sandbags (Demand)
Segment 4: Sending units
Segment 5: Supply
© AET 2016 and contributors
11
The tasks addressed different functionalities of the provided tool suites in
order to demonstrate the benefits under changing requirements.
Figure4:ScenarioDesign
For the processing of the scenario the THW volunteers had to solve
coincident the tasks in two different groups: one group (Tool Group) used new
solutions from the DRIVER repository while the other group (Control Group)
tackling the tasks in classical manner. After every segment the execution of
the tasks had been compared to each other in order to:
compare and analyse the results in both working groups,
discuss the benefit and usage of the provided solution to complete the
tasks,
gain feedback,
update all volunteers with the same information to ensure a common
initial position before starting the next segment.
A third group – considered as Control Centre - was always communicating
with the two groups and offered information or ordered tasks.
On commencement of the exercise, a training of the volunteers was carried
out to familiarize the volunteers with the solutions. During the experiment the
volunteers operated the solutions and were assisted by the solution providers.
5. RESULTS
Both quantitative and qualitative analyses indicate that the professional
responders have a great interest in the provided solutions. Moreover, it was
apparent that the THW volunteers see added value in using the tool suites.
In this regard, the results from the quantitative data show on the one hand that
the volunteers see the provided tools as a suitable solution for transport and
logistics demands in crisis management. On the other hand, it was stated that
some improvements have to be implemented with regard to technical and
© AET 2016 and contributors 12
functional aspects to guarantee more reliable and feasible solutions. Although,
the solutions cover relevant demands in crisis management, the volunteers
express that not all features are obligatory worthwhile for THW related tasks
but could be interesting for other professional responders (e.g. police,
firefighters).
It was stated by the practitioners that the proposed solutions are beneficial for
the THW volunteers regarding certain conditions:
performing operation in unknown areas,
performing tasks with considerably calculation effort,
performing nationwide operations,
performing complex tasks with many alternative decision choices.
Besides, the volunteers declared that the solutions provide the base for
decision making, because they allow fast allocation of alternatives.
In contrast, restrictions due to the end use were expressed. Here, it was
stated that the usage of the provided solutions makes only sense at the level
“management and communication”. During the experiment it was noticed, that
the usage of the solutions below this level is not necessarily helpful for the
volunteers since tool operators are not available for other activities.
At the beginning, it was noticed that the tool group compared to the control
group needed more time to complete the given tasks. Especially in performing
easy and common tasks they are used to. Main reasons for the time delay
were that the volunteers were not familiar enough in operating the solutions
and due to system crashes. Normally, the volunteers are solely using
telephones or GoogleMaps if internet connection is available. Therefore, they
needed more time for solving the tasks at the beginning. With the ongoing
experiment, they became more confident with the features. However, the tool
allowed the volunteers to find routings with lower travel times and shorter
route length combined with a higher reliability due to exact and up-to-date
flooding masks as well as different traffic data sources. All in all, it was
obvious that the more complex the tasks were, the easier it was for the
volunteer group to handle the tools in order to complete the assigned tasks.
The same results eventuated by the qualitative data analysis. The THW
volunteers stated in the flashing light that they were more effective with the
tools if they would be used to them.
The results from the qualitative data approved the results from the quantitative
analysis. The professional responders declared a potential for the transport
© AET 2016 and contributors 13
and logistics support tools. All respondents would use them in real crisis
management scenarios.
Particular focus was put on the evaluation of tool handling which refers to
qualitative aspects such as “usability” and “suitability”. The international
standard, ISO 9241-11, provides guidance on usability and defines it as: The
extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified
goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of
use. This definition translates into the following questions:
Effectiveness: Can users complete tasks, achieve goals with the
product, i.e. do what they want to do?
Efficiency (often measured in time): How much effort do users require
to do this?
Satisfaction: what do users think about the products ease of use?
Thus, to evaluate the effectiveness the volunteers were asked whether they
could manage the tasks more easily with the proposed solutions (HumLog &
KeepOperational). All four volunteers in the Tool Group clearly answered that
question for both tool-suites with “yes”. Although they had some problems in
using the provided tool due to their lack of knowledge with the handling.
The efficiency was enquired by the following two questions:
Would you say that you could finish the tasks faster with the help of the
provided solution? (HumLog & KeepOperational)
Was a faster situation awareness possible? (KeepOperational)
Again, all four volunteers answered both questions clearly with “yes” for both
tool-suites. However, some volunteers named system crashes as restriction
as well as the assumption that the features might be more effective in case of
usage in foreign environment or at long distances.
The results’ regarding satisfaction (cf. Figure 5) differs between the proposed
solutions. The operating of HumLog was not seen as easy and the use was
assessed between good and partly. The use of ZKI-Products and
KeepOperational were evaluated between very good and good. This
difference in the usability is justified by the fact that HumLog is intended to be
used by dedicated system operators or supply chain planners on tactical level.
© AET 2016 and contributors
14
Figure5:ValidationofUsability
The suitability and relevance was seen for all solutions. But it has to be
mentioned, that the level of suitability/relevance differs between the features
of the provided solutions. The suitability can be defined as the quality of
having the properties that are right for a specific purpose. To find out, how
suitable the volunteers assess the provided features in the process of crisis
management, they were asked the following questions within the
questionnaire:
From your perspective, would the provided features in KeepOperational
be helpful in crisis management?
Should software, like KeepOperational, be instituted in crisis
management?
Should software, like HumLogSim, be instituted in crisis management?
Could you imagine to reuse the ZKI product in real CM scenarios to
support the situation assessment and operation planning?
Mainly all volunteers (Tool Group, Control Group, Control Centre) answered
the questions again with “yes” with a small restriction due to the availability of
internet connection. The reason for the gap in the number of questionnaire is
that not all ten volunteers answered the questions (cf. Figure 6).
Figure6:ValidationofSuitability
© AET 2016 and contributors
15
In addition, we asked for some specified expressions for KeepOperational,
HumLog and ZKI to get a more precise answer. Although, the solutions cover
relevant demands in crisis management, the volunteers express that not all
features are obligatory worthwhile for THW related tasks but could be
interesting for other professional responders (e.g. police, firefighters, etc.).
The validation of the tool features can be seen in Figure 7. For the ZKI Tool
mainly the GeoPDF product was used in the experiment and seen as helpful
(Figure 7c). But for the future the volunteers can also imagine to use the other
two ZKI products as well. For KeepOperational, Figure 7a sketches that
“isochrones” and “my places” were not so interesting for the THW volunteer’s
related tasks. This was also stated in the oral feedbacks. Figure 7b shows the
validation of the HumLog features related to the given planning tasks. It can
be seen that they assist crisis managers in their work. Especially the routing
and illustration of the routes by the solution were very helpful to increase the
situational awareness.
Figure7:ValidationofToolFeatures(a:KeepOperational;b:HumLog;c:ZKIproducts)
Main remarks of the volunteers were that they would prefer to use a mobile
application instead of a laptop during the operation and that one common user
interface where all tool functionalities are combined and connected to each
other (including automatic database matching) should exist in real operation.
Furthermore, the handling of the solutions should be easy and the data have
to be topical, be reliable and always available, also under bad weather
conditions.
6. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PROSPECTS
The experiment showed that the provided solutions are a suitable solution for
transport and logistics demands in crisis management. However, some
improvements regarding technical and functional aspects are required to
provide and guarantee more reliable and feasible information. All in all, the
usage of the solutions can lead to an improved operation process regarding
time saving and ease of use. Nevertheless, two main criteria must be met
© AET 2016 and contributors 16
according to the experiment results in order to state the solutions as useful
tools in crisis management:
1. The solutions are only useful in certain situations e.g. rural area,
nationwide operations and a wide range of available (routing)
alternatives. If and which impact the solutions might have in other
areas, especially in comparison to already used tools, cannot be stated
based on the experiment results.
2. For an efficient usage of the solutions, experienced solution operators
and standardised operating procedures are needed.
In sum, it can be stated, that the proposed solutions can generate an added
value in CM in certain situations. For future experiments the solutions can be
utilized alone or in combination. Furthermore, the solutions are adaptable to
any kind of changes (e.g. other crisis situations like forest fire). A combination
of all solutions is very appealing, because three areas could be covered:
situational awareness, logistics and transport.
© AET 2016 and contributors 17
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Project SECUR-ED (2014) Secured Urban Transportation – A European
Demonstration, project period: 2011 – 2014, available online:
http://www.secur-ed.eu/ (accessed on 04.04.2016).
Project PROTECTRAIL (2014) The Railway-Industry Partnership for
Integrated Security of Rail Transport, project period: 2010 – 2014, available
online: http://www.protectrail.eu/ (accessed on 04.04.2016).
Project CRISMA (2015) Modelling crisis management for improved action and
preparedness, project period 2012 – 2015, available online:
http://www.crismaproject.eu/ and for final results
http://www.crismaproject.eu/CRISMAbook.htm (accessed on 04.04.2016).
Project ELITE (2014) Elicit to Learn crucial post-crisis lessons, project period:
2013 – 2014, available online: http://www.elite-eu.org/index.html (accessed on
04.04.2016).
Project FORTRESS (2016) Foresight Tools for Responding to cascading
effects in a crisis, project period: 2014 – 2017, available online: http://fortress-
project.eu/ (accessed on 04.04.2016).
Project KOKOS (2016) Unterstützung der Kooperation mit freiwilligen Helfern
in komplexen Schadenslagen (KOKOS), project period: 2015 – 2018,
available online: http://kokos.wineme.fb5.uni-siegen.de/ (accessed on
04.04.2016).
Project SECTOR (2014) Secure European Common Information Space for the
Interoperability of First Responders and Police Authorities, project start: 2014,
available online: http://www.fp7-sector.eu/ (accessed on 04.04.2016).
Project RETISS (2013) Real Time Security Management System.
Erfahrungen und Anwendungsempfehlungen, project period: 2010 – 2013,
available online: http://www.bast.de/RETISS/DE/Downlad/ (accessed on
04.04.2016).
Römer, H.; Kiefl, R.; Henkel, F. ; Cao, W.; Nippold, R.; Kurz, F.; Kippnich, U.
(2016) Using airborne remote sensing to increase situational awareness in
civil protection and humanitarian relief - the importance of user involvement,
ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial
Information Sciences (accepted article).
Widera, A., and Hellingrath, B. (2013) From Process Analysis to Performance
Management in Humanitarian Logistics, in: Hellingrath, B., Link, D., & Widera,
© AET 2016 and contributors 18
A. (Eds.), Managing Humanitarian Supply Chains: Strategies, Practices and
Research (1st ed., pp. 244–264). Literature Series: Vol. Economics and
Logistics. Bremen/Germany: DVV Media Group GmbH.
Center for Satellite Based Crisis Information (ZKI) (2016) About the Center for
Satellite Based Crisis Information (ZKI), available online:
https://www.zki.dlr.de/mission (accessed on: 24.03.2016).
Steenbruggen, J., Nijkamp, P., Smits, J.M., Mohabir, G. (2012) Traffic Incident
and Disaster Management in the Netherlands: Challenges and obstacles in
information sharing, in: Networks and Communication Studies, NETCOM, Vol.
26 (2012), n°3-4, pp. 169 – 200.
Blecken, Alexander (2010): Humanitarian Logistics. Modelling Supply Chain
Processes of Humanitarian Organisations. 1. Aufl. Bern: Haupt (Schriftenreihe
Logistik der Kühne-Stiftung, 18).
Widera, Adam; Hellingrath, Bernd (2011a): Improving Humanitarian Logistics -
Towards a Tool-based Process Modeling Approach. In Björn Asdecker
Alexander Dobhan Sabine Haas Jonas Wiese Eric Sucky (Ed.):
Logistikmanagement. Herausforderungen, Chancen und Lösungen, II. LM 11
Bamberg. Bamberg. Bamberg: Univ. of Bamberg Press 2011, pp. 273–295.
Widera, Adam; Hellingrath, Bernd (2011b): Performance Measurement
Systems for Humanitarian Logistics. In NOFOMA (Ed.): Proceedings of the
23rd Annual NOFOMA Conference. Logistics and Supply Chain Management
in a High North perspective. 23rd Annual NOFOMA Conference. Harstad,
Norway, June 9-10, 2011. Nordic Logistics Research Network (NOFOMA), pp.
1327–1342.
Widera, Adam; Hellingrath, Bernd (2016): Making Performance Measurement
Working in Humanitarian Logistics: The case of an IT-supported Balanced
Scorecard. In: Haavisto, I. et al (eds) Supply Chain Management for
Humanitarians: Tools for Practice. Kogan Page, pp. 339-352.
