P cific M ritim Tr nsport S st ms H rd Exposur T chnic l Not Administered by HEALTHY OCEANS HEALTHY ECONOMIES HEALTHY COMMUNITES 1 © 2023 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: World Bank. 2023. Pacific Maritime Transport Systems: Hazard Exposure Technical Note. World Bank, Washington, DC. © World Bank. Contents Abbreviations................................................................................................................................ 4 Introduction................................................................................................................................... 5 Overview of Pacific Ports’Exposure to Natural Hazards and Climate Change................. 6 Mapping Pacific Islands’ Current Exposure to Hazards......................................................... 7 a) Tropical Cyclones ...................................................................................................................................... 8 ............................................................................................................................. 10 b) Regional Storm Waves. c) Coastal Flooding......................................................................................................................................... 11 d) Tsunami........................................................................................................................................................ 12 e) Earthquakes............................................................................................................................................... 12 f) Volcanic Hazards....................................................................................................................................... 13 Sea Level Rise (SLR).................................................................................................................................. 14 g) Identifying Where the Greatest Hazards Lie—a Hazard Heat Map for the Pacific........... 16 Current Status of Infrastructure Upgrades in Pacific Ports................................................. 18 Port Master Planning to Future-proof Pacific Ports............................................................... 22 Conclusion and Recommendations............................................................................................ 25 References..................................................................................................................................... 26 Appendix A: Calculating Tropical Cyclone Wave Heights...................................................... 29 Appendix B: Natural Hazard Risk Analysis.............................................................................. 30 Appendix C: A General Framework for Principles of Asset Management, adapted from ISO 55000:2014(E)............................................................................................................. 35 Appendix D: Climate Change and Natural Hazards Guideline for Ports in PICs................ 37 Abbreviations ADB Asian Development Bank CMIP6 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 GDP Gross domestic product GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery g Gravitational acceleration ha Hectare IBTrACS International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change MIH Maximum inundation height PGA Peak ground acceleration PIC/s Pacific Island country/countries PNG Papua New Guinea RP Return period s seconds SLR Sea level rise SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission SPC Pacific Community SSHWS Saffir–Simpson hurricane wind scale SSP Shared socioeconomic pathway TC Tropical Cyclone TEU Twenty-foot equivalent unit (for containers) VEI Volcanic explosive intensity VHL Volcanic hazard level All dollar amounts are US dollars unless otherwise indicated. 4 Introduction This Technical Note supplements the overarching regional report “A Blue Transformation for Pacific Maritime Transport” (World Bank, 2022). It provides more detail on, and analysis of, natural hazards in the Pacific affecting port infrastructure and operations. While natural hazards are a major issue for all Pacific Island states and dependencies, this Technical Note looks particularly at the experiences of 12 World Bank member countries, referred to collectively as the “PIC12 countries”. These are the Melanesian countries of Papua New Guinea (PNG), Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and Fiji; the Polynesian countries of Samoa, Tonga, and Tuvalu; and the Micronesian countries of the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI), the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Palau, Kiribati, and Nauru. This Note aims to assist technical specialists, client country teams, and donors, to identify needs and priorities for more detailed, site-specific risk studies. These risk studies will form the basis of port master planning, project design, asset management, and capital upgrade projects, as appropriate, to increase resilience in ports to the impacts of natural hazards. This Technical Note has six sections, as follows: » Overview: a brief summary of why Pacific ports are particularly exposed to natural hazards. » Mapping Pacific Islands’ Current Exposure to Hazards: descriptions of the seven natural hazards facing Pacific Island countries (PICs), and maps showing where in the Pacific their main impacts are felt. » Identifying Where the Greatest Hazards Lie—a Hazard Heat Map for the Pacific: quantitative and qualitative measures of the hazard intensities are summarized for primary and hub ports, with general observations and conclusions. » Current Status of Infrastructure Upgrades in Pacific Ports: a summary of work, both completed and planned, in each of the PIC12 primary ports, between 2007 and 2022. » Port Master Planning to Future-proof Pacific Ports: a brief outline of port master planning, strategic asset management and risk analysis, and principles of asset management for port infrastructure.1 » Conclusions and Recommendations. 1 Further information is provided in the appendices, including examples of modern methods of natural hazard risk analysis in the Pacific, mainly coastal impact studies that easily translate to ports, but including two specific port examples. Note that the information in this report is based on publicly accessible datasets to quantify natural hazards at a regional level and in the wider areas around the ports of interest. 5 Overview of Pacific Ports’ Exposure to Natural Hazards and Climate Change Pacific Island countries (PICs) are among the world’s most exposed and vulnerable countries to natural disasters. They are exposed to a range of natural hazards including tropical cyclones, regional storms, coastal flooding, earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions. Climate change is expected to exacerbate these risks, particularly the impacts of sea level rise (SLR), more variable weather patterns, and the changed intensity and frequency of extreme events, such as storm surges and tropical cyclones. The result will be an increase in the number of multi-hazard events the PICs will face. For example, coastal flooding caused by SLR will be exacerbated when severe events that raise water levels occur at the same time—such as storm surges, king tides, cyclones, and high swells. Pacific ports are typically located on open coasts, at or near sea level. Maritime infrastructure is often not constructed with climate-resilient standards and is often poorly maintained, in part because of the cost. In addition, decision-makers may not have access to information about how to adequately plan for and manage the risks and impacts of natural hazards and climate change on maritime transport systems. These factors combine into wide-ranging impacts—following disasters, maritime operations and systems have limited ability to bounce back, largely due to a lack of contingency and business continuity planning, and a general shortfall of government capacity in building maritime sector resilience. Alongside social and environmental costs, the financial cost of damages and losses from natural disasters are huge. For example, maritime asset damage in Samoa in 2012, following Tropical Cyclone Evan, was estimated to equal 4.63 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). Table 1 provides a summary of the costs of several recent natural disasters in PIC12 countries. Given this, improving PICs’ ability to access robust sectoral and spatial data and tools that help Governments better plan for and manage natural hazard and climate change risks must be a first step in all future maritime transport system planning and asset management. Table 1: Maritime asset damages and losses from recent natural disasters in PICs Maritime Maritime Total Combined Maritime Asset Asset Natural Asset Losses Damages/Losses Damage as Country Year Damages Disaster Event Proportion of GDP (USD million) (USD million) (%) (USD million) Samoa 2009 Earthquake 6.73 2.40 9.13 1.57 Fiji 2012 TC Evan 0.18 0.06 0.24 0.01 Samoa 2012 TC Evan 26.0 9.20 35.20 4.63 Vanuatu 2015 TC Pam 0.37 10.08 10.45 1.36 Fiji 2016 TC Winston 8.34 0.02 8.36 0.17 Tonga 2018 TC Gita 0.57 0.21 0.78 0.16 Source: GFDRR, Post Disaster Needs Assessments.1 2 https://www.gfdrr.org/en/post-disaster-needs-assessments 6 Mapping Pacific Islands’ Current Exposure to Hazards Much work is underway to identify the possible future impacts of climate change and natural hazards to enable PICs to build their resilience. An important first step is to understand their current exposure. This section looks at seven significant hazards in the Pacific region and quantifies their impacts on the PIC12 countries—not all are vulnerable to the same hazards, or in the same ways. Figure 1 shows a high-level view of how the hazards differentially impact the PIC12 primary ports. This is derived from the analysis of each hazard (sections a–g) and the scale of its impact on each country—the latter is collated into the heat map in Table 2. In Figure 1, ports exposed to multiple or severe hazards are marked with a hazard icon. Of the seven hazards, the three most common in the Pacific are tropical cyclones, swell waves from regional storms, and earthquakes. Figure 1: The most severe Natural Hazards affecting PIC12 primary and hub ports Northern Mariana HIGHER COMBINED Islands (U.S) HAZARDS Cyclone Wave REPUBLIC OF THE Manila Guam (U.S.) MARSHALL ISLANDS Regional Storm Wave Coastal Flooding PHILIPPINES NORTH PACIFIC Tomil Tsunami Koror Weno Majuro Earthquake Davao Pohnpei OCEAN Ngerulmud Palikir Volcanic Hazard FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA Okat PALAU Betio Howland (U.S.) London Kauditan Tarawa Baker(U.S.) Jarvis Aiwo (U.S.) PAPUA NEW Yaren GUINEA NAURU INDONESIA K I R I B A T I Lae SOLOMON Dili TUVALU ISLANDS Funafuti Tokelau Motukea Noro (N.Z.) TIM OR- L ES T E Port Honiara SAMOA Moresby Wallis-et-Futuna Apia (Fr.) Luganville Cook Is. American (N.Z.) Samoa (U.S.) PA Port Vila Lautoka AUSTRALIA VANUATU Suva Niue French Polynesia (N.Z.) (Fr.) New FIJI Nuku’alofa OCEAN Caledonia PORTS (Fr.) NATIONAL CAPITAL TONGA MAIN TOWN OR PORTS INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES Source: World Bank, 2022. 7 a) Tropical Cyclones Tropical cyclones (called “typhoons” in the North Pacific and parts of Asia, and “hurricanes” elsewhere in the world) are low-pressure vortex wind systems that form over warm tropical waters. The intensity of tropical cyclones is often categorized using the Saffir–Simpson hurricane wind scale (SSHWS), the scale being ordinal values in the range 1 to 5 according to the one-minute-average maximum sustained winds at 10 meters above the ground or ocean surface.3 Cyclone intensity typically varies over time as the low-pressure vortex system migrates. Tropical cyclones bring strong winds, heavy rainfall, wind-generated waves, a local rise in sea levels due to low air pressure, and storm surge where wide expanses of land are present. Figure 2: Tropical cyclone tracks for the 50-year period 1972–2022 according to their SSHWS category Legend Tropical Cyclone Tracks: 1972-2022 Source: World Bank, 2022. Sea Port TD Cat-3 TS Cat-4 Cat-1 Cat-5 Cat-2 Tropical cyclone track data in Figure 2 has been taken from the International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship (IBTrACS) database (Knapp et al., 2010). Tracks and associated SSHWS values are plotted for the 50-year period 1972–2022. Figure 3 shows values of gust speed (Vmax = maximum 3-second gust windspeed) for a 50-year return period (RP), taken from the GFDRR GeoNode database4 which, in turn, has been calculated from the IBTrACS database as described in the GeoNode database abstract. Although gust speeds affect above ground structures, cyclone wind-generated waves can have a major impact on port infrastructure and coastlines. To quantify this, cyclone generated maximum significant wave heights have been calculated using the effective fetch method of Young (1988) for a standardized cyclone with 30 km radius to maximum wind speed and a 6 m/s (21.6 km/h) forward speed. The methodology and formulae used are summarized in Appendix A. Resultant maximum significant wave heights with a 50-year RP are shown in Figure 4. Figures 2–3 show that, of the PIC12 countries, ports in Fiji, FSM, Palau, Samoa, Tonga, Vanuatu, and Honiara port in the Solomon Islands face the greatest exposure to tropical cyclone winds. However, some ports are sheltered by surrounding land or atoll reefs, so limiting the distance or fetch length over which waves can be generated by winds. From our analysis summarized in Table 2 and shown in Figure 4, the ports most exposed to tropical cyclone wind-generated waves are Suva and Lautoka in Fiji, Apia in Samoa, Nuku’alofa in Tonga, and Luganville in Vanuatu. 3 Sustained maximum wind speed for each category of tropical cyclone is: category 1: 119–153 km/h; category 2: 154–177 km/h; category 3: 178–208 km/h; category 4: 209–251 km/h; and category 5: ≥ 252 km/h. 4 https://www.geonode-gfdrrlab.org/layers/hazard:viento_mundo_tr50_int1 8 Figure 3: Tropical cyclone peak gust speeds for 50-year RP Legend Cyclone Peak Gust Speed (km/h) Source: World Bank, 2022. Sea Port 0-50 201-250 51-100 251-300 101-150 301-351 151-200 Figure 4: Tropical cyclone wind-generated maximum significant wave height Legend Tropical Cyclone wind-generated maximum significant wave height (m) Source: World Bank, 2022. for 50-year RP. Sea Port 0,00-1,00 5,01-7,50 12,51-15,0 1,01-2,50 7,51-10.0 15,1-17,50 2,51-5,00 10,01-12,5 17,51-20,70 Please note a phenomena disruption in the anti-meridian zone. This is generated due to data limitations (e.g. quality, density, scale) between Western and Eastern Hemispheres. This limitation did not influence the analytics presented in the report. 9 b) Regional Storm Waves Regional storm wave heights are the 99 percentile significant wave heights interpolated from Trenham et al. (2013) using global wind-wave models. The wave heights for the Pacific region are shown in Figure 5. These waves come from local trade wind-generated seas, swell waves generated in both the northern and southern hemisphere extra-tropical storm belts, and episodic tropical cyclone events.5 From Trenham et al. (2013): “The relative fraction of each of these components depends on location. Islands located on or north of the equator have wave fields dominated by the north-easterly trades and the northern Pacific generated swell, although islands located further eastwards (e.g., Hawaii) also experience southern-ocean swell. Islands located south of the equator have wave fields dominated by the south-easterly trades. Southern Pacific generated swell is also a major contributor to the wave climate in areas which are not sheltered by other islands (Hemer et al., 2011)”. Figure 5: Regional storm wave heights using global wind-wave models Legend 99 Percentile Regional Wave Heights (m) 0.2-0.5 2.01-2.50 4.01-4.50 Sea Port 0.51-1.0 2.51-300 4.51-5.00 1.01-1.50 3.01-3.50 5.01-5.50 1.51-200 3.51-4.00 5.51-6.00 Source: World Bank, 2022. Data are the 99 percentile significant wave heights interpolated from Trenham et al. (2013). Swell waves penetrate the low-latitude or doldrum areas where tropical cyclones waves are largely absent. Swell waves often have long wave periods, 12–20 seconds, which runup on the land further than short-period local storm waves, causing overtopping and flooding even during locally fine weather conditions, especially when combined with high or king tides. Of the PIC12 countries, Lautoka in Fiji, Weno in FSM, Apia in Samoa, Nuku’alofa in Tonga, and Luganville in Vanuatu face the greatest exposure to regional storm waves. However, from Table 2 it can be seen that several other ports have an exposure to regional storm waves rated as medium severity, so still significant. In all cases, the local impacts of such waves at the wharf sites can only be assessed through site specific analysis. 5 Tropical cyclone waves will not typically be resolved well at the scale of analysis done by Trenham et al. (2013), so the majority of the 99 percentile waves will come from larger-scale wind fields and therefore be trade wind-generated waves and far-field swell waves. 10 c) Coastal Flooding “Coastal flooding” means flooding heights from the global flooding dataset for storm surge and extreme sea levels, including tides, for a 50-year RP from the GFDRR Global Muis RF 50 dataset6 (calculated following Muis et al., 2016). Figure 6: Coastal flooding in metres for a 50-year RP Legend Coastal Flooding (Meters) Sea Port 0.00-0.50 2.51-500 Source: World Bank, 2022. 0.51-1.50 5.01-9.71 1.51-2.50 Some components of the coastal flooding hazard are predictable and readily quantified—for example, tidal fluctuations and El Niño- and La Niña-related ocean level fluctuations. However, their impacts will become increasingly more of an issue with SLR. Other aspects of coastal flooding caused by inverse barometric rise of water level,7 and storm surge, are linked to the presence of tropical cyclones and regional storms. Wave runup and overtopping may add to the impact of coastal flooding and is best quantified through site-specific analysis and modelling. Figure 6 shows that all PIC12 countries face some exposure to coastal flooding; however, it is most significant for Motukea in PNG and Suva in Fiji. From Table 2, exposure to coastal flooding falls into the medium risk category at a further 11 port sites. 6 https://www.geonode-gfdrrlab.org/layers/hazard:ss_muis_rp0050m 7 Inverse barometric rise of water level is the phenomenon of reciprocal rise in water level in response to atmospheric pressure drop associated with tropical cyclones and regional storms. 11 d) Tsunami Tsunami maximum inundation height (MIH) for a 50-year RP comes from the GFDRR Global Tsunami Hazard GTM RP50 dataset.8 The basis of the analysis is given in the GeoNode database abstract. Tsunamis are a series of waves generated by displacement of the seabed during an earthquake or volcanic eruption, or large landslides into the ocean or from below the ocean. Tsunami waves may be generated locally or from far away. MIH is defined as the largest elevation the tsunami reaches above still water level. The period of the tsunami waves may range from 5 to 90 minutes. Due to the long wave periods, individual waves can runup long distances over land, reaching hundreds of metres from the shoreline with considerable velocity and momentum. Forecast MIH values are shown in Figure 7. The highest figures are in areas of greater seismic activity along the edges of the tectonic plates. Figure 7: Tsunami Maximum Inundation Height (MIH) for a 50-year RP Legend Tsunami Runup Height, 50 year RP Sea Port 0.1-0.50 2.01-2.50 Source: World Bank, 2022. 0.51-1.00 2.51-300 1.01-1.50 3.01-3.50 1.51-200 The greatest threat from tsunami is seen in PNG and the Solomon Islands (Figure 7). Although MIH values are comparatively low in atoll countries, such as the RMI, Tuvalu, and Kiribati, it should still be considered because of their low ground elevations. In practice, the MIH at a port site may be heavily modified and attenuated by local topography and bathymetry. Therefore, local impacts need to be assessed through site-specific analysis. e) Earthquakes Earthquakes are quantified as the peak ground acceleration (PGA) in cm/s2 for a 250-year RP (the lowest RP for which data is given).9 The basis of the data, which comes from a combination of historic data and modelling, is given in the GeoNode abstract. Values of PGA are shown in Figure 8 in which it can be seen that higher values are clustered along tectonic plate edges and areas of volcanic activity. The PGA values will be representative for bedrock. Ground acceleration experienced locally by structures may be higher depending on local geology and foundation conditions. 8 https://www.geonode-gfdrrlab.org/layers/hazard:ts_mih_rp50 9 https://www.geonode-gfdrrlab.org/layers/hazard:gar17pga250. For reference, standard gravitational acceleration, g, is 981 cm/s2. Earthquake accelerations are often expressed as a ratio to the gravitational acceleration (for example, PGA = 500 cm/s2 0.51g). 12 Figure 8: Earthquake peak ground acceleration (PGA) in cm/s2 for a 250-year RP Legend Earthquake PGA 250 (cm/s2) Sea Port 0.1-25 100.1-250 Source: World Bank, 2022. 25.01-50 250.1-520 50.01-100 The greatest exposure to earthquakes is seen in Port Vila, Vanuatu (Figure 8 and Table 2). However, Suva in Fiji, Luganville in Vanuatu, and Nuku’alofa in Tonga also have a medium risk exposure to earthquakes. Earthquakes may affect port structures (including wharfs, revetments, and retaining walls), subsoils, and foundations. Most Pacific countries have a building code which should be applied, even if the codes simply refer to the New Zealand structures loading standard (NZS 1170.5) with local values of ground acceleration and other properties specified. Ports built on reclaimed land may be vulnerable to liquefaction and ground settlement depending on how well the reclaimed materials were compacted. As for all hazards, having disaster response plans in place will allow a port to manage and recover better after an earthquake. f) Volcanic Hazards Volcanic hazards involve pyroclastic ejecta and flows, lahars, lava flows, ashfall, gases, and debris avalanches. A volcanic hazard level (VHL) is assigned to an area within a 100 km radius of the volcano.10 VHL is a qualitative rating based on volcano location, maximum volcanic explosive intensity (VEI), and dates of previous eruptions. VHL measures the potential severity of a volcanic event but does not indicate probability. This dataset does not include data for hazards from volcanic ash, although impacts from ash can be severe and are implied within the impact radius. The VHL for the PIC12 countries is shown in Figure 9. The results of the VHL analysis are generic, and actual impacts may vary locally due to topography, volcanic vent geometry, and prevailing winds. 10 https://www.geonode-gfdrrlab.org/layers/hazard:volc_globalproximalhazard_wgs84 13 Figure 9: Volcanic Hazard Levels covering a 200 km radius from active volcanic vents Legend Volcanic Hazard Level Sea Port Very Low Medium Source: World Bank, 2022. Low High For the PIC12 countries, volcanic eruptions can potentially cause large disruption. For example, the sub vents Tavurvur and Vulcan on Rabaul volcano, New Britain Island, PNG, erupted in 1994, destroying Rabaul airport and covering most of Rabaul town with heavy ashfall.11 Rabaul Port was significantly disrupted and the provincial center was moved to Kokopo. Fortunately, most primary ports in the Pacific do not have a high risk to volcanic activity. Those with the highest volcanic threat—Luganville in Vanuatu, and Honiara and Noro in the Solomon Islands—may consider designing future structures to cope with ashfall loads and having well-rehearsed disaster response plans in place in the event of a volcanic disaster. These would be subject to more site-specific assessment. g) Sea Level Rise (SLR) SLR, measured in meters, is an effect caused by global warming, forecast with a high degree of certainty, with estimates varying depending on the temperature change scenario assumed. Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) integrate different sets of population, economic growth, and other socioeconomic assumptions into future emissions scenarios. The SSP terminology and approach is being adopted in Phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6), which is the basis of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) forecasts. SSP 5–8.5 represents a medium to high emission scenario.12 Values of SLR for SSP 5–8.5 by 2050 are presented in Figure 10.13 11 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabaul_caldera 12 The SSP8.5 scenario is like the previously used Representative Concentration Pathways RCP8.5 scenario, though it features around 20 percent higher CO2 emissions by the end of the century and lower emissions of other greenhouse gases. 13 https://sealevel.nasa.gov/ipcc-ar6-sea-level-projection-tool 14 Figure 10: SLR for scenario SSP 5–8.5 by 2050 Legend Sea level Rise by 2050 (meters) Source: World Bank, 2022. Sea Port 0.120-0.150 0.281-0.320 0.151-0.180 0.321-0.350 0.181-0.210 0.351-0.390 0.211-0.240 0.391-0.420 0.241-0.280 0.421-0.460 SLR is a common hazard for all PIC12 countries. The amount of SLR varies with geographical location and local tectonic plate movements, which may lead to higher, or lesser amounts of SLR compared to the regional trend.14 The effects of SLR combined with wave effects has the potential to severely affect most ports long term. As sea levels rise, the frequency of what would be considered a present-day high king tide also increases. For example, from a recent study done for Majuro (RMI), a further 0.33 metre rise in sea level (relative to 2010–19) would result in 50 percent of all high tides being above what is presently considered a king tide (compared to 10 percent at present), with just over a 0.8 metre rise resulting in every high tide being the equivalent of a present-day king tide. “Nuisance” inundation events, either directly due to high tides, or in combination with waves, will occur more frequently and result in more significant damage and disruption (Ramsay, 2021). Similar conclusions apply to most port sites. The impacts for each will depend on the degree to which future SLR has been accommodated in designs setting wharf, building foundation, and ground levels, and structure loads. 14 Islands very close to active plate boundaries can experience vertical movements from earthquakes larger than decadal changes in absolute sea level (for example, Vanuatu and Tonga: see Ballu et al., 2011). 15 Identifying Where the Greatest Hazards Lie—a Hazard Heat Map for the Pacific The information used to develop the hazard maps in Figures 2–10 has been used to create a “heat map” (Table 2). This uses color coding to show how exposed to hazards the PIC12 countries and their primary ports are. Values quantifying the hazards have been extracted from the hazard maps for each port site (Figures 2–10). Sites with the highest hazard values, and combinations of hazards, are listed at the top of the heat map. Table 2: Heat map of hazards showing values interpolated from Figures 2 to 10 Inund. Height (m) Coastal Flooding Speed (km/h) (2) Wave Height (m) Wave Height (m) Volcanic Hazard Regional Storm SLR (SSP5-8.5, T/Cyclone Gust Port Category Tsunami Max. Conditions (1) 2050 (m) (9) Wave Fetch Earthquake PGA (g) (7) T/Cyclone Level (8) Country (m) (5) Port (6) (3) (4) Tonga Nukuálofa Primary Open 178 9.1 4.1 1.3 1.5 0.27 Medium 0.27 Vanuatu Luganville Primary Open 141 6.7 3.3 1.5 1.8 0.30 High 0.24 Primary & Samoa Apia Open 159 7.9 3.0 1.5 1.1 0.09 Low 0.31 Hub Primary & Fiji Suva Open 136 6.4 2.7 2.0 1.3 0.28 Low 0.26 Higher Hazard Exposure Hub Fiji Lautoka Primary Open 135 6.3 4.0 0.6 0.9 0.10 0.25 Limited by Solomon Primary & Honiara Central 116 3.2 2.2 0.8 1.7 0.19 High 0.22 Islands Hub Province Islands FSM Weno Primary Open 88 3.5 3.2 1.5 0.8 0.24 Solomon Semi- Noro Primary 91 2.8 2.2 0.6 1.5 0.19 High 0.22 Islands enclosed Vanuatu Port Vila Primary Sheltered 140 0.7 2.2 1.0 1.6 0.43 Low 0.25 Lower Hazard Exposure Primary & Semi- PNG Motukea 79 1.0 2.5 2.5 2.9 0.05 Low 0.22 Hub enclosed Majuro Limited RMI (i.e Delap Primary 90 1.7 2.7 1.2 0.9 0.27 by lagoon Dock) Limited Tuvalu Funafuti Primary 87 1.2 3.0 1.4 1.1 0.11 0.25 by lagoon Nauru Aiwo Primary Open 1 0.0 2.5 1.4 1.0 0.25 Semi- Palau Koror Primary 157 1.1 2.2 0.9 1.1 0.03 0.25 enclosed FSM Pohnpei Primary Enclosed 188 1.0 2.7 1.8 1.0 0.27 FSM Okat Primary Enclosed 152 0.7 2.6 1.7 0.9 0.25 Primary & PNG Lae Open 38 1.1 2.2 1.3 0.9 0.17 Low 0.22 Hub Semi- FSM Tomil Primary 127 0.7 2.7 1.7 0.8 0.25 enclosed Kiribati Betio Primary Open 24 0.6 1.3 1.4 1.0 0.25 Colour Legend: High Medium Low Very Low Not applicable Source: World Bank, 2022. 16 Table 2 shows that natural hazards affect all PICs to varying degrees. The five ports with the greatest exposure to multiple hazards are: Nuku’alofa in Tonga; Luganville in Vanuatu; Apia in Samoa; and Suva and Lautoka in Fiji. However, as can be seen, other ports are also exposed to at least one significant hazard. Table 2 does not convey risk or the consequences of natural hazards. The impact of natural hazards also depends on the nature of each port site and the surrounding land. For example, the ports in atoll countries, such as Tuvalu, RMI, Nauru, and Kiribati, have very low-lying surrounding land areas making them highly susceptible to wave induced and general flooding, especially with SLR. Drawing on the heat map information in Table 2, general observations and conclusions are: » The most severe winds are generated by tropical cyclones. The intensity of such winds varies with location but is not a critical issue for countries that fall within the doldrum belt. Severe winds may affect port operations temporarily, but their effects on buildings and structures can be addressed through assessment and, where necessary, retrofitted improvements (that is, local upgrade programs). » Regional [swell] waves generated from regional storms and/or tropical cyclone generated waves, are a common hazard to all PICs. Waves can interrupt operations, but, more critically, may cause flooding due to wave runup and overtopping, and erosion, with long-term impacts. The degree of potential wave-induced effects depends on the exposure of the port and whether the port infrastructure has been upgraded in the past decade, perhaps as a gateway port, to cater for such effects. However, combined with SLR, wave events and their effects, rare in the past, will become common within the next half decade. Wave hazards combined with SLR have the potential to make some ports unviable without adaptation. SLR of 0.5 m might be regarded as the tipping point for a port to remain operational without interventions, such as infrastructure upgrades and land raising. » Tsunamis have the potential to affect most ports although effects will vary enormously depending on local bathymetry and topography. Although tsunami impacts can be severe, swell, and tropical cyclone wave effects combined with SLR, will generally pose a greater risk. Tsunami risks may be mitigated through good disaster response and recovery planning. » Earthquakes are severe in some countries and may critically affect port infrastructure. The effects of earthquakes can be addressed, after assessment, through structural upgrading where applicable, combined with disaster response planning. In a few cases, especially if the port is built on reclaimed land, ground conditions may necessitate retrofitted improvements if liquefaction effects are assessed to be critical. » The Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, and Tonga are exposed to volcanic hazards with high or medium severity ratings. However, only three ports across these countries are at high risk, of which one (Honiara) is a gateway port. The effect of a volcanic eruption can be catastrophic with long-term impacts. » SLR is a common hazard for all locations and will increase general and wave-induced flooding over time. Although heights of SLR vary between sites, the differences are not that material to warrant ranking in Table 2. 17 Current Status of Infrastructure Upgrades in Pacific Ports Over the past 20 years, work has been done to try and improve the efficiency, resilience, and safety of infrastructure in primary and hub ports in the PIC12 countries. It is important to understand what work has been done in this area in order to understand ports which may need further work in this space. Table 3 provides a snapshot of the current status of studies and/or upgrade projects in various ports, some more recent than others. Future work to build the resilience of Pacific ports will build on this foundation. The icons used in Figure 1 to show ports facing the most severe hazards are used to also identify those locations in Table 3. Table 3: Status of port infrastructure upgrades in PIC ports Int’l Container Transshipment/ Population served Port Volume per International Hub (=100% population Status/key characteristics/comments annum (TEUs) (>5% throughput) of country) 15 2016: Construction completed of new 240-meter (m) international wharf and 11.5 hectare (ha) terminal area at Lae for containers and general cargoes—separate to the old port area. Lae Port, PNG 2017: Private foreign terminal operator 155,000 Yes (Hub port) took over the new terminal under a 25-year concession contract. 2022: Planning underway for additional expansion of wharf length to accommodate longer vessels and strengthening to accommodate permanent quay cranes. 9,119,000 2015: PNG Ports Corporation (state-owned enterprise) acquired Motukea Port from private developers. 2017: A foreign private terminal operator took over the new terminal for 25 years under a concession contract. Motukea Port, 68,000 No PNG (Hub port) 2021: Rectification works began on the international container terminal pavement. 2022: 30-year development planning began for staged expansion to domestic and international wharves and expansion of terminal hardstand areas. 2021 Figures from World Bank (https://datatopics.worldbank.org/world-development-indicators/) for 2021; RMI data is from the revised 15 2021 census. 18 Int’l Container Transshipment/ Population served Port Volume per International Hub (=100% population Status/key characteristics/comments annum (TEUs) (>5% throughput) of country) 2007: International wharf and deck strengthening and expansion completed. 2013: A foreign private terminal operator took Suva Port, Fiji over the rehabilitated terminal for 15 years 115,000 Yes (Hub port) under a concession contract. 2019: Assessment of Suva international port relocation began—study ongoing as of June 2022. 902,900 2007: International wharf and deck strengthening and expansion completed. 2013: A foreign private terminal operator took over the rehabilitated terminal for 15 years under a concession contract. Lautoka Port, 65,000 No Fiji (Hub port) 2019: Warehouse demolished to increase open on-wharf storage as recommended in the 2017 Fiji Ports’ masterplan. 2022: Plans to expand domestic harbor and re- site shipyard. 2017: Port Vila Lapetasi—new location and construction of international wharf and terminal Port Vila, development project completed. 21,000 No Vanuatu 2018: New terminal concession contract with a private Vanuatu firm for 50 years. 314,500 2017: Luganville international wharf and terminal redevelopment completed. Included rehabilitation and lengthening of international Port Luganville, wharf and cruise passenger building. 7,000 No Vanuatu 2018: A 25-year concession contract with a private Vanuatu firm to operate the wharf and terminal. 2018: Apia international wharf extension, hardstand repairs, and expansion of yard completed. 2019: Feasibility assessment to extend the breakwater and enlarge the harbor area for safer navigation and berthing of international Apia Port, ships began. 40,000 No 200,100 Samoa 2021: Samoan Government confirmed it would not pursue the proposed international port relocation to Vaiusu Bay. 2021: Breakwater extensions, wharf repairs, and shed upgrades under construction (ADB financed). 19 Int’l Container Transshipment/ Population served Port Volume per International Hub (=100% population Status/key characteristics/comments annum (TEUs) (>5% throughput) of country) 2016: Second international wharf and expansion to terminal yard area completed. 2018: Various upgrades to port buildings, security, terminal lighting, and other Honiara Port, superstructure completed. Solomon 32,000 No Islands (Hub port) 2020: Planning began to review development of an off-dock terminal at main industrial site, as proposed in 2012 port development plan. 704,000 2021: Concession loan executed with ADB to upgrade the old wharf at Honiara Port.16 2012: Private development at fisheries port, with new private wharf for tuna boats. Noro Port, 2016: Feasibility planning for development of Solomon 6,000 No public port site and international port. Islands 2021: Concept planning began for international port site, to expand wharf and pave terminal area. and improve roads. 2015: Concept planning began for development of all FSM international ports. 2021: Needs Assessment Concept Options for Pohnpei, Weno, upgrades at Pohnpei, Weno, Tomil and Okat Tomil and Okat 7,500 No 116,300 Ports through the World Bank-financed FSM Ports; FSM Maritime Investment Project (FSMIP) 2023: Planned appointment of engineering firm for detailed designs of upgrades at Pohnpei, Weno, Tomil and Okat Ports through FSMIP 2014: International port development completed new wharf and increased terminal yard area. Betio Port, 2021: International fuel storage tanks and 5,000 No 121,400 Kiribati pipework completed. 2022: Need for assessment of upgrades for creating improved international port facilities. The ADB financed project (No. 53421-001) will also support the construction of new reinforced concrete pile wharves in Kirakira 16 (Makira-Uluwa Province) and Ahanga (Renell-Bellona Province) 20 Int’l Container Transshipment/ Population served Port Volume per International Hub (=100% population Status/key characteristics/comments annum (TEUs) (>5% throughput) of country) 2021: Needs Assessment Concept Options for upgrades at Delap and Uliga Docks in Majuro through the World Bank-financed Marshall Majuro Port, Islands Maritime Investment Project (MIMIP) 12,000 No 43,000 RMI 2023: Planned appointment of detailed design engineers for Delap and Uliga Dock upgrades through MIMIP. 2017: Concept planning—detailed design and engineering works underway for new wharves Aiwo Port, and port terminal (ADB). 3,800 No 10,900 Nauru 2022: Development is progressing. Koror Port, 2022: Need for assessment of upgrades for 5,600 No 18,200 Palau creating improved international port facilities. 2018: Feasibility for expansion and upgrades to international port and terminal areas. Nuku’alofa 32,000 No 106,800 Port, Tonga 2022: Detailed design underway to upgrade wharves and terminal yard area (ADB). 2009: Upgraded international wharf and port terminal completed. 2023: Works to pave the container yard and Funafuti Port, build additional seawall protection through 1,800 No 11,900 Tuvalu the World Bank-financed Maritime Investment in Climate Resilient Operations Project are expected to commence. However, further demand assessment is required to assess long- term container storage capacity needs. Source: World Bank, 2022. 21 Port Master Planning to Future-proof Pacific Ports Master planning is an approach to dynamic, long-term planning for ports that provides the conceptual design for short- and long-term future developments. Recurrent port master planning is linked to careful design and renewal planning of infrastructure and includes the long-term adaptation and future capacity and capabilities of the port. The many considerations for port master planning include: demand forecasting; adequacy in design; possible revenue sources; location and any land use conflict; implementation; maintenance capability and resources; and resilience to the expected impacts of natural hazards and climate change. Investment decisions need to be carefully assessed to ensure they address both current issues and long-term needs—they need to be fit-for-purpose and realistically scaled to meet expected demand and the changing environment over the 50-year build life of major port infrastructure. Ideally, port master planning occurs at intervals no longer than seven years. This enables the PIC ports to address strategic development priorities and funding estimates well before they become critical needs or impact service capabilities. Port master planning begins with an understanding of: a. National and regional/provincial development policies of the country b. Inland transport infrastructure and planned or anticipated network improvements or expansion c. Existing port capacity and potential for development d. Cargo forecasts for each port. Once a national picture has been developed, a master plan can be drawn up for each port (Tsinker, 2004). Asset Management and Risk Analysis An integral part of port master planning is asset management which enables an organization to realize value from assets to achieve its operational objectives (ISO 55000:2014). Asset management provides a basis for better financial stewardship, and improved outcomes for stakeholders. Understanding and quantifying hazards and risks is another facet of good port governance in which:17 » Risks are quantified by identifying and quantifying hazards and evaluating their impacts and likelihood. » Tolerances are set to determine acceptable levels of risks and considering the balance between potential benefits and drawbacks. » The scope, priorities, and time lines to reduce or manage risks are defined. » Risks are treated by mitigating the impacts of hazards, or preparations are made to respond to their impacts. » The timeliness and effectiveness of mitigation activities by risk owners is monitored and reported. » Changing circumstances are monitored and risk issues are escalated. » Risk issues, actions, and responsibilities are communicated. Stakeholders are consulted to identify new issues and actions as part of a cycle of continuous improvement. Approaches to quantifying natural hazards and risks, and some examples where coastal risk analyses have been applied in the Pacific, are provided in Appendix B. 17 ISO 31000:2009 Risk management - Principles and Guidelines on Implementation. International Standard. 22 Principles of Asset Management for Port Infrastructure Strategic asset management approaches for maritime transport assets in the Pacific should include assessing the need for assets, the level of service needed to deliver the objectives, and every aspect of financial planning and monitoring. The best practices of life cycle asset management should be applied. A general framework for asset management, adapted from ISO 55000:2014, is shown diagrammatically in Appendix C. The principal elements of applied asset management are summarized in Table 4. This begins with developing an asset inventory and undertaking condition assessment to provide a picture of the current state of the port infrastructure. This asset information, combined with a risk assessment and life cycle cost analysis, provides a foundation to develop the port masterplan. Effective asset management needs to consider funding. Planned capital investments, upgrades, and maintenance work should be both necessary and affordable.18 Table 4: Practical elements of applied asset management Element Purpose Data and/or approach Asset inventory To provide a full list of assets owned Asset database (in simple cases, could be an Excel Workbook or database, but or managed by an organization, may be commercial software systems) with details such as: broken down by components, » What (name, purpose, size, capacity, length, materials) in formats that can be used for subsequent review and analysis. » Where (geo-reference, records such as as-built drawings) » Condition (based on rating schemes appropriate to the asset or component) » Expenditures and remaining useful life » Failure history (time, root cause, repair details, materials used) » Inspection history (time, by whom, records). Condition To provide information on assets, and » Structural and hydraulic analysis based on drawings and surveys assessment asset components’ condition, current » Inspection and assessment and future performance, and residual life. » Condition rating against attributes and visual guides. Risk An assessment of the risks » Consequence of failure (may be monetarized or qualitative, such as numbers assessment (consequence × probability) and the of people affected) criticality or importance of an asset » Direct and indirect economic losses or component. » Redundancy and available alternatives » Annual exceedance probability and cumulative probability of the life of the asset » Risk rating. Life-cycle cost To calculate and document the total » Capital or initial investment cost (LCC) analysis cost of an asset (or component) over » Expected or historic preventative or reactive maintenance, repairs, its lifespan. LCC analysis may be rehabilitation costs over the life of the asset, disposal costs used, for example, to optimize trade- offs between capital investment » Optimization of capital versus operating costs based on standards, desired (standards) versus later maintenance levels of service, and available funds. and rehabilitation. Further information on asset management best practice, including manuals, training resources, and forums, can be found at http://www. 18 nams.org.nz/ and http://www.ipwea.org/publications/bookshop. 23 Element Purpose Data and/or approach Operation and Developing and documenting day- » Operating instructions maintenance to-day operating and maintenance » Operating manuals and guidance (reactive, preventative, and predictive requirements. May include maintenance) requirements during natural hazard events (for example, installing » Business continuity and emergency response plans. stoplogs during severe wave action, preventing access to dangerous areas, and clearing moored boats). Rehabilitation To restore an asset to its required » Setting rehabilitation triggers (point at which rehabilitation is justified rather performance standard. Often, this than maintenance) may be after a natural hazard event » Design, drawings, specifications, standards, and required levels of service. (for example, earthquake or tropical cyclone). It may also be in response to changed environmental conditions (for example, sea level rise). Replacement, To replace assets that are no longer » New project selection upgrade, and worth maintaining or rehabilitating. » Business case analysis and approval new asset It is also an opportunity to review the selection need for the assets and, potentially, » Design, drawings, specifications, standards, and required levels of service. invest in new, alternative assets. Source: World Bank, 2022. Based on ISO 55000:2014. Adaptation pathways for SLR and natural hazard impacts should feature in all port masterplans. Atoll countries may be particularly severely affected because they are low lying with limited land available, have no opportunity to retreat or relocate, and expensive land raising/reclamation may be the only viable adaption option available. As for other hazards, volcanic risks may be mitigated through good disaster response and recovery planning. 24 Conclusion and Recommendations For ports and port infrastructure, resilience to the impacts of natural hazards and climate change means they are able to withstand, or quicky recover from, natural hazard events so operations can be restored and disruption to the port and dependent supply chains minimized, at a reasonable cost. Based on recent post-disaster needs assessments (shown previously, in Table 1), maritime asset damage from a single disaster event may be as high as 4.63 percent of GDP. Port master planning and strategic asset management planning, incorporating enterprise risk management approaches, are core elements of good port governance. Key considerations in this work are the consequences of natural hazard events on port operations, including the effects of climate change and SLR. The details in this note aim to assist technical specialists, client country teams, and donors, to identify needs and priorities for more detailed, site-specific risk studies. It is recommended that country gateway ports operate as part of a lifeline chain with facilities (either the whole port or critical elements) that can operate after a major disaster or hazard event, including the impacts of future SLR. It is recommended that all ports have an up-to-date port masterplan (supported by an asset management plan and risk management framework) that takes into consideration the impacts of natural hazards. Accordingly: a. For ports that have been or are in the process of being upgraded: Ensure port master plans and strategic asset management plans, supported by a port-specific strategic risk management framework, are drawn up, or confirm that these are in place and audited for completeness, to be applied by the port owners and operators. The risk management framework should include details of response and recovery plans for residual risks that cannot be avoided or reduced, supported by evidence of operational testing. The responsibility and time frames for actions should be clear where control of operations is divided between the port owners and contractors engaged under concession contracts. b. For ports for which studies or works are planned: Ensure preparation includes comprehensive natural hazard assessments on which to base master plans, asset management plans, risk management frameworks, and designs for risk reduction works. c. For ports where no studies or upgrades are in the pipeline: Undertake comprehensive natural hazard impact assessments, which can be used to develop response and recovery plans, at least, and a basic master plan and risk assessment. The risk assessment will help quantify potential impacts from the exposure to hazards the port faces (with and without treatment). The master plan will also identify upgrade needs with supporting justifications that can be used to scope potential upgrade projects financed by government owners and donors. Internal auditing is an independent, objective assurance activity designed to add value and improve an organization’s operations. It is recommended that port owners commission an internal audit to evaluate their master plans, strategic asset management plans, and disaster response and recovery plans against good practice. It might be useful to undertake such audits across groups of PICs, which would allow inter-port comparisons and benchmarking. 25 References Arin, T. 2017. Economic Analysis, Annex 4 to the Project Appraisal Document, Pacific Resilience Project II under the Pacific Resilience Program, World Bank. Ballu, V., M.-N. Bouin, P. Siméoni, B. P., Crawford, W. C., Calmant, S., Boré, J.-M. Kanas, T. and Pelletier, B., 2011. Comparing the role of absolute sea-level rise and vertical tectonic motions in coastal flooding, Torres Islands (Vanuatu), Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 108 (32), 13019–13022, doi:10.1073/pnas.1102842108. Booij, N., Ris, R.C., Holthuijsen, L.H. 1999. A third-generation wave model for coastal regions: I. Model description and validation. J. Geophysical Research 104, 7649–66. Bosserelle, C., Kruger, J., Movono, M. and Reddy, S. 2015. Wave inundation on the coral coast of Fiji, Proc. Australasian Coasts & Ports Conf., 15–18 September, Auckland, New Zealand. Budiyono, Y., Aerts, J., Brinkman, J., Marfai, M. A., & Ward, P. 2015. Flood risk assessment for delta mega-cities: a case study of Jakarta. Natural Hazards, 389–413, http://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1327–9. Cardno 2017. MetOcean Design Criteria. Nauru Port Development Project (48480-001) PPTA Consultants. Prepared for ADB. Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P., Kobayashi, S., ... & Bechtold, P. 2011. The ERA‐ interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 137 (656), 553–97; doi:10.1002/gj.828. Deltares 2016. Coastal risk assessment for Ebeye. Technical Report 1230829-001-ZKS-0001, Deltares, The Netherlands. Deltares 2021. Coastal vulnerability assessment for Majuro Atoll. Technical Report 11205176-002-ZKS-0002, Deltares, The Netherlands. Egbert, G.D. and Erofeeva, S.Y. 2002. Efficient inverse modelling of barometric ocean tides. J. Atmospheric & Ocean Technology 19, 183–204. EurOtop 2007. Wave overtopping of sea defences and related structures–Assessment manual. Allsop, N. W. H., Pullen, T., Bruce., T.L., van der Meer, J. W., Schüttrumpf, H., and Kortenhaus, A. Available from www.overtopping- manual.com. EurOtop 2016. Manual on wave overtopping of sea defences and related structures. An overtopping manual largely based on European research, but for worldwide application. Van der Meer, J.W., Allsop, N.W.H., Bruce, T., De Rouck, J., Kortenhaus, A., Pullen, T., Schüttrumpf, H., Troch, P. and Zanuttigh, B. Retreived from: www. overtopping-manual.com. Goodwin, P., Haigh, I.D., Rohling, E.J. and Slangen, A. 2017 A new approach to projecting 21st century sea‐level changes and extremes. Earth’s Future 5 (2), 240–53. Gourlay, M.R., 1996. Wave set-up on coral reefs. 2: set-up on reefs with various profiles. Coastal Engineering 28, 17–55. Gourlay, M.R., 1997. Wave set-up on coral reefs: some practical applications. Proc. 13th Australasian Coastal and Ocean Engineering Conference and 6th Australasian Port and Harbour Conference, 7–11September, Christchurch, N.Z, Vol. 2., 959–64. 26 Hallegatte, S., Shah A., Lempert R.J, Brown, C., and Gill. S. 2012. Investment decision making under deep uncertainty – application to climate change. Policy Working Research Paper 6193. World Bank. Harper, B.A., Kepert, J.D. and Ginger, J.D., 2010. Guidelines for converting between various wind averaging periods in tropical cyclone conditions (p. 52). Geneva, Switzerland: WMO. Hemer, M., Katzfey, J. and Hotan, C., 2011. The wind-wave climate of the Pacific Ocean, PASAP final report. Canberra: DCCEE. Hoeke, R.K., McInnes, K.L., O’Grady, J.O., Lipkin, F., & Colberg, F. 2014. High resolution met-ocean modelling for storm surge risk analysis in Apia, Samoa, Technical Report No. 071, Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne, Australia. Hoeke, R.K., McInnes, K.L., O’Grady, J.O. 2015. Wind and wave setup contributions to extreme sea levels at a tropical high island: A stochastic cyclone simulation study for Apia, Samoa. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 3, 1117–35; doi:10.3390/jmse3031117 Holland, G. 2008. A revised hurricane pressure–wind model. Monthly Weather Review 136, 3432–45. Holland, G.J., Belanger, J.I. and Fritz, A. 2010. A revised model for radial profiles of hurricane winds. Monthly Weather Review 138, 4393–401. Hubert, G.D. and McInnes, K.L. 1999. A storm surge inundation model for coastal planning and impact studies. J. Coastal Research 15, 168–85. ISO 55000:2014(E) Asset management – Overview, principles and terminology. International Standard. McInnes, K.L., Walsh, K. J. E., Hoeke, R.K., O’Grady, J. G., Colberg, F., and Hubbert, G.D. 2014. Quantifying storm tide risk in Fiji due to climate variability and change. Global and Planetary Change 116, 115–29; doi:10.1016/j. gloplacha.2014.02.004 Mendez, F.J., Rueda, A., Cagigal, L., and Antolinez, J.A.A. 2017. Preliminary assessment of TC-induced coastal flooding in Fiji. Report prepared for the Fiji Climate Vulnerability Study. Muis, S., Verlaan, M., Winsemius, H.C., Aerts, J.C.J.H., Ward, P.J., 2016. A global reanalysis of storm surge and extreme sea levels. Nat. Commun. 7, 1–11. Paulik, R., Smart, G., Turner, R. and Bind J. 2015. Development of preliminary depth-damage functions for Samoa buildings. Presentation to the 2015 Australasian Natural Hazards Management Conference, RiskScape, NIWA, and GNS, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. Ramsay, D., Stephens, S., Gorman, R., Oldman, I., Bell, R., and Damlamian, H. 2008. Kiribati Adaptation Programme Phase II: Information for climate risk management – sea levels, waves, run-up and overtopping. Report HAM2008-022, National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, Hamilton, New Zealand. Ramsay, D., 2021. Technical note: Underpinning long-term adaptation pathway development in the RMI. Building Resilience in Pacific Atoll Countries Study, Internal Note. World Bank. Ris, R.C., Holthuijsen, L.H., and Booij, N. 1999. A third-generation wave model for coastal regions: 2. Verification. J. Geophysical Research 104, 7667–81. Stockdon, H.F., Holman, R.A., Howd, P.A., and Sallenger, A.H. 2006. Empirical parametrization of setup, swash, and runup. Coastal Engineering 53, 573 – 88; doi:10.1016/j.coastaleng.2005.12.005 27 Trenham, C.E., Hemer M.A., Durrant, T.H. and Greenslade, D.J.M. 2013. PACCSAP wind-wave climate: High resolution wind-wave climate and projections of change in the Pacific region for coastal hazard assessments. Technical Report No. 068, Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne, Australia. Tsinker, G. P., 2004. Port engineering: Planning, construction, maintenance, and security. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey. Van Rijn, L. 2013. Erosion of coastal dunes due to storms. Retrieved from: www.leovanrijn-sediment.com. WACOP, 2014. WACOP wave climate reports. Solomon Islands, Honiara. Secretariat of the Pacific Community. Retrieved from: http://wacop.gsd.spc.int/WaveclimateReports.html. Young, I. R., 1988: Parametric hurricane wave prediction model. J. Waterw. Port Coastal Ocean Eng., 114: 637– 652, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-950X(1988)114:5(637). Zijlema, M., Stelling G. and Smit, P. 2011. SWASH: An operational public domain code for simulating wave fields and rapidly varied flows in coastal waters. Coastal Eng. 58, 992–1012. Zijlema, M. 2012. Modelling wave transformation across a fringing reef using SWASH. Coastal Eng. Proc., 1–12. Retrieved from: https://icce-ojs-tamu.tdl.org/icce/index.php/icce/article/view/6479/pdf_492 28 Appendix A: Calculating Tropical Cyclone Wave Heights The following note describes how to calculate the maximum wave height from tropical cyclones using aspects of the method by Young (1988) and 3-second gust winds. The method involves several approximations in the absence of detailed data on the cyclone tracks, centre pressure, forward cyclone speed over the ground, and radius to maximum winds.19 The steps are as follows: a. Maximum gust wind speeds, V’max, are taken from the https://www.geonode-gfdrrlab.org/layers/ hazard:viento_mundo_tr50_int1 database for each grid point (values in the database are in units of km/h). b. Average or sustained wind speeds at 10-metres above ground or ocean level, Umax’ are calculated from V’max Umax= f in which f = a gust factor taken from Table A-3 of Harper et al. (2010). For practical purposes, assume f= 1.41 over ocean and f = 2.14 over land since most land areas in Pacific countries are either towns/cities or forested areas. c. Ensure all parameters used in subsequent calculations have or are converted to the following units: wind speeds in m/s; distances in m. These parameters were converted from km/h and km, respectively, if necessary. d. Calculate the effective wave fetch, F, for a tropical cyclone (aka hurricane or typhoon) from Young (1988) for a standardized cyclone with a radius to maximum wind speed of R’= 30,000 m and a velocity of forward movement of Vfm= 6 m/s from F = aU2 + bU V + cV2 + dU + eV + f max max fm fm max fm 0 R’ in which a= -2.175×10-3, b= 1.506×10-2, c= -1.223×10-1, d= 2.190×10-1, e=6.737×10-1, and f0=7.980×10-1. e. However, for ports that are sheltered, or where the fetch is limited by land or a reef, a measured maximum fetch distance, taken from Google Earth, was used if less than that calculated above. f. Calculate the maximum significant wave height, H_s, from: gHs gF 1/2 = 0.0016 U2max U2max in which the open or limited fetch distance is used, whichever is smaller (the later applicable at a port site only). 19 These parameters can be obtained or calculated for individual cyclones/hurricanes from the IBTrACS database, which involves a considerable amount of specialised computational analysis. 29 Appendix B: Natural Hazard Risk Analysis Risk may be quantified using: Risk = probability × consequences. Probability means the likelihood of natural hazard events affecting coastal areas. Consequences means the effect of the natural hazards and their impacts on buildings, infrastructure, people, and the environment. Coastal risk analysis means assessing the probability and consequences of coastal hazards, including climate change, on people and infrastructure. Coastal risk management means avoiding, mitigating, accepting, or transferring risk due to effects of natural hazards in port and coastal areas.20 Figure B.1 is a general flow map for assessing risk from tropical cyclones and regional waves and earthquakes at ports. The methodology may also be applied to extreme winds, tsunamis, and volcanic hazards with an appropriate change in terminology and modelling methodology. Figure B.1. Components of a comprehensive wave-impact risk and earthquake-impact risk and economic analysis Wave Impact and Risk Economic Assessment Deep water Wave event Joint level-wave occurrence characterization probabilities models Coastal hazard Run-up, overtopping & effects flooding relationships Facility location/ Flood depth damage elevation/structural relationships characteristics Coastal population Facility occupancy Spatial damage Facility use characteristics characteristic distribution characteristics Repair and Non-monetary loss Loss of use replacement cost models models models Estimated annual Monetary loss affected people distribution (EAAP) Risk reduction Methodology treatments Intermediate result Inventory data Estimated annual damage saved Final result A risk management framework is prescribed in AS/NZS ISO 31000: 2009 Risk Management – Principles and Guidelines. 20 30 Earthquake Impact Risk and Economic Assessment Seismic Seismic event Bedrock motion occurrence characterization estimation models Regional seismic Local site effects hazard model Facility structural Motion-damage characteristics relationships Regional population Facility occupancy Regional damage Facility use characteristics characteristic characteristics characteristics Repair and Non-monetary loss Loss of use replacement cost models models models Non-monetary loss Monetary loss distribution distribution Risk reduction Methodology treatments Intermediate result Inventory data Estimated annual damage saved Final result Source: World Bank, 2022. Methods to calculate each stage may vary in sophistication or involve different assumptions. The approach starts with collecting data on the hazards and hydrodynamic environment, and projecting what may happen in the future. Physics-based modelling and structural analysis quantifies the effects of the various hazards on the shoreline, subsoils, people, buildings, and infrastructure. For wave action, the wave effects and damage on revetments or seawalls can be quantified using wave models and guidance from manuals such as EurOtop.21 Wave induced flooding may be based on empirical methods or sophisticated open-source modelling tools such as XBEACH.22 Wave induced structural effects on buildings might be analyzed by applying simple force-momentum principles. Empirical damage curves due to inundation are available (e.g., Budiyono et al., 2015 and Pistrika et al., 2014), although their application to industrial buildings may require more work and interpretation. Note that wave analysis is just one facet of coastal risk analysis. Other aspects cover tides, storm surge, inundation, and erosion. 21 http://www.overtopping-manual.com/ 22 https://oss.deltares.nl/web/xbeach/ 31 For earthquakes, the capacity of buildings and structures (e.g., warehouses, administration centers, wharfs, cranes and towers) is often assessed as a percentage of the requirements of the applicable building code (i.e., ratio of the failure forces to required code earthquake action forces). A minimum acceptable percentage of the building code may then trigger the need to retrofit, upgrade, or replace the structure. The models may include risk management alternatives, such as mitigation through protection works, new works or retrofit upgrades, or avoidance through building or land use controls. Mitigation measures will also include preparation and response planning and rehearsal in case a major natural hazard event occurs. Preparation and response may be the only practical mitigation option available for certain rare natural hazards such as volcanic eruption. Some good examples of coastal risk analysis are summarized below. Two of these relate specifically to ports; the others were for broader, coastal vulnerability assessments, but the approach remains the same. South Tarawa, Republic of Kiribati Ramsay et al. (2008) summarize one of the earlier toolkits developed for the ocean and lagoon sides of Tarawa, Kiribati. The authors used deep water ocean waves from the NOAA/NCEP Wavewatch-III hindcast dataset to calculate the ocean side wave conditions. Waves inside the lagoon were transformed from deepwater to near the shoreline using the SWAN numerical model (Booij et al., 1999; Ris et al., 1999). Long-term time series of tides and storm surge were calculated from tide gauge records using harmonic analysis. The DHI-MIKE21 modelling system was used to produce synthetic time series of water levels at sites around Tarawa from the tide gauge records, including the effects of wind stress and barometric setup from local meteorological records. Significant wave heights and water levels were calculated at 10%, 2%, and 1% AEP using extreme value analysis.23 Future water levels include SLR over different time periods using the A1B and A1F1 scenarios.24 Water levels and significant wave heights on the reef were calculated using the one-dimensional reef hydrodynamic models of Gourlay (1996, 1997). Wave runup and overtopping rates, calculated at the shoreline following Stockdon et al. (2006) and EurOtop (2007),25 allows for beach slope and revetment structure types. The results of the analysis were combined into an Excel wave calculator, further details of which are available at www.climate.gov.ki/ resources/information-library. Mulinu’u Peninsula, Apia, Samoa Hoeke et al. (2014, 2015) present a storm surge analysis for Mulinu’u Peninsula, Apia, Samoa. The analysis was carried out using nested models. Each model transferred information to the boundaries of the next inner model. Wave climate information was derived from the PACCSAP 30-year Wavewatch-III wave hindcast data (Durrant et al., 2013). Cyclone waves were synthesized following McInnes et al. (2014), and the pressure/wind fields determined using the Holland (2008) vortex hurricane model. The GCOM2D hydrodynamic model was used to simulate the depth-averaged ocean currents and sea levels from tides, wind stress, and atmospheric pressure (Hubert & McInnes, 1999). Tide and storm surge levels were computed from hourly tide gauge data from Apia Harbour covering 1993 to 2013. Generalized Pareto distributions were used to calculate extreme values of water levels with and without cyclone effects. Delft3D was used for all nearshore hydrodynamic modelling. SWAN was used for offshore wave modelling. The SWASH modelling system (Zijlema et al., 2011; Zijlema, 2012) was used to simulate inshore wave transmission, breaking, runup, overtopping, and inland flooding.26 Bathymetry used in the large-scale models came from General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (GEBCO) data on global 30 arc-second grids.27 Inshore bathymetry was based on LiDAR data collected under the PPCR-ECR project, supplemented by multi-beam side-scan sonar data collected by SPC-SOPAC. Flooding calculated for Mulinu’u Peninsula considered various RP wave and water level events, time periods (1990, 2030, 2055, and 2090) and SLR scenarios (B1, A1B, and A2). 23 P = annual exceedance probability (AEP). The annual RP is T = 1/P. 24 SLR for the A1B and A1F1 scenarios are like those for RCP 6.0 and RCP 8.5, respectively. 25 EurOtop (2018, 2nd edn.) is now available. The Mulinu’u Peninsula is fronted by a concrete-capped rock riprap revetment. Wave overtopping wave was implicitly 26 calculated from using the hydrodynamic equations solved in the SWASH model and, therefore, assumes the revetments acts like a weir. 27 www.gebco.net 32 Majuro and Ebeye in the Republic of the Marshall Islands Deltares (2016, 2021) carried out an analysis for Ebeye and Majuro in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Offshore waves were extracted from the ERA-Interim global wave reanalysis for 1979 onwards (Dee et al., 2011). Effects of typhoons were included using a Holland (2010) wind vortex model and typhoon track and central pressure data from the IBTrACS database.28 All typhoons in the region of category 1 or higher were considered. An empirical, exponential decay factor used in the Holland model wind speed profile was modified from the widely used default value. This resulted in a stronger decay in wind speed from the center associated with immature typhoons in the region. Asymmetrical wind fields were assumed allowing for the forward motion of the typhoons. Tides, including ENSO effects, were derived from the global TOPEX/Poseidon database (Egbert & Erofeeva, 2002) combined with measurements at the Kwajalein tide station. Time series of water levels throughout the study area, including storm surge and barometric setup, were generated using the Delft3D hydrodynamic model. Wave time series at the study sites were created using the SWAN model with regional wind data at its boundaries, and wind stress from the modified parametric typhoon model. The XBeach modelling system was used to propagate waves across the reefs to the shoreline and over Ebeye island, including the effects of water levels varying over time and SLR. Bathymetric and topographic level data was obtained by direct survey along transects.29 Extreme value wave and water level combinations representing RPs of 1, 5, 10, 30, and 50 years were considered. Two sea level cases corresponding to the RCP 6.0 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, and three time periods (2030, 2050, and 2100) were used from CSIRO (2014). The effects of wave overtopping and flooding on building, infrastructure, and people, was calculated. Annual expected damage, and numbers of people affected annually was determined by simple economic analysis for various RP events and time horizons. Several flood depth damage curves were considered to calculate damage to buildings, but curves previously used in Samoa (Paulik et al. 2015) were used because they seemed to best represent conditions in Ebeye. Erosion was assessed using DUNERULE model (Van Rijn, 2013). Coastal retreat with SLR was calculating using the Bruun rule. Building information came from the PCRAFI database (PCRAFI, 2015). Cases with and without coastal protection works were considered. The economic analysis included direct and intangible losses (Arin, 2017). Sensitivity of the economic analysis to uncertainty in inputs or assumptions was assessed following Hallegatte et al. (2012). Fiji SPC-SOPAC host wave climate reports for 167 sites in the Pacific, including 66 sites in Fiji, as part of the Changing Waves and Coasts in the Pacific project.30 The data used in the reports is described by Trenham et al. (2013). Each report includes wave direction roses and RP curves for significant wave height. Bosserelle et al. (2015) presents an example of using field data, combined with the XBeach model, to forecast wave runup and wave inundation at Maui Bay on the south coast of Viti Levu, Fiji. The authors conceptually describe a system for forecast inundation by measuring water levels and using model forecast waves to predict inundation levels. McInnes et al. (2014) carried out a storm tide risk assessment for all coastal waters of Fiji. The methods used are the same as those described in Hoeke et al. (2014, 2015). The analysis is limited to extreme-value water levels offshore from tides, storm surges, cyclones, and possible climate change effects. 28 www.ncdc.noaa.gov/ibtracs 29 A Trimble CentrePoint-RTX GPS recorder was used with 10 cm vertical accuracy 30 http://wacop.gsd.spc.int/WaveclimateReports.html 33 Mendez et al. (2017) carried out an assessment of flooding in Fiji caused by tropical cyclones. The analysis allowed for tides, seasonal and interdecadal mean sea level anomalies, storm surge due to barometric effects, wave setup over reefs, and SLR. The tide at Suva was assumed to apply uniformly throughout the Fiji archipelago. Thousands of synthetic cyclone tracks, stochastically the same as those from the IBTrACS database,31 were modelled to calculate cyclone wave and setup effects. Far field waves were obtained from the Globwave database.32 Local waves came from the CAWCR hindcast analysis. Wave setup over the reefs was calculated as 0.2 × offshore significant wave height. SLR scenarios from Goodwin et al. (2017) were used.33 Mendez et al. (2017) provide 100-year RP estimates of total water levels for 300 points along the Fijian coastline. Aiwo Port, Nauru The Government of Nauru is undertaking an ADB financed project to improve the port facilities and operations at Aiwo. The scope of the project includes the construction of a wharf for berthing vessels and a breakwater, a berth pocket, an approach causeway from shore to wharf, demolition and safe removal of existing derelict port buildings and their replacement with new buildings, secure fencing, and a heavy-duty industrial pavement in a container storage yard. The project will also include capacity building and institutional strengthening of the Port Authority of Nauru to enhance the efficiency of port operations, port security, asset management, occupational health and safety, and various reforms including tariff restructuring. A climate risk vulnerability assessment (CRVA) was undertaken in 2016 to 2017 (ADB, 2017). The primary climate-related hazards were SLR, regional wind-generated waves, tidal and current streams, and tsunami. Other hazards, such as earthquake, tropical cyclones wind/waves, intense rainfall, and drought, were negligible for port operations or nonexistent. The wave climate was quantified by historic wave analysis and hydrodynamic computer modelling (Cardno 2017). An unexploded ordinances (UXO) survey was also carried out in relation to potential dredging operations. Many sites in the Pacific were combat zones during World War II, and unexploded ordinances remain a threat, especially in Nauru, Kiribati, RMI, FSM, Solomon Islands, and PNG. Port of Honiara, Solomon Islands Natural hazards including earthquakes, tsunamis, tropical cyclones, coastal erosion, and flooding, were analyzed as part of the investigations to upgrade the main cargo wharf at Honiara port. Earthquakes were analyzed for the period 1905–2019 from the ISC-GEM earthquake catalogue and USGS earthquake catalogue, along with historic records of damage. A separate ground liquefaction and probabilistic seismic hazard assessment was done to quantify impacts on the wharfs and buildings, and to provide a basis for structural design of proposed upgrade works. A local tsunami impact assessment around the port was based on previous work done by the Solomon Islands’ Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management, and Meteorology. Tropical cyclone and regional wave climate data were taken from analysis prepared under the Changing Waves and Coasts of the Pacific project (WACOP, 2014) implemented by the Pacific Community (SPC),34 after adjusting for forecast climate change trends. Storm surge and rainfall was based on analysis by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). Mean sea level and SLR was based on analysis and forecasts by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and BOM. A Climate Change and Natural Hazards Guideline for Ports in PICs (Appendix D) has been developed to help better plan for building resilience of the maritime transport system. 31 Tracks within a 12° radius (≈ 1,300 km) of the mid-point between Viti Levu and Vanua Levu were used. 32 http://globwave.ifremer.fr 33 Goodwin et al. (2017) estimate mean value SLRs of 0.83 m for RCP 4.5 and 1.08 m for RCP 8.5. These figures are a little higher than the ICCP AR5 projections. 34 Pacific Community was previous called the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC); the acronym SPC is still used given its wide use and recognition throughout the Pacific. 34 Appendix C: A General Framework for Principles of Asset Management, adapted from ISO 55000:2014(E) “Value” depends on the organization and its stakeholders and can be tangible or intangible. VALUE ALIGNMENT LEADERSHIP ASSURANCE » Alignment with » Risk-based, » Clear roles, » Connects required organizational information driven, responsibilities purpose and objectives planning and and authorities performance to decision-making organizational » Life-cycle transforming » Employees objectives management organizational aware, approach to objectives into competent, and » Implement processes realize value asset management empowered for assurance across plans all life-cycle stages » Decision-making » Consultation processes » Asset management with » Processes for that reflects approach employees and monitoring stakeholders’ integrated with stakeholders and continual needs and defines finance, HR, about asset improvement value information management » Providing resources systems, logistics, and competent and operations personnel to » Specification, demonstrate design, and assurance, by implementation of undertaking asset supporting asset management management activities and systems operating asset management systems 35 “Strategic asset management” includes the concepts of assessing the need for assets, levels of service to deliver the objectives, and every aspect of financial planning and monitoring. Stakeholder and organization context Organizational plans and organizational objectives Asset management policy Strategic asset management plan (SAMP) and asset management objectives Asset management plans Plans for developing asset management system + relevant support Implement asset management plans Asset management system + relevant support elements Asset portfolio Performance evaluation and improvements 36 Appendix D: Climate Change and Natural Hazards Guideline for Ports in PICs General vulnerability assessment prompts ASSET GROUP GENERAL PROMPTS FOR ALL HAZARDS YES SOMEWHAT NO » Are the aides to navigation, pilotage, mooring buoys and tugboats currently in good condition? Water based » Have these water-based assets been damaged in the past due to this hazard? » Are the buildings and sheds in good condition? » Are physical assets such as cranes, trucks, forklifts, reach stackers, etc. in good condition? » Is the container yard well-maintained and in good condition? Land based » Is the port impacted by this hazard (e.g., heavy rain leads to flooding)? » Have any of the above-mentioned assets been damaged or significantly impacted in the past due to the effects of this hazard? E.g., extreme wind during tropical cyclones cause damge to roofing of buildings » Is the port significantly exposed to this hazard? » Is the condition of assets such as pavements and access roads within the port’s vicinity in good condition? » Is the wharf built earlier than 1990s and has not had any major reconstruction or upgrade works in the past 20 years? » Is it hard for ships or boats to navigate through the approach channel as a result of this event? Interface » Is the wharf significantly exposed to this event where damage is likely to occur? » Are the measures in place (design or maintenance) to prevent the assets being impacted by the hazard? » Does the port have access to a backup generator to supply electricity during power cuts as a result of this hazard? Connected Infrastruture » Does the port have access to a backup water supply (i.e., water tanks or reservation) to supply water during water cuts as a result of this hazard? » Has there been a history of shut down or cease in operations due to this hazard? Social-economic » Has the transport of passengers and cargo been significantly impacted as a result of this hazard? » Does the port have a well-developed and fully operating Standard Operating Procedure/Response plan for this event? » Does the port have security controls in place? For example, security cameras, fencing/gates etc. » Has there been history of maritime incidents that led to extreme damage Safety & Operations of assests, injury and loss of life (both internationally and domestically) due to storm surge events? » Are there any safety measures in place to improve maritime security (both at domestic and international terminals) for this hazard? » Did the port have delays in sourcing key equipment or parts to repair vessels or infrastructure? Source: Project team assessment, 2022 37 Hazard specific vulnerability assessment prompts EXTREME HEAT/ EXTREME RAINFALL/ INCREASING GEOPHYSICAL STORM OR CYCLONE SEA LEVEL RISE FLOODING TEMPERATURES/ EVENTS DROUGHT » Is the port inundated » Are there measures in place » Does the port have access to » Has there been » Have past earthquakes/ either by heavy (design and maintenance) refrigerators/freezer storage observation of volcanic eruptions let rainfall, high swells to prevent the assets being systems? sea-lelvel rise that to tsunami causing and king tides? impacted by the hazard? For resulted in higher significant damage to Land-based example, drainage systems » Has there been observation storm surge/ port land-based assets of higher temperatures at the waves, king tides? and operations? » Have imported or exported port compared to past years? goods been damaged as a results » Is the port build of heavy rainfall/flooding? » Have imported or exported to seismic design temperature-sensitive goods standards? been damaged due to high tempreature/extreme heat? » Are there measures in » Is the wharf significantly » Is the wharf significantly » Is the port » Is the wharf built place to prevent the exposed to extreme rainfall/ exposed to extreme heat inundated from according to assets being impacted flash floods where damage is where damage is likely to day-to-day earthquake/seismic by the hazard? likely to occur or has occurred in occur or has occurred in the waves (i.e., not standards? the past? past? influenced by king » Have vessels been » Is the port inundated tides, cyclones either by heavy destroyed from the » Has there been observation of or geophysical impact of earthquake rainfall, high swells activity) that flash floods or pooling of water induced tsunamis? Interface and king tides? would normally at the interface in the past as a » Has earthquake/ result of heavy rainfall or is the be stopped by the freeboard of the earthquake induced port rarely impacted by floods tsunami/volcanic (i.e., at the wharf/berthing area)? wharf? events caused landslides/coastal » Has increased rainfall or flooding erosion along or at the impacted operations at the port? wharf in the past? » Has there been history » Has there been history of » Has there been history of » Has there been » Has there been history of power cuts at the extreme rainfall or flash floods power cuts at the port due history of power of power cuts at the port due to cyclone inside or in surrounding port to extreme heat that led to cuts at the port port due to earthquake Connected Infrastructure events that led to areas that led to cease in cease in operations? due to inundation events that led to cease cease in operations? operations? as a result of in operations? » Has there been history » Has there been history of sea-level rise that of water cuts at the » Has flooding caused access extreme heat that led to led to cease in » Has there been history port due to cyclone issues on road networks that are cease in operations? operations? of water cuts at the events that led to used for movements of goods in » Has there been port due to earthquake cease in operations? and out of the port in the past? history of water events that led to cease cuts at the port in operations? » Have staff had issues accessing due to increased » Have earthquakes the port in the past due to flash salinization resulted in landslide floods near access roads? of ground events that damaged water tables access roads, power that impacted or water supply freshwater supply infrastructure? to the port? » Has the transport of » Has the transport of passengers » Has the transport of » Has there been » Has the transport of passengers and cargo and cargo been significantly passengers and cargo been a history of port passengers and cargo Socio- economic been significantly impacted as a result of this significantly impacted as a shut down during been significantly impacted as a result hazard? result of this hazard? higher-than- impacted as a result of of cyclone/storm normal waves this hazard? events? For example, inundating the due to strong winds, port? inter-island shipping or transfer of imported/ domestic goods to land-based storage or onto shipping boats is delayed. 38 EXTREME HEAT/ EXTREME RAINFALL/ INCREASING GEOPHYSICAL STORM OR CYCLONE SEA LEVEL RISE FLOODING TEMPERATURES/ EVENTS DROUGHT » Are access roads » Does the port have a well- » Does the port have a » Does the port have » Does the port have a to the port usually developed and fully operated well-developed and fully a well-developed well-developed and blocked due to broken Standard Operating Procedure operated Standard Operating and fully operated fully operated Standard trees, debris etc. that for workers working in heavy Procedure for workers Standard Operating Procedure/ prevent staff or trucks rainfall/extreme weather working in extreme heat Operating Response plan for from going exiting/ conditions? i.e., are workers conditions? i.e., are workers Procedure/ earthquake events? entering the port? given appropriate PPE, work is given appropriate PPE, breaks Response plan for » Are there existing stopped at this time etc. throughout the day? sea-level rise? » Are access roads to the Safety & Operations physical controls in » Are there existing port usually blocked place to secure assets » Are there shelters available for » Are there shelters available physical controls due to broken trees, and infrastructure passengers to wait for their for passengers to wait for in place to protect debris etc. that prevent during extreme wind ships/boats? their ships/boats? and maintain staff or trucks from events? assets from this going exiting/entering hazard? the port? » Are there existing physical controls in place to secure assets and infrastructure during earthquake events? » Has there been history of injury or loss of life due to earthquake/ earthquake induced tsunami/landslide events? *Prompts related to Water-based infrastructure is only covered under General Prompts since these assets are vulnerable and exposed to almost all hazards. Source: World Bank, 2022. 39 Design and operational management measures that could be adopted to increase resilience EXTREME HEAT/ EXTREME RAINFALL/ INCREASING STORM OR CYCLONE SEA LEVEL RISE GEOPHYSICAL EVENTS FLOODING TEMPERATURE/ DROUGHT Engineering measures: Engineering measures: Engineering measures: Engineering measures: Engineering measures: » Assess and if required » Bund or raise critical assets » Improve the thermal » Consider measures listed » Assess and if required, increase the number and equipment (e.g., back-up efficiency and design for under “Overtopping’ increase number and and strength of bollards, generators, pump-house). temperature regulation for Cyclones and under strength of bollards/quays quays and mooring lines (e.g., install air- ‘Dredging’ and ‘Drainage’ and mooring lines for cyclone events. » Consider installing relief conditioning or cooling for Extreme Rainfall / slots, drain holes and valves systems on vessels, in Flooding: » Develop new responsive, » Assess tug and tug towing at the deck. offices, storage facilities flexible, or demountable strength so that it is etc.). » Construct new or modify infrastructure e.g., ramps, » Dredge the navigation sufficient for increasing channel to improve existing breakwaters (e.g., pontoons, fendering, vessel size conveyance of ships through » Assess and if required, armour unit selection, berthing or pilotage the harbour. upgrade equipment that orientation, height) facilities » Install new or strengthen is more heat-tolerant » Regular and effective storm-pin or tie-down or resistant, including » New infrastructure design » Install or improve warning maintenance of existing points, especially for infrastructure or to consider consequences equipment, fog horns, drainage systems, storm cranes. materials. of changes in salinity. radar, high visibility drains, culverts and screens. » Consider installing a » Modify vessel design lighting, visibility measuring flood defense system to » Review vessel design to accommodate new instrumentation » Relocate critical assets and help dissipate waves and including insulation conditions (e.g., install plan equipment to elevated overtopping at the port. platforms to upper floors of sensors to detect » Optimise protection or » Consider retrofitting buildings or otherwise out of » Consider renewable shoaling; shallower draft; burial of sub-sea cables existing buildings and the flood risk area energy options i.e., modify vessel weight designing future buildings back-up generators and or reduced weight; hull » Provide hydraulic structures and wharves to meet park lights are powered strengthening to allow of an adequate capacity to » Consider raising the elevation international standards by solar power/batteries drying out at berth). pass water under a canal of access roads, regress instead of diesel fuel. » Consider providing pathways and emergency » Provide safe havens pathways around the port. » Review and revise (sanctuaries) or additional sheltered infrastructure Ecosystem-based measures: anchorage arrangements; moorings for staff on site during consider re-siting future upgrades » Consider raising bridges, decking, jetties and » Provide shade using » Bund or raise critical » Selection of pavement » Conduct surveys to revetments when designing nature-based solutions assets (e.g., back- up material for the wharf - determine the depths of and installing new where practicable generators, pumphouse); rigid concrete slabs are the approach channel infrastructure. for staff and visitors install water splash or difficult to move back into after cyclones or and adjacent to heat- scour protection. position after movement, increased rainfall events » Install flood-proofing to ensure there is safe sensitive equipment. » Review/revise consider using ‘pavers’/ measures (e.g., barriers, navigation of the channel gates, shutters etc.). maintenance schedule for interlocked blocks » Consider improving assets that are vulnerable » Consider the height » Survey depths of the the landscape at the to corrosion or to changes » Consider the form of the and the arrangement approach channel after port to include shaded in salinity levels. structure i.e., does the of buildings at the port cyclones/increased rainfall as well as surrounding pedestrian areas/ wharf have an ‘open’ or events to ensure there is safe environment in design of walkways between » Consider the functional ‘piled’ design navigation of the channel. future infrastructure wharves and offices or design of products that tree-lined walkways accounts for corrosion- where possible. Corrosion protection Ecosystem-based measures: systems. (CPS)/Sacrificial steel design » Consider changing the lanscape of the port; re- routing roads that might be susceptible to damage from nearby trees. » Regularly prune and maintain trees around the port and near connected infrastructure. 40 EXTREME HEAT/ EXTREME RAINFALL/ INCREASING STORM OR CYCLONE SEA LEVEL RISE GEOPHYSICAL EVENTS FLOODING TEMPERATURE/ DROUGHT Non-engineering measures: Ecosystem-based measures: Non-engineering measures: » Install or enhance bank Ecosystem-based measures: protection, water splash, » Stop operations when » Consider installing or scour protection. » Research new » Refer to measures listed for wind speed is >25 knots sustainable drainage heat-resistant or Sea Level Rise and ensure tie-down systems (SuDS), gullies heat- tolerant plant, Ecosystem-based measures: points for critical and other flood run-off, equipment, materials etc. infrastructure is secured. conveyance or storage Non-engineering measures: » Consider nature-based » Raise awareness or infrastructure and nature- » Consider relocating resilience e.g., create provide associated based solutions in future » Allow increased wait times sensitive assets to offshore berms or barrier training for all staff onsite. upgrades. in anchorages; improve shaded areas in the port. islands; supplement or enhance marsh, queuing procedures » Provide accommodation This will likely reduce the and transport for » Consider nature-based energy demand. mangrove, or other » Develop and raise personnel to use during an systems such as offshore intertidal habitats. awareness of new incident berms or mangroves to operational protocols for » Review and update » Use nature-based manage flooding and operations in strong stream health and safety solutions wherever sediment. or high wave conditions » Consider how and where legislation for hot practicable e.g., beach cargo equipment, vehicles weather operations nourishment; restoration and/or empty containers Non-engineering measures: or planting of mangroves, » Develop new protocols are stockpiled across saltmarshes, riparian or codes of practice for the site to reduce risks » Investigate flood diversion or vegetation; restoration of operations in poor visibility of further damage in the storage options beyond the reef ecosystems. (recreational use, pilotage, event of a cyclone that port or waterway estate. etc.). results in inundation. Non-engineering measures: » Produce up to date » Review and update signage » Develop or improve warning electronic bathymetric and emergency marks systems (up to date » Consider elevated access charts to better around the port for operators electronic bathymetric and regress pathways/ understand the depths and visitors charts and forecasting emergency walkways and critical systems in the systems) and promote » Map and zone flood risk around the port. harbour. Electronic Chart Display areas in and around the » Technical awareness and Information System port to relocate sensitive of effect of increased (ECDIS) for inland activities. salinity on electrolytic waterways » Provide and coordinate corrosion. » Flexibility in staffing alternative transport routes rotations to respond to (if possible) and logistics to » Review or revise relevant climate-related events access port facilities during design codes, standards, floods. » Improve (or instigate) or operational parameters monitoring and record in relation to salinity keeping on relevant » Consider flexibility in staffing tolerances. location- specific flow or rotations to respond to wave-related metrics climate-related events. » Encourage relocation out Use topographic survey » Introduce diversions, of high-risk areas. outcomes and ‘during event’ one-way systems, or monitoring to understand temporary closures of port flood risk area. or waterway » Revert to traditional means or methods of navigation Source: World Bank, 2022. 41