3. The future of Next Generation Infrastructures

BSIK project data
Project number: BSIK 03035
Project title: Next Generation Infrastructures
Starting date: 1 January 2004
Finishing date: 31 August 2014
Reporting period: 1 January 2004 31 August 2014
Names project leaders: Prof.dr.ir. Margot Weijnen and Prof.mr.dr. Ernst ten Heuvelhof
Contacts: Dr. Judith Schueler, Prof.dr.ir. Paulien Herder, Dr.ir. Martijn Kuit (former contact)
Management Board Next Generation Infrastructures Foundation
Dr. S.A.G. Peerdeman, former managing director, Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, TU Delft
Ir. A.B.M. van der Plas, former Secretary General, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management
Drs. P.M.M. Rullmann (chair), former member Executive Board, TU Delft
Dr.ir. A.W. Veenman, former CEO, NS Group (Dutch Railways Group)
Scientific Advisory Board
Prof. Wolfgang Marquardt, RWTH Aachen
Prof. Eve Mitleton-Kelly, London School of Economics
Prof. Ignacio Perez Arriaga, Comillas University Madrid (chair since Oct 2010)
Dr. Sudha Mahalingham, Member of India’s Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board
Prof. Tea Petrin, University of Ljubljana
Prof. Jean-Michel Glachant, European University Institute
Prof. Richard DeNeufville, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Prof. William Nuttall, Open University, UK
User Council
Drs. Bert Klerk, former Chairman of Board of Directors, ProRail
Drs. Jan Dekker, Mediq
Drs. Mark Dierikx, Director General, Ministry of Economic Affairs (chair)
Ir. Mel Kroon, President and CEO of TenneT
Prof.dr. Alexander Rinnooy Kan, University of Amsterdam
Drs. Ulco Vermeulen, Director Business development Gasunie
Sub-program Leaders
Understanding Complex Networks: Dr. Pieter Bots / Prof.dr.ir. Peter Kroes / Dr. Maarten Franssen
Safeguarding Public Values in Infrastructures: Dr. Suzan Stoter / Dr. Wijnand Veeneman / Dr. Aad Correljé
Flexible Infrastructures: Prof. dr.ir. Paulien Herder / Prof.dr.ir. Wil Thissen
Reliable Infrastructures: Prof.dr. John Groenewegen / Dr. Mark de Bruijne
Intelligent Infrastructures: Dr.ir. Zofia Lukszo / Prof.dr. Hans Hellendoorn
Knowledge Dissemination: Prof.dr.ir. Margot Weijnen / Dr. Judith Schueler
Next Generation Port Infra, Powered by Maasvlakte 2: Prof.dr.ir. Margot Weijnen / Dr. Judith Schueler / Ir. René van der Plas /
Drs. Henk de Bruijn (Stuurgroep)
Empowering Networks: Prof.dr.ir. Margot Weijnen / Dr. Judith Schueler / Dr. Pallas Agterberg / Dr. Harry van Breen
(Programmaraad)
Program Office 2014
Scientific Directors: Prof.dr.ir. Margot Weijnen, Prof.mr.dr. Ernst ten Heuvelhof, Prof.dr.ir. Paulien Herder
Managing Director: Dr. Judith Schueler
Proces manager/Interim Managing Director: Ir. Jacqueline Meerkerk
Financial affairs: M. van Laarhoven, B. Minnella, F. Viglietti
Program secretary: Connie van Dop
Communication advisor: Marco Verschoor
Assistants: Jori Corbié, Fransje Oudshoorn
2
Preface
Over the past ten years, I have been asked many times to explain Next Generation Infrastructures. In China, the
question usually is: “What technology is it?” The assumption that Next Generation Infrastructures is about a new
technology is not far-fetched, given the fact that this knowledge initiative originates from and has for ten years
been hosted by the Delft University of Technology. While the answers I give may disappoint Chinese contractors
and policy makers, they have become well-understood in the international academic community and in circles of
infrastructure providers and policy makers in the Netherlands and elsewhere in Europe. The answer is threefold:
1.
Next Generation Infrastructures is a new concept of infrastructure systems, more precisely, the
introduction of socio-technical and complex adaptive systems thinking into the world of infrastructures.
With these new conceptual models of infrastructure systems, and the simulation tools to make them
operational, we have been able to generate new insights into the behavior of infrastructure systems and
to expand the solution space for many persistent problems encountered by infrastructure planners,
owners, operators, service providers, regulators and policy makers.
2.
Next Generation Infrastructures is a node in the evolving international knowledge network for crosssectoral and interdisciplinary research on infrastructure systems and a platform for knowledge
exchange, joint learning and co-creation between researchers and practitioners, and for dialogue
between the infrastructure knowledge community and society.
3.
Next Generation Infrastructures is a not-for-profit foundation established to allocate the BSIK resources
as productively as possible, in line with its societal mission “to support the development of more flexible,
reliable and intelligent infrastructures and services, in respect to public and consumer interests, so as to
sustain a sustainable development of the society, the economy and their natural environment.”
th
th
May 20 , 2014, Next Generation Infrastructures (NGINFRA) celebrated its 10 anniversary. An excellent moment
to reflect on the past and look ahead into the future. Wrapping up ten years of infrastructure systems research,
knowledge dissemination and valorization calls for an assessment of the impact of the 176 projects that hundreds
of researchers and practitioners all over the world conducted under the umbrella of NGI NFRA. They all contributed
to a better understanding of infrastructure systems and to new ways of working in the provision of infrastructure
and infrastructure services. The results have convinced the Netherlands’ infrastructure providers that the NGINFRA
initiative must be continued: only by constantly pushing the infrastructure systems science frontier, by continuing
the joint learning experience and the ongoing innovation of working practices will the Netherlands ensure that its
infrastructure systems will also in the future be able to accommodate social and economic development.
The start of the program in 2004 was induced by the infrastructure sectors in Europe entering a state of flux, after
decades of being run as stable public monopolies. Liberalization, de-regulation, unbundling and privatization
paved the way for rapid internationalization and opened up the infrastructure sectors to new technologies, new
functionalities and business models. At the same time, hitherto unknown phenomena such as multi-functionality,
multi-utilities and converging infrastructures were observed, creating unprecedented complexity in the physical as
well as the social dimension of infrastructure systems. Whereas infrastructure research and regulation were still
segmented along sectoral and disciplinary borders, a new reality of interacting and interdependent infrastructure
systems unfolded, posing new challenges for safeguarding the future availability, affordability and acceptability of
infrastructure bound services – in all infrastructure sectors.
3
The new reality of our infrastructure systems called for a new approach towards gaining a better understanding of
the behavior of these complex evolving systems. Cross-sectoral and inter-disciplinary research were clearly
required to capture the new complexity of infrastructure systems, doing so not only as an academic exercise, but
also aiming to provide practical solutions and tools for improving the performance of our infrastructure systems
and services and shaping the development of the infrastructure systems serving society in the future. The
financial and economic crises since 2008 put even more strain on the challenges identified in 2004. With
dwindling financial resources we need to keep our ageing infrastructures going, while end-users demand better
reliability and quality of service, even personalized services, and new societal concerns on privacy, security and
security-of-supply have emerged. Only innovative solutions, whether in terms of new technology or new
governance models, can help to secure the adequacy of our infrastructure systems today and in the future.
Today, in 2014, reflecting on our ambitions at the start of the program, we find that the results of our efforts in the
past ten years have surpassed our wildest dreams. Throughout the years, evidence has increased that our
approach is the winning strategy to cope with the enormous complexity of today’s infrastructure challenges. The
quality of our research and its practical relevance have been convincingly demonstrated. In the worldwide
knowledge network of Next Generation Infrastructures, new nodes emerging in other continents are following us
as a role model. Practitioners see us, find us, like us and ask us to help them tackle the new challenges they are
facing. For us, the great challenge for the coming years is to stay intellectually at the forefront.
Empowered by the BSIK subsidy, Next Generation Infrastructures has been able to generate new knowledge
supporting infrastructure providers and policy makers in improving the performance of our infrastructure systems
and safeguarding their performance for the future. Last but not least, the B SIK subsidy contributed to consolidating
the network of infrastructure practitioners and academia that will secure the continuation of the Next Generation
Infrastructures knowledge initiative in the future.
We trust you will enjoy reading this report and hope it may encourage you to join in our efforts.
On behalf of the Board of Directors,
Prof.dr.ir. Margot P.C. Weijnen, Scientific Director
4
Summary in highlights
Throughout ten years of pioneering work, from 2004 to 2014, NGINFRA experienced many highlights. A selection
from different perspectives:
Scientific impact
The Next Generation Infrastructures research at the TU Delft Faculty of Technology, Policy and
Management received the highest possible scores for scientific quality, productivity, societal relevance
and viability in an external (QANU) research quality assessment (over the years 2004-2009/2010).
NGINFRA developed a highly visible series of PhD theses. The total number of 90 theses, with 77
produced by NGINFRA Bsik funded research projects in the Netherlands and abroad, is proof of the
scientific productivity of the program.
Many publishers showed interest in starting a new journal to disseminate scholarly articles in the vein of
Next Generation Infrastructures. We decided to go ahead with Springer and launched Infrastructure
Complexity as a new Springer open access journal in the first quarter of 2014.
Knowledge dissemination
The Hub Holland magazine that emerged from the STT project “The future of transnational infrastructure
systems in Europe” was adopted by NGINFRA and infrastructure providers. Since 2011 it is published by
Elba Media as the INFRA magazine for practitioners in the infrastructure sectors.
In 2011, Infratrends was launched as a book and as an event for knowledge exchange between
researchers and practitioners. The Minister of Infrastructure and Environment wrote the preface to
the Infratrends book and received the first copy. The Infratrends event has since then become a regular
th
event, which saw its 4 edition, May 20, 2014.
Education and training
NGINFRA transformed the Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management (SEPAM) and the
Engineering and Policy Analysis (EPA) curricula of the TU Delft Faculty of Technology, Policy and
Management, and resulted in Erasmus Mundus MSc and PhD programmes on Economics and
Management of Infrastructure Networks, and Sustainable Energy Technologies and Strategies,
respectively.
The NGINFRA Academy, held in 2009 and 2010, was a tremendous success. Its courses have since then
been transferred to the TU Delft Technology, Policy and Management Graduate School, and to postgraduate teaching programs, such as the TU Delft TopTech Master of Business in Energy Systems and
the European University - Florence School of Regulation.
NGINFRA NGINFRA created a Massive Open On-line Course (MOOC) which is accessible for free for
students worldwide through the EdX platform, in which ten years of NGI NFRA research is consolidated.
The Next Generation Infrastructures MOOC was launched in 2014, reaching 17,000 students
worldwide.
Knowledge valorization
Many of the innovative infrastructure system models that were developed in NGINFRA research
projects, were adopted by practitioners to test new practices and support organizational learning. An
outstanding example is the use of serious gaming by ProRail in support of the introduction of a new time
table for the Dutch railway system.
NGINFRA’s strategic alliances with Alliander NV (1.5 million Euro) and the Port of Rotterdam (2 million
Euro) created living labs for innovating infrastructure planning and management practices.
The best proof of the value of NGINFRA knowledge for practitioners in the world of infrastructures is the
continuation of NGINFRA. The founding fathers funding the new NGINFRA program beyond the BSIK
subsidy period are: the Netherlands Agency for Public Works, Highways and Water Management
(Rijkswaterstaat), the Port of Rotterdam, Alliander, ProRail, Vitens and the Delft University of
Technology. While a number of pilot projects is already in place since May 2014, the formal launch of the
new NGINFRA program is scheduled for January 2015.
5
Internationalization
The first International Conference on Infrastructure Systems and Services was held in 2008,
Rotterdam, followed by conferences in Chennai, India (2009), Shenzhen, China (2010) and Norfolk,
th
Virginia (2011). The 8 IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control was
organized in Delft, 11-13 April 2011 with the main theme Next generation Infrastructures. More than 100
researchers from all over the world active in the area of infrastructure networks for energy and water
supply, transportation of people and goods and provision of telecommunication and information services
participated in the conference. In 2013, the SMART Infrastructure facility in Wollongong, Australia
launched the new International Symposium series for Next Generation Infrastructure (ISNGI). The
2014 ISNGI event was organized by NGINFRA /TU Delft in partnership with the University of Oxford and
University College London and hosted by IIASA, in Laxenburg, Austria.
Through the international research relationships established within NGINFRA, a vibrant international
knowledge infrastructure emerged that is not only perpetuated by ISNGI and the Infrastructure
Complexity journal, but also by collaboration in European projects and the Council for Engineering
Systems Universities (CESUN).
NGINFRA also instigated many international collaborative teaching initiatives. Besides the Erasmus
Mundus MSc and PhD programs, a successful international joint course on infrastructure economics
by ETH Lausanne (EPFL), Université Paris I and TU Delft has been staged annually for 10-20 PhD
students since 2007. The course rotates between Paris, Lausanne and Delft.
As it turns out, the MOOC NGINFRA initiative did not only reach out to international students. It also
generated interest from organizations of practitioners worldwide, such as the United Nations
Operations Branch.
6
Margot Weijnen, Paulien Herder en Ernst ten Heuvelhof - Comprehend, Connect, Solve
‘NGINFRA kijkt met een nieuwe bril naar infrastructuren’, constateert Margot Weijnen.
‘Liberalisering, deregulering, opsplitsing en privatisering hebben binnen de verschillende
infrasectoren voor een heel nieuw speelveld gezorgd. Hoe zorg je er dan voor dat de
gebruiker toch het totaalpakket krijgt dat hij verwacht? Door infrastructuren als sociotechnische systemen en als complexe adaptieve systemen te bekijken, leer je begrijpen
hoe infrastructuren functioneren en hoe ze elkaar beïnvloeden. In complexe systemen
gaat het om variatie en selectie. We moeten niet denken in termen van design, maar van
evolutie van infrastructuren.’
Voor Paulien Herder staat NGINFRA voor het verbinden van partijen. ‘De neiging is groot,
ook in de wetenschap, om binnen je eigen vakgebied te blijven. Met NGInfra hebben we
cross-sectoral learning centraal gesteld. In verschillende sectoren bleken vergelijkbare
vraagstukken te spelen. Systematiseren en uitwisselen was dan ook ons doel. Dat heeft
onder meer geleid tot oprichting van een assetmanagementplatform. Daarnaast brachten
we wetenschap en praktijk bij elkaar: bij ieder onderzoeksproject hadden we de industrie
aan tafel. Dat was in de beginjaren geen sinecure. Ook lieten we verschillende
wetenschappelijke disciplines samenwerken. Dit leidde tot een internationaal netwerk met
lijnen tot in Australië, Amerika en Engeland.’
‘Wij hebben als NGINFRA een sterke band met de industrie opgebouwd’, stelt Ernst ten
Heuvelhof vast. ‘Zuiver wetenschappelijk onderzoek is NGINFRA eigenlijk vreemd. AIO’s
zijn altijd direct verbonden geweest aan infrabedrijven. Die praktische inslag is toch wel
ons handelsmerk. Zonder dat we daarbij overigens onze wetenschappelijke beginselen
loslaten. Het zijn vooral de complexere vraagstukken die bij ons worden neergelegd. Dat
leidt tot kennis die weer bijdraagt aan cross-sectoral learning. Vanuit een abstract
denkniveau slaan wij de brug tussen de verschillende infrasectoren.’
Margot Weijnen, Paulien Herder en Ernst ten Heuvelhof vormen samen de wetenschappelijke directie van NGINFRA
7
Contents
Preface .................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Summary in highlights ............................................................................................................................................. 5
1.
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 9
2.
Timeline – shifting focus ............................................................................................................................... 11
3.
The future of Next Generation Infrastructures............................................................................................... 13
4.
5.
3.1.
Preparing for the future ........................................................................................................................ 13
3.2.
Shaping the future of Next Generation Infrastructures ......................................................................... 13
3.3.
Shaping the future NGINFRA program .................................................................................................. 15
Accomplishments of Next Generation Infrastructures ................................................................................... 17
4.1.
Scientific impact ................................................................................................................................... 17
4.2.
Knowledge dissemination .................................................................................................................... 22
4.3.
Education and training ......................................................................................................................... 31
4.4.
Knowledge valorization ........................................................................................................................ 35
4.5.
Internationalization ............................................................................................................................... 42
Achievement of scientific and societal milestones ........................................................................................ 47
5.1.
Milestones............................................................................................................................................ 47
5.2.
Cross-cutting scientific output .............................................................................................................. 53
5.3.
Main findings on the level of sub-programs.......................................................................................... 60
6.
Innovation, valorization and dissemination ................................................................................................... 72
7.
Synergy with other BSIK projects ................................................................................................................. 74
8.
International positioning ................................................................................................................................ 75
9.
8.1.
European visibility ................................................................................................................................ 77
8.2.
Profile in the scientific and practitioners community............................................................................. 77
Project funding 2004-2014 in relation to project budget................................................................................ 78
Appendix 1 - Next Generation Infrastructures Partners ......................................................................................... 79
Appendix 2 - Next Generation Infrastructures PhD Thesis Series on Infrastructures ............................................ 81
Appendix 3 - QANU Research Quality Assessment Report .................................................................................. 85
Appendix 4 - Brochures ......................................................................................................................................... 88
Appendix 5 - Summary of final review and reflection and conclusions on Next Generation Port Infra, powered by
Maasvlakte 2 ......................................................................................................................................................... 89
Appendix 6 - Summary of final review and enquete Empowering Networks.......................................................... 91
Appendix 7 - Intentieverklaring het Nieuwe NGInfra.............................................................................................. 93
Appendix 8 - Preliminary outline of the contents of the State of the Infrastructure report .................................... 108
Appendix 9 – Detailed findings of the subprograms ............................................................................................ 124
8
1.
Introduction
The societal relevance of the infrastructure sectors is enormous. Citizens in modern societies use infrastructure
based services in almost everything they do in the context of their daily life, as part of their social and working
routines. Infrastructures make the economy ‘tick’: they constitute the backbone structure of the built environment,
they provide the arterial system that enables the flows of people and goods, the metabolic pathways for society’s
consumption of energy, water, food and inorganic materials, and the nervous system that enables real-time
communication and information exchange across the globe. As such, infrastructures are deeply embedded in the
spatial, economic and social structure. This feature, combined with the massive capital embedded in the physical
assets of our infrastructure systems, seems to pose an insurmountable barrier to the capability of infrastructures
to adapt graciously to changing needs and technological innovations.
9
It is an interesting paradox that many of the infrastructures serving us today were laid out to service the
th
development of the post WW II industrial economy, with some infrastructures dating back to the dawn of the 20
th
th
century and even to the 19 century. In the meantime, the 20 century has seen new infrastructures for
telecommunication and information exchange being brought into being, in increasingly rapid succession. It is hard
to imagine how, only 25 years ago, we coped without the internet and mobile telephony and the services provided
over these new infrastructures. In emerging economies such as Kenya, mobile phones have created the
opportunity to leapfrog the capital intensive copper wired telephony infrastructure. Many Kenyans only know the
internet through their smart phones. With M-PESA services provided not by their banks, but by their mobile
network provider, they can use their mobile phones for money transfers and thus engage in business even if they
do not have access to an all-weather road. This only illustrates how infrastructures pervade our societies. In
western and emerging economies alike, the current proliferation of telecommunication and information
infrastructures has in less than two decades profoundly changed the structure of the economy and our social life.
Whereas the huge capital intensity of the traditional physical infrastructures: roads and railways, gas and
electricity infrastructures, water and sewage networks, is not conducive to rapid change, in the past decades
many of these infrastructure sectors have been attacked on the institutional side: through de-regulation,
liberalization and privatization profound and ongoing change has been unleashed in the organization and market
structure of the infrastructure sectors. The traditional vertically integrated infrastructure monopolies have made
way for a mix of competitive markets and regulated networks, with new roles and rules for public and private
actors and new interfaces to be coordinated. On top of the new and unprecedented multi-actor complexity of the
infrastructure sectors, and the institutional fragmentation induced by the introduction of competition, we have to
deal with their international dimension. Since most of our infrastructure systems are physically interconnected
across national borders in regional, continental or global networks, we are also facing the challenge of institutional
fragmentation on an international scale.
These observations brought us to formulate the Next Generation Infrastructures knowledge initiative. At the time
of writing of our program proposal, in February 2003, we diagnosed an appalling knowledge gap. The long-time
lack of societal interest in infrastructures had caused infrastructures to be largely neglected as a topic area in
academic research, especially in technological research, which generally focused on innovation of infrastructure
components without questioning the infra-structure or the working of an infrastructure as an integrated system.
Another knowledge gap we identified was concerned with the lack of insight into how infrastructures and
infrastructure bound markets develop as a function of their institutional context, with regard to economic
conditions, governance structure, legislation and regulatory framework. Most of the ongoing infrastructure
research at the time was of a mono-disciplinary nature, either focusing on the physical or on the social and
institutional complexity of infrastructures. In our effort ‘to create a systematic framework for understanding and
steering the behavior of infrastructures as socio-technical systems’, we also envisaged to create opportunities for
‘systematic cross-sectoral learning.’ The latter was deemed necessary in view of the increasing interlinkage and
interdependencies between infrastructures across sectoral borders and the evident need to reduce, or at least
explain, inconsistencies in approaches and regimes between infrastructure sectors, as these create uncertainties
which are detrimental to the investment climate in the infrastructure sectors and in the wider economy.
Now, in 2014, our program has only increased in topicality. At the latest G20 meeting, November 2014 in
Brisbane, eight countries decided to establish a global infrastructure knowledge hub in Sydney, Australia, to
improve the functioning and financing of infrastructure markets, and to improve the quality of infrastructure
investment around the world. Only one week later, the EU announced the creation of a new European Fund for
Strategic Investments (ESFI) to remedy Europe’s underspending on infrastructures. The ESFI is envisaged to be
multipied wth private capital for investment especially in the EU’s energy, road and digital networks, and therewith
re-invigorate the European economy.
Evidently, after the global financial crisis of 2008 and the ensuing economic crisis, infrastructure investment is
making its way back to the attention of politicians. Western economies have rediscovered infrastructure
modernization as a conditio sine qua non for economic recovery. Emerging economies are even more under
pressure to invest in infrastructure. The Asian region alone is expected to need US$700 billion a year spent on
infrastructure over the next 30 years, to support projected economic growth. Given these overwhelming
challenges, the NGINFRA knowledge base is here to stay and will continue to be expanded.
10
2.
Timeline – shifting focus
The BSIK Program ‘Next Generation Infrastructures’ (NGINFRA) spans more than a decade. Building on an
exploratory inter-faculty research program: ‘Design and Management of Infrastructures’, established in 1998 with
TU Delft internal stimulation funding, we were able to formulate the BSIK program proposal and solicit the interest
of many infrastructure and infrastructure service providers. For us, the BSIK process started in 2001, with the
submission of a comprehensive Expression of Interest. When the ensuing final program proposal was selected for
BSIK funding in November 2003, preparations to set up its organization started in earnest, to prepare for the
formal start of the program in September 2004. Originally planned to end in 2012, our request to postpone the
BSIK subsidy closing date until September 2014 has been granted.
In hindsight, we can distinguish two phases in the execution of the program, and an even more exciting third
phase is about to start:
2004-2008
In the first phase of the program we focused on building a cross-sectoral and interdisciplinary knowledge
base, in a joint effort with practitioners and international knowledge partners. This was a bottom-up
process leading to a rich portfolio of research projects, loosely grouped under five themes/subprograms:
understanding complex networks, safeguarding public values, critical infrastructures, flexible
infrastructures and intelligent infrastructures.
2008-2014
In the second phase we re-invented NGINFRA in three respects: (1) visionary in steering cutting-edge
research, (2) self-evident as a facilitator of knowledge exchange, and (3) valuable as a network
organization.
1.a. The knowledge program shifted from bottom-up emergence to a top-down steering mode. Based on
vision documents of the subprogram leaders and synthesis efforts across the subprograms, knowledge
gaps and ‘hotspots’ were identified. This process led to targeted calls for new proposals, designed to
either fill in the blanks in the program and/or to stimulate the development of successful rapidly evolving
themes, such as gaming and simulation, and infrastructure systems asset management.
1.b. In a collaborative effort with NGINFRA‘s knowledge users, we published InfraTrends, as a basis for
Next Generation Infrastructures 2.0.
1.c. We established and helped to establish new infrastructure systems knowledge programs in strategic
alliances with knowledge users:
o
o
o
o
Next Generation Port Infra – powered by Maasvlakte 2, funded by NGINFRA and the Port of
Rotterdam (2 million Euro)
Empowering Networks, funded by NGINFRA and Alliander (1,5 million Euro)
Intelligent Railway Infrastructure, funded by ProRail, STW and NWO/MaGW (2.5 million Euro,
call published May 2011)
Whole System Performance, funded by ProRail, STW and NWO/MaGW (call published Sept.
2011)
2. With the increasing awareness of our vital role as a knowledge hub, more effort was explicitly
dedicated to knowledge dissemination, knowledge exchange across infrastructure sectors, knowledge
exchange across the public and the private sector and to translation of knowledge to a diversity of user
communities. Especially the process of understanding the needs of and engaging practitioners’
organizations turned out to be a slow and cumbersome yet very rewarding process. Besides the
knowledge programs developed in strategic alliances with important user organizations, NGINFRA hosts
the Asset Management Platform, HubHolland.Magazine and the Next Generation Infrastructures
Academy to increase its visibility in various communities of knowledge users. Increasingly, infrastructure
owners and operators recognize our role as a knowledge hub and ask us to facilitate and feed the
process of formulating a strategic vision on infrastructure development for the future in its institutional
context.
11
3. Through its research and knowledge exchange activities NGINFRA built an international network of topresearchers and key-practitioners. At the moment, the network has opportunities to convene at either
one of two annual international conferences (Economics of Infrastructures and the International
Symposium for Next Generation Infrastructure Systems, respectively), at national network meetings (e.g.
Infratrends) and in the context of specific platforms (e.g. national Asset Management Platform and
International Society for Engineering Asset Management) and activities (e.g. high level HubHolland
meetings).
2014 and beyond
While the BSIK-funded program is being wrapped up, a new NGI NFRA organization is being set up that
can safeguard the continuation of the mission: Improving infrastructure systems by understanding. The
new NGINFRA program will rest on the same two pillars as the current program: developing cutting-edge
understanding of complex infrastructure systems and improving the performance of the current and next
generation of infrastructures with these new insights, methods and tools. How do we see the
development of the program so far and its development in the post- BSIK era?
Next Generation Infrastructures in transition
Next Generation Infrastructures has been successful in many ways. It established the interdisciplinary and crosssectoral field of infrastructure systems research in the academic community, it proved the high quality of its
research efforts in a recent assessment of a substantial part of the program, and it proved the relevance of its
work for society. We have inspired researchers abroad to establish infrastructure systems research initiatives,
resulting in a vibrant international knowledge network which is still expanding. Yet, the infrastructure systems
research domain is far from mainstream in the academic context, and continued support is still needed to secure
its continued evolution into a fully accepted domain of interdisciplinary systems research. NGINFRA is confident
that infrastructure systems research is on its way to be firmly anchored in academia, since Delft University of
Technology has offered to host the program office for the new NGI NFRA program, and support it with research
capacity and facilities. This gives us a solid base to consolidate our current position, to continue building strategic
alliances strengthening our role as a knowledge hub, and develop new initiatives. With the TU Delft, and with five
infrastructure providers supporting the new NGINFRA initiative as founding fathers, NGINFRA is all set for the future.
On this report
This report is not a comprehensive overview of the entire BSIK subsidized program during the years 2004-2014.
Many results have been reported in detail in previous annual progress reports, and a semi-final report has been
presented to and approved by the so-called Wise Mens’ Committee in 2011. This report therefore focuses on a
selection of highlights, the consolidation of lessons learned, and on the continuation of Next Generation
Infrastructures in the post-BSIK era. It is loosely structured along the lines of the performance indicators agreed
with RVO’s predecessor in 2004. Rather than following the chronological order of events, it will first focus on the
future, before elucidating the past performance of the program.
12
3.
The future of Next Generation Infrastructures
3.1.
Preparing for the future
In the midterm review we expressed the ambition to continue the program beyond the end of the B SIK subsidy,
regarding BSIK as a stepping stone to build a knowledge base for the years to come. Despite the significant
impact of the program so far, we think that the societal impact of the program has only just started to unfold.
Wider and more tangible benefits to society are still to be expected, especially in situations where new
infrastructure systems and governance models can be implemented, such as in Asia and Africa, in contrast with
the incremental expansion and innovation of infrastructure systems taking place in the Netherlands and
elsewhere in the western industrialized world where a legacy of ageing infrastructure systems dominates the
scene. The academic field of interdisciplinary infrastructure systems research is still young – it has potential to
grow, if it can be firmly consolidated – and continuous efforts will be needed to engage practitioners and translate
the knowledge generated for practical use. To ensure consolidation of the research base, continuation of the
program and further expansion of the international network of researchers and practitioners, NGINFRA still has an
important role to play.
The need to solidify the future of NGINFRA as a unique knowledge initiative based in the Netherlands is only
becoming more urgent as more and more competing initiatives are established world-wide. On the one side, new
infrastructure systems knowledge initiatives, such as the Infrastructure Transitions Research Consortium and the
International Centre for Future Infrastructures, both in the UK, and the SMART Infrastructure Facility in
Wollongong, Australia, are valuable new partners in NGINFRA’s international knowledge network. On the other
side, these new initiatives are competitors forcing us to stay alert, to choose our partners even more strategically,
and most importantly, to remain in the lead intellectually. NGINFRA is not lacking in new ideas to hold its position
as the front runner – however, new impulses are definitely needed in terms of new funding sources.
Also the Committee of Wise Men, in its final review of NGINFRA in 2011, concluded: “As observed previously,
NGINFRA has succeeded in effectively positioning infrastructure systems engineering as a new discipline. Its
research is of high quality, and its international position is strong. Long term strategic working relationships have
been established with key players in the infrastructure sectors. The program level activities are highly appreciated
by the stakeholders.” The committee advised the program management to give full priority in the years to come to
ensuring that the concepts of NGINFRA permanently take root in academia and in infrastructure practice.
The present organization was specifically established to execute the BSIK funded program. In view of NGINFRA‘s
ambitions for the future a new organization is needed that more effectively and professionally can support a
predominantly demand driven program. The co-funding structure embedded in the BSIK subsidy regulation has
boosted the emergence of a relevant network, but it has also led to a rather diluted identity of NGINFRA, in which
researchers and practitioners identify themselves with their employers’ organization rather than with NGINFRA,
which is perceived as a temporary construct. This is evident, for example, in their dealings with the media where
in the majority of cases their NGINFRA research is presented under their employer organization’s name. The
challenge for the future is to retain the advantages of a large international network organization while at the same
time establishing a solid organizational core where knowledge is synthesized and disseminated in tailored ways to
specific audiences, which continuously supports and facilitates the knowledge flow through the network and the
process of intellectual renewal, and which has the power to steer research and knowledge exchange. Without
specific acknowledgement of the need for these crucial functions in the central node of the network, and
appropriate funding, the network is at risk to disintegrate.
3.2.
Shaping the future of Next
Generation Infrastructures
The first steps towards the goal of consolidating and continued development of the unique NGI NFRA body of
knwledge were taken in 2011, when the first InfraTrends event was held. This event marked a change in
programme management focus from a knowledge supply driven programme towards a demand driven
programme. The InfraTrends event, and the many workshops and think tanks that were organized in preparation
of the event, signified a major change towards engaging the knowledge users as active partners in NGINFRA
programme development. These efforts led to the forging of strong knowledge alliances, especially with the Port
of Rotterdam and Alliander, both geared towards converting NGI NFRA knowledge into user value and articulating
knowledge questions encountered in these organizations.
13
Both alliance programmes involved a variety of networking activities, through workshops and other (types of)
meetings, which served to expand the networks of people involved, both on the side of the knowledge institutes
involved and on the side of the practitioners’ organizations. Furthermore, the alliance programmes were closely
monitored, not only for obvious reasons of time and budget control, but also to extract lessons for the future.
Besides the alliances with Alliander and the Port of Rotterdam, other knowledge exchange activities were
intensified to strengthen the working relationships with other infrastructure providers. Especially the Asset
Management Platform turned out to be very successful in accomplishing this goal.
In this new demand driven setting of the NGINFRA programme, major steps towards shaping the future of NGInfra
NGINFRA have been made. The founding fathers of the new NGINFRA are RWS, Alliander, the Port of Rotterdam,
ProRail and Vitens, with the Delft University of Technology in a threefold role: as a knowledge partner, as a portal
to the international academic knowlege network, and as the host of the new NGINFRA organziation. At the latest
InfraTrends event, in May 2014, the six founding fathers expressed their firm commitment to consolidate the
NGINFRA legacy. For this purpose they will establish a new organizational entity, operating under the label of Next
Generation Infrastructures, as a platform for cross-sectoral learning and as an engine of interdisciplinary
knowledge generation to ensure the ‘future proofness’ of the Dutch system of infrastructure systems.
What drives the infrastructure providers to support NGI NFRA?
“We realiseren ons dat we het in de toekomst als individuele infrabeheerders alleen samen redden. Onze
intensief gebruikte infrastructuren zijn van levensbelang voor onze economie en samenleving, waarbij de eisen
die eraan gesteld worden steeds sneller veranderen en toenemen. Ook nemen de afhankelijkheden tussen de
diverse infrastructuren toe. En er zijn minder mensen en middelen beschikbaar.”
The infrastructure providers see NGINFRA as an instrument for cross-sectoral knowledge exchange, as a platform
for dialogue with the public, as a knowledge generating engine and as a portal to the international knowledge
network. They recognize that the interdependencies between their infrastructures are intensifying, that
infrastructure operation is rapidly increasing in knowlege intensity, and that a serious knowledge effort is needed
to bridge the expected future gap between society’s demand for sophisticated and reliable services, and the
actual supply that can be accommodated by the infrastructures. The infrastructure providers are concerned about
the preparedness of their systems to face the challenges of the future.
Whereas the decision to continue has been made and budget has been reserved, discussions on the design of
the new organizational set-up are still ongoing, expected to be finalized by January 2015, so that the new
NGINFRA can be launched early in 2015. The founding fathers of the new NGINFRA initiative are open to
welcoming new infrastructure providers on board, and will actively solicit more partners to join.
14
Paul Rullmann - En nu doorpakken
Wat kan de ene infrastructuur leren van de andere? Zijn er
vergelijkbare kwetsbaarheden, patronen, wetmatigheden? Kunnen
we een kennisbasis opbouwen die tot een professionelere
benadering leidt en risico’s vermindert?
Infrastructuren zijn het centrale studieobject van NGINFRA. Voor mij
als voorzitter van dit programma is het iedere keer weer een feest
om te zien hoezeer dit onderwerp disciplines verbindt en creatieve
gedachten uitlokt. Niet voor niets heeft NGINFRA bijna 70
proefschriften opgeleverd. Stuk voor stuk met buitengewoon nuttige
handreikingen. Voorwaarde daarbij is wel dat de wetenschappelijke
vraag zo wordt uitgewerkt dat men er in de praktijk ook
daadwerkelijk mee uit de voeten kan. Die balans moet goed zijn, en
dat is een dun lijntje. Uiteindelijk merk je dat onderzoeken die in de
praktijk geworteld zijn veel meer dynamiek krijgen.
Het is nu van belang dat deze aanpak wordt doorgezet, samen met de infra-partijen: beheerders, ontwikkelaars,
toeleveranciers. Het immense gebied van infrastructuren is nog lang niet uitgeplozen. Dagelijks ontstaan
casussen die erom vragen om verder te worden onderzocht. Het gaat erom dat we patronen gaan ontdekken en
deskundigheden ontwikkelen die ook voor fijnmaziger netwerken interessant zijn. Ik verwacht van deze actuele
uitdaging ook in de toekomst nog heel veel mooie opbrengsten.
Paul Rullmann is bestuursvoorzitter van NGINFRA
3.3.
Shaping the future NGINFRA
program
As it turns out, the Dutch infrastructure providers have major concerns about the future preparedness of their
systems, in view of their ageing work forces and their limited means to invest in innovation and expansion of their
infrastructure systems. They agree on the need to periodically diagnose how their systems perform against
endogenous and exogenous trends, and to timely identify knowledge gaps. One of the products that has been
defined as an output of this joint effort is a biennial State of the Infrastructure report, an assessment of the
future proofness of the Dutch infrastructure system. This report is primarily designed as a catalyst for crosssectoral knowledge exchange and research collaboration between the infrastructure providers and between the
infrastructure providers and academia. At the same time it will support the building of an Infrapedia database for
longitudinal monitoring of the state and performance of the Netherlands’ infrastructure base, and last but not least,
it will inform the public on the value of infrastructure for society and the economy.
In two pilot projects that were started in May 2014, we are exploring how to design the processes of knowledge
exchange and joint learning between their organizations, and we are exploring how much value added can be
created by combining and systematically comparing their empirical knowledge bases. The two pilot projects, one
on the subject of infrastructure availability, and the other one on the foresight study methods used for strategic
infrastructure planning, have already turned out to be successful. They also revealed many problems of
inconsistency between the infrastructure providers, both within and between infrastructure sectors, for example in
terms of definitions used and demand prognoses used in their planning processes. It is evident that the first
challenge faced by the infrastructure providers is to adopt a joint terminology. On the basis of the past decade of
systematic infrastructure system research, and especially the ontologies developed for modelling and simulation
of infrastructure systems, NGINFRA can provide the joint vocabulary needed to enable joint cross-sectoral learning.
In terms of knowledge content, the trends and themes taken as the starting point for the new NGINFRA agenda,
are the ones presented in the InfraTrends book, 2011:
Smart and secure infrastructures;
Sustainable infrastructures;
Interconnected networks and hubs;
Creating public value;
Transforming asset management;
Embracing complexity.
15
In our current discussion with the founding fathers, the NGI NFRA knowledge field and the 2011 InfraTrends
themes are being redefined, resulting in the following knowledge themes:
Open data and Big Data analytics (esp. in the context of smart grids/smart cities)
Urban Infrastructure and urban planning
Sustainable Energy Transition
Internationalization of infrastructures and markets
Managing interdependencies across markets, sectors and national borders
In all of these areas, NGINFRA has already laid a knowledge foundation and knowledge needs for the future are
evident. On the basis of the knowledge gaps that will be encountered in the process of generating the State of the
Infrastructure report, and in confronting the actual state of the Dutch system of infrastructure systems with the
challenges of the future, a new research program will be defined. That will be designed to deliver the knowledge
needed to secure the future proofness of the national infrastructure system. A preliminary outline of the contents
of the State of the Infrastructure report is presented in appendix 8.
Moreover, while the funding basis of the new program is being expanded, NGI NFRA is planning to venture into
new research areas that will be crucial to the future of infrastructure systems, especially:
Infrastructure financing arrangements
Spatial infrastructure modelling
16
4.
Accomplishments of Next Generation
Infrastructures
4.1.
Scientific impact
The BSIK-subsidy was a major enabler for our infrastructure systems research. It created an opportunity to carve a
niche for inter-disciplinary and cross-sectoral research on infrastructure systems in a world which is still
dominated by sector-specific and monodisciplinary work. Besides the research as such, the subsidy catalyzed the
development of a worldwide network of researchers and professionals sharing a passion for the challenges of
Next Generation Infrastructures. The network represents a new knowledge infrastructure through which the
research results and empirical findings are shared and disseminated, and which breeds new ideas and
knowledge initiatives.
Highest scores for Next Generation Infrastructures in QANU research assessment
In September 2010, VSNU’s prescribed periodic research quality assessments turned their focus on the research
at TU Delft’s Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, TU Eindhoven’s Faculty of Industrial Engineering &
Innovation Sciences and the University of Twente’s School of Management and Governance. An assessment
committee consisting of international academic heavyweights appointed by the QANU (Quality Assessment of
Netherlands’ Universities) organization, visited all 17 participating research programs in Delft, Eindhoven and
Enschede on location to discuss the content, results and management of each program with the program heads
and a delegation of researchers. All of the research programs were assessed on scientific quality, productivity,
relevance and viability.
For NGINFRA, this QANU research review was especially significant, as several of the programs assessed are
contributors to NGINFRA, most notably so the infrastructure systems research program of TU Delft’s Faculty of
Technology, Policy and Management. In total, the QANU review covered about half of the NGI NFRA program in
terms of budget and research capacity. Therefore, we were very proud that the QANU Research Review for
Technology, Management, Policy, and Industrial Engineering, published in March 2011, awarded maximum
scores for scientific quality, productivity, societal relevance and viability to the infrastructure systems research
program of the Technology, Policy and Management faculty of TU Delft, NGI NFRA’s ‘birth place’, our most
important partner and host.
The auditors were deeply impressed and gave the highest scores possible. The scores obtained by the Modern
Societies in Transition research program at the Faculty of Industrial Engineering & Innovation Sciences at TU
Eindhoven were equally impressive.
This is good news for the BSIK research project Next Generation Infrastructures, to which both research groups
are major contributors. The impressive assessment results achieved by both groups and their programs are good
news for NGINFRA: they confirm that infrastructure systems research has been put firmly on the map and that it is
of very high quality. It is also clear evidence for the quality of the assessment of research proposals made by
NGINFRA’s Scientific Advisory Board, which is part of the project selection procedure. Next Generation
Infrastructures is delighted to have been able to make a contribution to this achievement by encouraging and
supporting excellent researchers and their projects.
Quoting from the QANU assessment of the infrastructure systems research program of the faculty of Technology,
Policy and Management:
“The Committee has never seen a research program as impressive as this program in terms of quality,
productivity and outreach.”
“The quality of scientific relevant research is outstanding. The originality of work, both analytically and
technically, is excellent.”
“The quality and productivity rating and the related impacts are ‘off the charts’ in terms of expansion
rates.”
“Last, but not least, the robustness and stability of the program is reflected not only in its size, diversity
and leadership but also in its intellectual depth.”
17
“This is a strong, high-quality, productive program that is socially relevant and works to maintain that
relevance. It is vital and flexible.”
About the research at Eindhoven, the committee said:
“This is a first-rate program which might be described as the ‘jewel in the crown’ of the School and the
department. It is innovative and entrepreneurial.”
This evaluation clearly shows the scientific impact the program has. Please see appendix 3 for the full report.
What sets us apart
NGINFRA did pioneering work in bridging the engineering and the social sciences in their study of infrastructure
systems. In the traditional engineering approach to infrastructures the actors tend to be seen as part of the
context; in the traditional approach of the social sciences to infrastructures the actors are central and the physical
infrastructure is considered a context variable. NGI NFRA takes infrastructures as socio-technical systems,
comprising of the physical infrastructure, including its production facilities and end-use devices, the actors that
operate, control and govern the system, and the institutions that dictate the playing field and the rules of the
game. Hence, the market structure, the legislative and regulatory framework and the broader institutional context
are included as integral parts of the infrastructure system instead of the context. This integrated socio-technical
systems perspective also explains our adoption of a complex adaptive systems perspective in our studies: as
institutional choices favor certain technologies over others and as, in turn, technological innovations invoke
institutional change, the infrastructure system is in a process of constant adaptation in order to (re-)create
coherence between its technologies and its institutions.
Academic journals
In the first phase of the program it was hard to find scientific output channels that accommodated the crosssectoral and inter-disciplinary work for which NGINFRA was established. As a result, most of the academic output
found its way to the traditional mono-sectoral and/or mono-disciplinary journals. As a result of the prevailing
academic performance ranking system, these journals have not lost their significance as output channels for
NGINFRA research. However, new journals have come into existence which do more justice to the core concept of
NGINFRA: infrastructures as complex adaptive socio-technical systems. Many of these younger journals find their
roots in the overwhelming academic interest into critical infrastructure protection which emerged after 9/11.
Among these is the International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, which is published by Inderscience since
2004.
As NGINFRA progressed, several publishers started showing an interest in establishing a new journal to
disseminate scholarly articles in the vein of Next Generation Infrastructures. In 2013 we decided to go ahead with
Springer. In spring 2014, Infrastructure Complexity was launched as a new Springer open access journal.
PhD research productivity
NGINFRA initiated a Next Generation Infrastructures PhD series in a recognizable and attractive format,
contributing to our efforts to ‘brand’ NGI NFRA. We encouraged PhD candidates to publish in this format to make
them profit from a recognizable quality-label that the series offers as well as the distribution and communication
channels. In total, NGINFRA produced 90 PhD theses, 78 of which were published in the NGINFRA thesis series,
including three theses that were co-funded with Transumo/Trail. The remaining 12 were published in a different
format, for example when they originated from universities abroad. Appendix 2 contains the full list of PhD theses
that were published in the series, including two theses that are forthcoming in 2015. Numbers 1-17 were included
in the list, as these were funded through the predecessor programs of Next Generation Infrastructures
(DIOC/DRC on Design and Management of Infrastructures) and are thus considered to be an integral part of the
NGINFRA knowledge base. From number 17 onward (most of) the PhD theses listed have been sponsored with
BSIK funds. In some cases, the research projects themselves were funded by other organizations/programs than
NGINFRA, but if the work built on NGINFRA research, the thesis was accepted for publication in the NGINFRA
dissertation series and its publication was sponsored by NGINFRA.
Many of the NGINFRA theses are not only of excellent quality, they also received attention in the media and/or won
special awards. For example, Maaike Snelder (2011) won the TU Delft DEWIS Award and Emile Chappin (2011)
was interviewed by national newspapers and interviewed on BNR Radio (June 22, 2011).
18
.
Remco Verzijlbergh - De meerwaarde van systeemdenken
Mijn promotie over de rol van elektrische vervoer in
slimme energiesystemen is uitgevoerd binnen het
NGINFRA programma. Het deel uitmaken van een
programma waarin onderzoekers van verschillend
pluimage, vanuit verschillende invalshoeken en over
meerdere sectoren hun onderzoekswerk doen, is
bepalend geweest voor het uiteindelijke promotieonderzoek. In mijn ogen onderscheidt zich dat van
vergelijkbare studies over elektrisch vervoer in het
systeem-denken. Wij vragen ons niet alleen af: hoe kan
een elektrische auto zijn laadkosten minimaliseren? In
plaats daarvan kijken we over de hele keten en stellen
de vraag: hoe kan het systeem zo ingericht worden, dat
áls alle elektrische auto's hun laadkosten minimaliseren, het systeem als geheel er het meest van profiteert. Dan
moet je dus bijvoorbeeld ook de samenhang tussen variabele energietarieven en netwerktarieven meenemen in
je analyse - iets wat één van de kernpunten van het proefschrift is geworden.
Het vermogen om verder te kijken dan een enkele technologische niche is iets wat in de NGI NFRA benadering
natuurlijk sterk naar voren komt en waarin een onderzoeker in dit programma vanaf dag één uitgedaagd wordt.
Remco Verzijlbergh promoveerde cum laude op zijn onderzoek naar elektrisch rijden.
Scientific productivity and quality
Whereas the numbers of papers, books and other scientific outputs are not very informative as such, it is evident
from the numbers that NGINFRA has been an academically productive program:
Scientific output of Next Generation Infrastructures
Papers in
scientific
journals
Academic
books
Conference
papers
Chapters in
academic books
PhD theses
Total number
of scientific
publications
359
14
718
101
90
1282
Table 1. Scientific output of Next Generation Infrastructures counted.
19
Throughout the years, NGINFRA has not only succeeded in consistently increasing steering the program’s
productivity; we are especially proud that we have been able to consistently steer NGINFRA’s output towards
higher impact journals and towards higher impact papers (in comparison with the average impact of papers in
those journals), as follows from a detailed bibliometric analysis (made by the Leiden University CWTS institute) of
the NGInfra program at the TU Delft Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management (TPM), which represents a
substantial part of NGINFRA.
In the table below CPP is the average number of citations per publication; JCSm is the mean Journal Citation
Score, i.e. the average citation rate of all papers in which the institute, i.e.TPM-NGInfra, has published; FCSm is a
field-based world average, based on the citation rate of all papers (world-wide) published in all journals of the
field(s) in which the institute is active, and not only the journals in which the TPM-NGInfra’s researchers are
active. If the ratio CPP/JCSm is above 1.0, then the impact of the institute’s papers exceeds the journal-based
world average. If the ratio CPP/FCSm is above 1.0, then the institute’s work is cited more frequently than the field
based world average.
CPP/JCSm
CPP/FCSm
2003-2006
0.37
0.43
2004-2007
0.65
0.62
2005-2008
0.85
0.75
2006-2009
1.08
0.99
Δ
+192%
+130%
Table 2. Bibliometric analysis of TU Delft-TPM-NGInfra research group impact (CWTS, Leiden, 2010)
As can be seen in the table, NGINFRA started from a very mediocre performance in terms of scientific impact,
which comes as no surprise as the program more or less started from scratch – without a recognizable and
consistent body of knowledge to build on. However, in the six years over which the analysis was performed,
NGINFRA managed to leap towards a CPP/JCSm value of 1.08, and a CPP/FCSm value of almost 1.0. At the time
of the QANU research quality assessment in 2010, we had reached a JCSm/FCSm indicator of 1.03, which
signifies that the mean citation score of the institute’s journal set then (narrowly) exceeded the mean citation
score of all papers published in the fields) to which the journals belong. These numbers indicate that there is still
ample room for improvement of scientific impact, which is to be expected for a pioneering research program. On
the basis of the evident trend of consistent performance improvement, and considering the fact that most of the
new infrastructure systems journals were (and are) still too young for inclusion in the impact analysis, we trust
that, in time, NGINFRA will be able to show a continued increase of scientific impact towards levels that are
consistently higher than the world average.
The bibliometrric analysis only takes papers published in peer reviewed international scientific journals into
accont. Academic books cannot be included in such analyses. Books, however, are a very visible and important
part of NGInfra’s scientific output, which find their way to practitioners’ organizations and university class rooms.
20
Disciplinary research quality
For the NGINFRA researchers themselves, an indicator for academic quality can be derived from the fact that
many have acquired fellowship status in the Netherlands Institute of Governance (NIG). Within NIG, the group
from the TU Delft Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management belongs to the highest performers. For the
researchers in economics, law and engineering science disciplines, indicators of academic quality can be derived
from invited keynote presentations, invitations in international research assessment committees, invitations to act
as peer reviewers and members of project selection committees, editorships of relevant international journals, et
cetera.
The following is a non-exhaustive list of functions and roles taken up by NGINFRA researchers, with the purpose of
showing the breadth of the scientific and societal network, and the variety of roles that the researchers take up in
these networks.
Editor-in-Chief
International Journal of Critical Infrastructures – M.P.C. Weijnen, European editor
Infrastructrue Complexity – P.M. Herder, editor in Chief
Competition and Regulation in Network Industries – M. Finger and R. Künneke, Editors in Chief
Journal of Design Research – P.M. Herder, Editor in Chief
Editorial Board Memberships
Computer Standards & Interfaces (Elsevier) – T.M. Egyedi
Critical Policy Studies - J.F.M. Koppenjan
International Journal of Critical Infrastructures – P.M. Herder
International Journal of IT Standards and Standardization Research – T.M. Egyedi, Associate Editor
Journal of Public Administration, Research and Theory – J.F.M. Koppenjan
Membership of ad hoc advisory committees
Member of 1st National Innovation Platform, 2003-2007
Member of the Knowledge and Innovation Council of the Ministry of Public Works, Transport and Water Management
(V&W Kennis- en Innovatieberaad) (2005-2009)
Member, Advisory Committee (to the Minister of Economic Affairs) on Unbundling of the Duitch energy companies
Member, Netherlands Environmental Impact Assessment Committee
Member, Program Council of the ' Rijksacademie of Project Management'
Member, Advisory Board Palladio
Member, Risk Committee Room for the River
Chair, national Taskforce Smart Grids
Expert for improving United Nations (UN) annual e-government country assessment resulting in development of new egovernment readiness indicators related to the backend of organizations (2008-2009)
Member of the supervision commission Measuring the Digital Economy, National Office of Statistics (2000-2007)
Chair of Committee of Experts ITO, St. Telecom Groot-gebruikers & CCMA (2001-2003) (2003-2007)
Member of Scientific Board Klantenservice Kenniscentrum (Customer Center Knowledge Center)
Chair of the supervisory committee of the evaluation of the Dutch energy legislation on behalf of the Parliament (2006)
Member of the advisory committee to the Minister of Economic Affairs on the implementation of the unbundling law in
the energy sector
Membership of permanent advisory councils/board memberships
President of the European Academy for Standardization (EURAS)
Vice-Chair of the International Cooperation for Education about Standardization (ICES)
President of the Board of Supervisory Directors, TAUW Group
Member of the European Telecom Standards Inst. (ETSI) Special Task Force 376 Expert Committee
Member of the Expert Group 'Enterprise Interoperability Science Base' (EISB), European Commission, DG Information
Society and Media (2009)
Member of the Advisory Group on Energy for the European Commission
Member of the Netherlands Council on Science and Technology Policy
Member of the Netherlands General Energy Council
Member, Board of Governors, IEEE System, Man & Cybernetics Society
Chair, IEEE SMC Technical Committee for Infrastructure Systems & Services
Member of the Supervisory Board, Dutch National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR)
Board Member (vice chair), Netherlands Technology Foundation STW
Member (vice chair), Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute Advisory Council (KNMI Raad)
Chair, evaluation committee SBIR programme for Improving the Sustainability of Heat Supply in Industry, AgentschapNL
21
Member, Board of the Netherlands Study Centre for Technology Trends (STT)
Member, TenneT Innovation Advisory Board (TenneT is the Dutch TSO)
Founding Fellow, International Society of Engineering Asset Management
Board member, Hoogheemraadschap Delfland
Freight & Logistics Committee, Association for European Transport (chair)
Member, Advisory Board European Transport Research Review
Member, Program Board TRAIL Research School
Member, Program Committee Netherlands Research School on Transport, Infrastructure and Logistics
Member, Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR)
Member, board of the Energy Top Sector
Chairs
Several new chairs have been established in the framework of Next Generation Infrastructures:
 Security and privacy of internet users, Milton Mueller (Syracuse), visiting professorship, funded by XS4All with two
PhD projects funded by Next Generation Infrastructures
 Control of future electricity network operations, Marija Ilic (CMU), honorary chair, parttime for five years, funded by
Next Generation Infrastructures
 Public Administration - Governance of Infrastructures, Michel van Eeten, funded by NSOB/EZ
 Engineering Systems Design in Energy & Industry, Paulien Herder
4.2.
Knowledge dissemination
NGInfra knowledge carriers
Besides the academic staff involved in the program, the most important NGINFRA knowledge carriers are those
who played a key role in generating new insights into infrastructure systems: the dozens of PhD researchers, the
hundreds of MSc students and the post-doc’s who participated in NGINFRA projects. They represent the next
generation of academic researchers and young professionals in governmental organizations and the
infrastructure sectors, where they continue to build on NGINFRA knowledge. They can be expected to solve
problems in interdisciplinary teams, to think cross-sectorally and to be aware of the international dimension.
In its survey of the societal impact of NGINFRA, the Rathenau Institute found that the MSc graduates who did their
Master thesis research on NGINFRA (and NGINFRA related) projects, found their jobs mainly with technology and
infrastructure providers. We see a more or less equal distribution of MSc graduates among infrastructure
providers (e.g. Enexis, TenneT) and infrastructure service providers (e.g. Essent, Eneco), research institutes (e.g.
Deltares) and universities in the Netherlands (mainly TU Delft) and abroad (e.g. Purdue University, USA). For our
PhD graduates we see a similar picture: many of them find their way to post-doc and assistant professor positions
in academia, but a substantial number opt for non-academic positions and find their way to non-academic
knowledge institutes, governmental organizations and infrastructure (service) providers.
Website and InfraBase
In 2009, we launched the www.nextgenerationinfrastructures.eu website. It contains links to all projects,
researchers and affiliated partners. It regularly showed interesting articles and news related to infrastructure
issues. Moreover, relevant articles and NGINFRA outputs can be downloaded from the website.
In 2013 the website had a make-over. Apart from a new look the key change was the addition of InfraBase, an
integrated online repository of projects, researchers and results. InfraBase will remain accessible for three years
after the ending of the NGINFRA program.
Infra magazine
In June 2009, we launched the HubHolland Magazine together with the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the
Directorate-General for Transport, Public Works and Water Management (Rijkswaterstaat). HubHolland
addressed pressing issues on infrastructure developments in the Netherlands. HubHolland consists of the
publication of a thematic magazine and a high-level meeting. We adopted the concept HubHolland from a project
at the Study Centre of Technology Trends, to which managing director Judith Schueler and scientific director
Margot Weijnen contributed.
22
In 2012 new partners continued HubHolland as INFRA Magazine with a professional publisher (Elba Media).
INFRA is the only professional publication on the Dutch market that provides independent and objective
information about infrastructural networks in the Netherlands. INFRA is distributed four times a year, as a paper
magazine, and recently also as a digital publication.
Maarten van der Vlist - Infrabeheerders en wetenschap bij elkaar brengen
Infrastructuren vormen veelal de ruggengraat van een
samenleving. Onmisbaar voor het maatschappelijk en economisch
verkeer. Het is belangrijk dat intellectuele en wetenschappelijke
denkkracht over de ontwikkeling en het functioneren van
infrastructuren worden ontwikkeld en gemobiliseerd. NGINFRA
heeft het denken over infrastructuren in brede zin op de
wetenschappelijke agenda gezet. Het programma heeft ook een
katalyserende werking gehad op het bij elkaar brengen van de
diverse infrabeheerders. Mede door NGINFRA zijn de contacten
tussen infrabeheerders toegenomen en dat is van blijvende
waarde.
De laatste jaren zijn INFRA magazine, het InfraTrends congres en
het assetmanagementplatform ontwikkeld. Zij vormen een verbinding tussen de wetenschappelijke wereld
van NGINFRA en de praktische wereld van de infrabeheerders (en advieswereld over infrastructuren).
Tussen wetenschap en infrabeheerders en tussen infrabeheerders was en is relatief weinig contact. Die
contacten komen nu tot stand en zijn vruchtbaar.
De praktische waarde van NGINFRA is het voeden van het management en de senioren in de organisatie
die infrastructuren beheren. De afstand tussen het wetenschappelijk bedrijf en de werknemers van
infrabeheerders in operationele functies is groot. De vraagstukken die bij NGINFRA aan de orde zijn
gekomen, sluiten aan op strategisch en tactisch niveau. Dat is in mijn ogen ook goed. Het gaat om het
herkennen van de waarde van het onderzoek en het kunnen inschatten van de betekenis voor het
infrabeheren.
Maarten van der Vlist is lid van de redactieraad van INFRA magazine
In the media
Many NGINFRA researchers articulate their knowledge in the media. Some examples from the last few years:
In reaction to problems in the Dutch railway sector:
Caspar Chorus en Wijnand Veeneman in NRC Handelsblad op 19 januari 2011. “Samenvoegen
van NS en ProRail is geen oplossing meer;
23
Wijnand Veeneman in NRC Handelsblad op 21 januari 2011: Veel excuses, maar nog weinig
zicht op oplossingen
Wijnand Veeneman in NRC.NEXT: 21 januari 2011, Bert en Bert: het spijt ons
Wijnand Veeneman op Radio 1, 10 oktober 2014 over concurrentie op het spoor, gaat de
reiziger er op voor- of achteruit als er meer concurrentie komt voor de NS
In reaction to the Japanese tsunami disaster and troubles with the nuclear power plants in Japan:
Emile Chappin in het AD over Kernenergie in Nederland,17 maart 2011
In reaction to the debate about the ‘OV-chipkaart’:
Willemijn Dicke en Wijnand Veeneman in Rotterdams Dagblad op 18 april 2011, ‘RET levert
een verloren strijd’
Wijnand Veeneman in AD:, 27 januari 2011 ‘De strippenkaart is ook te vervalsen’
In relation to internet security, especially botnets:
Michiel van Eeten: 10 procent pc's in Nederland is onderdeel van botnet - webwereld.nl - 14
januari 2011
Michiel van Eeten: Veel Nederlandse computers in botnet - Algemeen Dagblad - 13 januari
2011
Michiel van Eeten: Ongeveer half miljoen computers Nederland deel van botnet - Volkskrant 13 januari 2011
Michiel van Eeten: Veel Nederlandse computers in botnet - nu.nl - 13 januari 2011
Michiel van Eeten over de beveiligingsproblemen van iCloud, september 2014
Tineke Egyedi in diverse media (zowel Europese als Nederlandse media) over concurrerende
IT standaarden, 20 januari 2012
In relation to his chairmanship of the task force Smart Grids:
Ernst ten Heuvelhof BNR Nieuwsradio d.d. 3 september 2010
Ernst ten Heuvelhof in Energie Nederland: ‘Smart grids leveren grote maatschappelijke baten
op’ (jrg. 13, nr. 12, p. 4) op 21 september 2010.
Ernst ten Heuvelhof in het FD: Groene stroom vergt kostbare investering in 'slim' stroomnet, 3
September 2010.
In general to energy issues:
Gerard Dijkema, Emile Chappin en Laurens de Vries, 13 january 2011 in FD Selections: Stop
de offshoring van wind
Gerard Dijkema, Emile Chappin and Laurens de Vries, … 2011 in The Wall Street Journal:
Europe’s Flawed Carbon-Trading System
Emile Chappin, RTL Nieuws (prime time) 28 March, on ‘zonne-energie in Nederland’
Laurens de Vries en Emile Chappin op blogs.reuters: Energy policy is key at Davos op 28
januari 2011
Margot Weijnen en Laurens de Vries in het FD over de Splitsingswet, 20 augustus 2011 –
‘Splitsingswet dient algemeen belang’
Emile Chappin in de Staatscourant over de haalbaarheid van duurzame energie, 14 december
2012
Rob Stikkelman en Hamilcar Knops in de Volkskrant over overtollige energie, 21 oktober 2013
24
Hamilcar Knops in Ensoc Magazine over het gebruik van overschotten van windenergie in
Rotterdamse industrien, 21 oktober 2013
Aad Correlje, NOS Journaal, 30 oktober 2014, de invloed van de gedaalde olieprijs op
economische grootmachten zoals Japan, India, Duitsland en Frankrijk
Laurens de Vries en Emile Chappin reageren met een opinieartikel in het Financieel Dagblad.
Op de discussie rond de baten van windenergie op zee
After Hamilcar Knops and Anish Patil had won first prize in the ‘Smart Port’ poster session of the
Port of Rotterdam Authority in July 2013, they found themselves in the spotlights numerous
times. Winning the poster session with their project ‘Converting Excess Wind Power into
Valuable Products’ (flexible capturing of wind-energy peaks) led to contributions in, among
others, the Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant (‘TomTom for harbour crane seeks shortest route
to quayside or ship’) and the trade journal SZW Maritime. De Volkskrant even dedicated an
extensive article to this project (‘What should you do with surplus energy? Go to the port’, 11
October 2013), which clearly fired the imagination.
25
On cross-cultural collaboration:
Karen Smits was quoted on several occasions about her research into cross-cultural
collaboration at the Panama Canal, e.g. Panamese newspapers La Prensa, El Siglo and
Central America Data, as well as on the Panamese television.
26
InfraTrends
Minister of Infrastructure and Environment, Ms. Schultz
van Haegen received the first publication of the book
‘Infratrends Next Generation Infrastructures’. The
collaborative effort presents both the synthesis of our
research as well as new research directions for the
future. The event took place in the Fokker Terminal in
The Hague.
In her preface to the book she notes: “Infratrends
2011’ is vanzelfsprekend ‘slechts’ een tussenbalans.
Het denken over de volgende generatie infrastructuren
staat nooit stil. Maar voor nu complimenteer ik Next
Generation Infrastructures met deze nuttige en
noodzakelijke publicatie.”
To capture the body of knowledge as well as to renew the research themes, NGINFRA published a ‘popular’ book
with the title ‘InfraTrends - Next Generation Infrastructures’. It was the ‘Wise Men’s Committee’ (Commissie van
Wijzen) which triggered the writing of this book with their explicit request to evaluate the program in 2011, rather
than after the BSIK-subsidized program closure per August 31, 2014.
An Italian
participant at
the workshop
Common
Ground in
April 2010 in
preparation of
the
InfraTrends
book and
event.
In 2010, we organized several small scale events in preparation of the book. One of these events was the
“Common Ground’ workshop to which all researchers and practitioners involved in NGI NFRA projects, including the
researchers from abroad, were invited. In this workshop which took place at the Delft Art Centre all participants
worked on a mid-term knowledge synthesis of the program, exploring the relationships between their projects,
and diagnosing the trends that will define infrastructure systems performance and research needs in the future.
In the resulting InfraTrends book, six trends were identified as crucial for the future of infrastructure systems:
Interconnected Infrastructures and hubs;
27
Sustainable Infrastructure 2.0;
Smart and Secure Infrastructure;
Transforming Asset Management;
Creating Public Value;
Embrace Complexity.
Descriptions of the thematic trends form the core of the book. Subprogram leaders, scientific directors as well as
project leaders and practitioners developed the content of these texts together. Moreover, the book contains fact
sheets with summaries of selected research projects. Furthermore, key players in the infrastructure sectors gave
interviews in which they expressed their opinions on the challenges they foresee for the future. Finally, the book
contains interesting quotes from many experts involved in the program, such as (former) Scientific Advisory Board
members and members of the Executive Board. The illustrations in the book tell their own story about the
complexity of infrastructures.
The first copy of the book was presented during the InfraTrends event to the Minister of Infrastructure and
Environment, Ms. Melanie Schultz van Haegen, who also wrote the preface to the book.
th
The first InfraTrends event, sponsored by Enexis and Essent, took place on the 19 of May, 2011. The Instituut
voor Maatschappelijke Innovatie (IMI) helped organizing the content in a refreshing way in order to ensure a
fruitful exchange between researchers and practitioners. The event strengthened our visibility in the field and
helped us to reach out to many new people. The event scored an ‘8’ in the evaluation by its 130 participants, with
the explicit encouragement to organize it more often.
The six themes presented in the InfraTrends book constitute the basis for the new Next Generation Infrastructures
research agenda up till 2014 and beyond. (See a copy of the InfraTrends book appendix 4)
One of our researchers proudly presents InfraTrends.
Next Generation Infrastructures during the event. .
28
The book Infratrends. Next Generation Infrastructures cites
the many influential people related to the program, among
which Tea Petrin, Scientific Advisory Board Member to
NGInfra and former Minister of Economic Affairs in
Slovenia.
As requested by the participants in the first InfraTrends event, InfraTrends has become a recurrent event. In 2012
it was organized by Elba Media, at the premises of Siemens Nederland, the Hague. InfraTrends 2013 and 2014
were, like the 2011 event, staged in the Fokker Terminal, the Hague. The 2014 edition doubled as NGINFRA‘s
public closing event. Again, the Minister of Infrastructure and Environment, Ms. Melanie Schultz van Haegen was
present, therewith emphasizing the importance and success of the programme. On the occasion, Rijkswaterstaat
(the Netherlands Agency for Public Works and Water Management), Alliander, the Port of Rotterdam, ProRail,
Vitens and the Delft University of Technology signed an agreement to establish an NGINFRA follow-up knowledge
initiative. All participants in the 2014 event and the regular readers of INFRA magazine received a
commemorative magazine about 10 years of NGINFRA: improving by understanding.
29
NGINFRA present at the Innovation Relay
In 2009, NGINFRA made its first appearance at the Innovation Relay (‘Innovatie-Estafette’). The Innovation Relay
is an event held every two years, where the business community, knowledge institutions, the government and the
society at large are invited to accelerate and stimulate innovations. In this way, the relay is designed to contribute
to solving social issues, while emphasizing the importance of innovation and strengthening innovation networks.
The 2013 Innovation Relay held a special significance for NGINFRA, as it provided the platform for the signing of
the (first) declaration of intent for the continuation of NGINFRA beyond the BSIK subsidy. This important moment
happened November 12, 2013 at the Innovation Relay in the Amsterdam RAI.
NGINFRA documentary
Over a 10-year period, the NGINFRA programme has built up a rich research portfolio, which led to a deeper
understanding of the behavior of infrastructure systems and to innovative approaches and modeling tools to
handle the challenges posed by their socio-technical complexity. In the process, new relationships between
researchers and practitioners were established. The 14 minutes’ documentary “Improving by Understanding”
gives an impression of how the program evolved and how the infrastructure practitioners appreciate the value of
the insights gained. The documentary is available on http://youtube.com/nextgenerationinfra in a Dutch version
with English subtitles.
30
4.3.
Education and training
Undergraduate and MSc education
Given the prominent role of TU Delft, and especially the Technology, Policy and Management Faculty in the
NGINFRA program, the insights gained through NGINFRA‘s research directly found their way to the BSc and MSc
curricula, especially the Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management (SEPAM) curricula, and the
Engineering and Policy Analysis (EPA) MSc curriculum. Furthermore, the research relationships which NGINFRA
developed in Europe, led to a joint Erasmus Mundus MSc program on Economics and Management of
Infrastructure Networks with Comillas University (Madrid, Spain) Université Paris XI, the European University
(Florence School of Regulation, Italy), and Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, USA).
PhD education
In 2009, NGINFRA launched a PhD education initiative: an intensive summer school, offering three parallel courses
for PhD students, operating under the name of Next Generation Infrastructures Academy. The first NGINFRA
Academy took place in September 2009, in Tegelen. The second NGINFRA Academy was staged in September
2010, in Santpoort. Besides a selection of NGINFRA researchers from the Netherlands and abroad, prominent
international experts (e.g., Prof. Benjamin Hobbs, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore and Prof. Yuval Portugali,
Tel Aviv University) and practitioners (e.g. Peter Jørgensen, Energinet, Denmark) were invited to participate in
the teaching. Both times the Academy was deemed a resounding success, by the students as well as by the
teachers. See Appendix 4 for the brochures about the Academy.
Student at the Next Generation
Infrastructures Academy
discussing the challenges of
the energy market .
Originally the NGINFRA Academy’s was designed to be the most prominent knowledge dissemination vehicle of
NGINFRA, bringing the participants up to date with the latest developments in infrastructure systems research,
providing practical tools for addressing many of the challenges faced in the design of tomorrow's infrastructure
systems, and creating opportunities for interaction with other talented researchers and young professionals from
government ministries, the infrastructure sectors, regulatory agencies and international knowledge institutes.
However, the business model of the Academy was concluded not to be viable for the future, and we decided to
explore alternative routes for knowledge dissemination to the target group of PhD researchers and young
professionals.
In the meantime, another vehicle presented itself: the Erasmus Mundus joint doctorate program for
Sustainable Energy Technologies and Strategies (SETS). Although, as a sector-oriented program it deviates from
the core mission of NGINFRA, NGINFRA convinced TU Delft to enter the SETS PhD partnership with Comillas
University (Madrid) and KTH (Stockholm) as a joint doctorate pilot. The joint doctorate is a new type of PhD
degree, which is not (yet) recognized under Dutch law, and which was designed in the context of the ERA
(European Research Area). In the framework of this pilot project, the three universities involved have struggled to
align their PhD regulations. On September 11, 2014, the first two PhD students in the Erasmus Mundus SETS
program successfully defended their dissertations at TU Delft. As a matter of course, the two candidates, José
Pablo Chaves Avila and Riccardo Fagiani, published their thesis in the NGI NFRA dissertation series.
Many of the course modules originally developed for the NGINFRA Academy have found their way to TU Delft
TopTech programs, such as the Master of Business in Energy Systems, to the Florence School of Regulation of
the European University, to the Netherlands School for Public Management (NSOB), etc.
31
Another example of successful PhD education is the annual course on Economics of Infrastructures that is taught
by TU Delft, EPFL (ETH Lausanne) and Université Paris I professors, since 2007. The course, which emerged
from research collaboration in NGINFRA between the professors involved, rotates between Delft, Lausanne and
Paris.
On-line NGINFRA education
Presented with the challenge to consolidate the legacy of NGI NFRA in a modern and easily accessible way we
decided to develop a MOOC, i.e. a Massive Open On-line Course for Next generation Infrastructures. This
turned out to be a very challenging and a very rewarding experience. The first part of the course was designed to
cover the basic concepts of Next Generation Infrastructures and to offer an introduction into a selection of
relevant analytical methods and modeling tools. Over the course of eight weeks, the participants were challenged
to apply their new understanding of infrastructures as complex adaptive socio-technical systems to infrastructure
problems in their own country. The final assignment after six weeks of intensive course work was to synthesize
the lessons learned in an issue paper. The second part of the course offered a selection of special topics:
standards, ICT and infrastructures, cyber security, smart grids and smart grid architecture, urbanization and urban
infrastructures.
Our MOOC was offered through the EdX platform, originating from an initiative by MIT and Harvard, in which TU
Delft and many other universities joined. Part 1 of the MOOC was offered in April-July 2014. Part 2, which
extended over six weeks, was offered during September – November 2014. The teachers involved were mainly
recruited from our TU Delft home base, but also involved renowned professors from e.g. the NGI NFRA Scientific
Advisory Board (Richard DeNeufville, MIT; Eve Mitleton-Kelly, LSE; Ignacio Perez-Arriaga, Comillas University
Madrid) and NGINFRA researchers working abroad (Geert Deconinck, KU Leuven; Sebastiaan Meijer, KTH
Stockholm; Johan Schot, SPRU, UK).
In Part 1, more than 17,000 students enrolled. In Part 2, more than 5000. A total of more than 800 certificates was
issued for those students who completed all assignments and were willing to pay for the certificate. However, the
study behavior of students in a MOOC turns out to be very different from students in regular academic programs.
Most just pick and choose from the course offerings. Many of the students who participated very actively in the
MOOC discussion forum, and brought valuable contributions, did not choose to obtain a course certificate. As
such, it is difficult to tell how effectively the NGI NFRA body of knowledge was disseminated. However, the
students’ comments to the course materials have convinced us that they have truly appreciated the course
contents:
Participants of the MOOC - Involve me and I will understand
“I would like to extend a hearty thank you to the wonderful professors and staff at DelftX for putting together this
engaging interdisciplinary course. It has opened my eyes to the issues to do with the infrastructures in my own
neighborhood, and has spurred me to research rack my brains day and night to come up with the most original
and effective solutions I can think of, in particular, regarding the frequent energy crises in my state and especially
in my city, and in general, around the world. I do not believe I have ever learned so much from an essays and
research based course before.”
Voor NGINFRA is kennisdisseminatie altijd belangrijk geweest. Naast onder meer boeken, congressen, artikelen in
vaktijdschriften en kranten is een nieuw medium gekomen: de Massive Open Online Course, of MOOC. Een
MOOC geeft iedereen, wereldwijd, de mogelijkheid om gratis een cursus te volgen. De MOOC Next Generation
Infrastructures is een van de eerste MOOC’s die door de TU Delft wordt aangeboden. Het gedachtegoed en het
internationale netwerk van NGInfra spelen een belangrijke rol in de cursus.
Voor het eerste deel van de MOOC meldden zich ruim 17.000 deelnemers die tijdens de collegecyclus van zeven
weken wekelijks een aantal korte colleges konden volgen. Daarnaast waren er filmpjes, animaties en opdrachten.
Er kwam veel feedback van de deelnemende studenten, waaronder opmerkingen, vragen, aanvullingen,
voorbeelden uit de regio van de studenten. Waar mogelijk werd hier in video’s op ingegaan.
De ruim 450 papers die werden ingediend, illustreren de diversiteit van deelnemers en hun aandachtsgebieden:
Toronto roads, Ethiopia telecom, Barcelona harbor, Peru electricity, gas pipe safety issues China, water New
Zealand. Een van de enthousiaste reviewers haalt een Chinees gezegde aan: Tell me and I'll forget; show me
and I may remember; involve me and I'll understand.
De MOOC Next Generation Infrastructures wordt via EdX aangeboden door de TU Delft
32
T. Scheller
@bones44
Very, very interessting lectures about complex systems. Never even saw it
that way until the last hours... Many thanks @DelftXNGI for that!
7 mei 2014 21:43
Quotes
“I wanted to say thank you for the very fascinating lectures you gave in the Next Generation Infrastructures EdX
course. It has inspired me to do a bit more reading into your work and in this field. I have even started to consider
how I can use this in my work as an engineer, or perhaps what type of jobs would allow me to use complexity
theory in practical situations. I think that's the type of work I'd like to contribute to!”
“Thank you for coming with such an enlightening course. Its my first course on edX and it was really an amazing
experience, specially the discussion page. Looking forward to next part. Regards.”
“Chinese Proverbs: “Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll understand."This
experience has been amazing because all of us is involved by applying knowledge and sharing
experiences: Such as people seeking to create a more resourceful world.I feel thankful with TU Delft team,
edX and fellow contributors.”
“Many thanks to my classmates who shared meaningful ideas and lessons with the class. This was a very wellstructured and interactive class that captivated my attention each week.”
“This experience has been amazing because all of us is involved by applying knowledge and sharing
experiences.”
“It has opened my eyes to the issues to do with the infrastructures in my own neighborhood‘
“.... and the experience has exceeded my expectations by far. Definitively is an outstanding educational model”
More than all these heart warming reactions, the most rewarding outcome of the MOOC efforts for NGI NFRA is the
case study material that the students contributed: more than 3000 case studies on infrastructure problems from
all over the world, on all types of infrastructure. A lot of this material is of surprisingly high quality, which is
explained by the fact that more than 50% of the MOOC Next Generation Infrastructures’ students turned out to be
professionals, working in the infrastructure sectors, in engineering contractors’ and consultancy firms, in
regulatory agencies and government.
In 2015, the MOOC Next Generation Infrastructures will be offered again, with major improvements:
building on the case study materials obtained in 2014, the course contents will be further
internationalized, in order to create an even stronger appeal to students living in emerging economies;
the two parts will be integrated into one course, in order to create a steeper and more coherent learning
curve;
the final assigment wil be more challenging in its requirements to arrive at a synthesis of the course
contents and to show quantitative rigor.
In the meantime, quite a few technicalities still need to be solved. One of the problems that we encountered is the
inadequacy of the EdX platform to allow for peer review, which is the mechanism that we relied on to make a first
selection of the best issue papers produced by the students of the first part of the MOOC. Before we were able to
make the final selection of the best papers, the EdX organization needed to implement new capabilities of the
platform, which caused excessive delay in the final assessment procedure. In the end, the course directors
selected the two best papers: one authored by Rommel Pastrana, from the Philippines, the other one authored by
Frederic Vanswijgenhoven from Belgium. As it turned out, Frederic just graduated in economics from KU Leuven.
Rommel is a young entrepreneur in telecommunications infrastructure and software engineering. These two
‘students’ were awarded with a free ticket to Vienna and free registration for the 2014 International Sympoisum for
Next Generation Infrastructure.
33
Looking back on our first MOOC adventure, it is evident that the exposure gained for the NGINFRA body of
knowledge far surpasses anything that we could have accomplished through publishing books and papers or
regular teaching. Through the MOOC, new professional contacts have been established, such as with the UN
Operations Branch in Africa. The experience has only strengthened our belief that we should continue to use
these new teaching opportunities, and learn to use them more effectively. Besides the aforementioned
improvements of the course, another item on our agenda for 2015 is to translate it into Chinese. In 2014, students
in China did not have effective access to the course contents due to the blockage of Youtube in China. In the
meantime, the EdX organization has negotiated this problem with China and established a partnership with a
Chinese provider. At present, we are already discussing a collaboration with the Tsinghua School of Public Policy
and Management aimed at incorporating more Chinese content in the Chinese version of the course.
34
4.4.
Knowledge valorization
Dialogue
Intensive interaction with practitioners is at the core of NGINFRA‘s mission. This leads to soft societal impact in
which we offer examples from other sectors, introduce a new vocabulary, terminology or model and/or help
analyzing and reframing a problem. Infrastructure professionals know a lot about their own sector, more than
most academic researchers do, but the latter can, with their academic perspective, often provide eye-openers.
They can compare the situation at hand to a similar situation in a different sector; they may come up with a new
framework or way of thinking; as an outsider they can address taboos; or they can pose the questions that
insiders take for granted. The impact of such interventions may be hard to measure – yet it is definitely why others
appreciate Next Generation Infrastructures.
At the starting point of NGINFRA in 2004 we wrote:
“Despite these investments it seems that many of the traditional infrastructures cannot keep pace with
changing societal and user demands (…). In the vision of the Next Generation Infrastructures (…), this
collection of interacting change processes in the infrastructure industries is creating a new generation of
infrastructures, which are so interwoven that traditional approaches to spatial planning, policy making
and regulation of infrastructures, structured alongside sectoral borders, are no longer adequate.
Likewise, infrastructure operators and managers have to take interactions with other infrastructures into
account in their decision making e.g. on capacity allocation and planning” (Next Generation
Infrastructures, Nulmeting, 2004).
Since then, the value of and the continued need for cross-sectoral learning has convincingly been demonstrated.
In preparation for the future of NGINFRA, two working groups with a representation from a diversity of
infrastructure sectors and science were started as pilots for the new NGI NFRA program and organization, one on
the topic of infrastructure availability, the other one on the topic of foresight studies. As it turned out, the
motivation in both groups was largely driven by the need to align working practices and join forces in future
knowledge development. As Vitens points out: 99% of its pipelines are in close physical proximity to other
infrastructure providers’ pipelines and cables. Another example: three infrastructure providers which are part of
the same logistical chain turned out to use different prognoses for the future freight transport needs. A deeper
exploration of the methods and data used by different infrastructure providers is already on the agenda for the
new NGINFRA program.
Strategic Alliances
Margot Weijnen and Ronald Paul, director of
Projectorganisatie Maasvlakte 2 shake hands after
signing the strategic alliance Next Generation Port
Infra. Powered by Maasvlakte 2.
Another vehicle that NGINFRA developed to create societal value out of the academic insights gained, is through
strategic alliances with infrastructure providers. In 2011 NGINFRA allocated the remaining BSIK funds almost
entirely to its strategic alliances with the Port of Rotterdam (Projectorganisatie Maasvlakte 2) and Alliander
(energy distribution network operator). The alliances involved the in-cash matching of BSIK-subsidy to a total value
of 3.3 Million Euro. See appendix 4 for a brochure about these alliances.
35
René van der Plas - Kennis opbouwen voor de haven van de toekomst
We moesten wel aan elkaar wennen. De wetenschappelijke wereld is
heel anders dan de zakelijke omgeving van het Havenbedrijf. Maar op
het moment dat we echt met elkaar in gesprek gingen, bleek de
samenwerking tot stand te komen. En dat leverde ontzettend leuke
resultaten op!
In 2010 startte de alliantie tussen het Havenbedrijf Rotterdam en
NGINFRA. Er zat een simpele gedachte achter: de Tweede Maasvlakte is
de toekomst van de haven; NGINFRA onderzoekt next generation
infrastructures. Kunnen we die wetenschappelijke kennis niet toepasbaar
maken voor de ontwikkeling, realisatie en inrichting van Maasvlakte 2?
Met als centrale vraag: wat is er nou nodig om ook in de toekomst
succesvol te kunnen zijn als haven? In nauwe samenwerking voerden we
elf verschillende onderzoeken uit. Bijvoorbeeld op het gebied van
technologie, energie, leefbaarheid en asset management. Het leverde
een schat aan nieuwe kennis en nieuwe ideeën op, die gaan resulteren in
daadwerkelijke vernieuwingen op Maasvlakte 2.
René van der Plas is directeur Maasvlakte 2 bij het Havenbedrijf Rotterdam
Next Generation Port Infra
The alliance with the Port of Rotterdam is known as Next Generation Port Infra - Powered by Maasvlakte 2. Its
aim was to employ the NGINFRA knowledge base to support the Port of Rotterdam Maasvlakte 2 extension to
become the most efficient and sustainable harbor in the world. In response to the needs formulated by the Port of
Rotterdam Maasvlakte organization, NGINFRA developed a strategic framework which was populated with projects
through co-creation workshops with researchers and practioners. The project ideas were developed into fullfledged project proposals, which were assessed for both scientific quality and practical relevance to the Port of
Rotterdam and its stakeholders. Within the budget limits, eleven projects were finally selected.
36
On 20 March 2014, almost seventy scientists and port professionals met during the festive Next Generation Port
Infra 'closing event'. In a playful setting the participants in the alliance were invited to reflect on the experiences of
joint knowledge creation and joint learning, and to share lessons learned. Ronald Paul, COO of the Port of
Rotterdam, expressed his appreciation of the network that has been created in the past four years, a good
illustration of which was the high level of interest shown in this closing day event. Particularly successful projects
in the Next Generation Port Infra alliance were Asset Life Cycle Management (which was instrumental in the Port
of Rotterdam being Pas55 certified for excellence in asset management), Apps Development for the Port of
Rotterdam and its Hinterland (initiating discussion within the Port Authority about open data) and 3D Spatial Data
Infrastructures (3D SDI).
Empowering Networks
The alliance with Alliander is known as Empowering Networks. Its primary focus is to support Alliander in its
interactions with stakeholders in society and to empower Alliander’s stakeholders to improve decision making
within Alliander, so that Alliander can create more value for society. Peter Molengraaf, CEO Alliander, stated in
InfraTrends (2011):
“Bij kwesties zoals de introductie van de elektrische auto beslist de politiek uiteindelijk over het
marktmodel en hoe de daarvoor benodigde infrastructuur moet worden aangelegd. Netwerkbedrijf
Alliander kiest er echter niet voor om deze beslissingen af te wachten. Als je zelf actief de dialoog
aangaat, vind je samen wat er nodig is en welke beleids- en reguleringskaders er uiteindelijk moeten
komen”.
As in the case of the alliance with the Port of Rotterdam, also for this alliance a strategic framework was
developed in response to Alliander’s knowledge needs. Through several rounds of co-creation workshops, the
framework was populated with project ideas which were then detailed in project proposals. The final selection
yielded ten projects for alliance funding. In the final evaluation of the Empowering Neworks alliance, particularly
successful projects were considered to be: Open Data, Modelling Complexity and Institutional Arrangements. The
project Open Data has lead Alliander to implement an open data policy and is a showcase in this sector.
37
Pallas Agterberg - Maatschappelijke vraag vertalen in oplossingsrichtingen
NGINFRA biedt ons toegang tot denkers over infrastructuren, mensen die
verder kijken dan vandaag. Belangrijke vragen waar we als infrastructuurbedrijf
mee worden geconfronteerd, kunnen we zo in een breder perspectief plaatsen.
De dynamiek op de energiemarkt dwingt Alliander mee te veranderen. De
betrouwbare leverancier wordt een netbeheerder die haar net ten dienste stelt
van de klant. Daarbij moeten we ook buiten de eigen kabels kunnen denken.
De onderzoekers van NGINFRA focussen op de vraag hoe je als beheerder
flexibel wordt, hoe je de vertaalslag maakt van wensen van de maatschappij
naar technische oplossingen. De samenwerking met NGINFRA heeft inzichten
opgeleverd over wat belangrijk is om vernieuwingen mogelijk te maken.
Deze inzichten moeten we toepassen en delen. Als we in een volgende fase onze inzichten uitwisselen met
andere infrabeheerders, zoals het Havenbedrijf Rotterdam of ProRail, dan kunnen we nog beter begrijpen wat we
anders moeten doen om nieuwe netwerken mogelijk te maken.
Pallas Agterberg is directeur Strategie bij Alliander
38
This Distribution System Operator (DSO)-society interaction model is used to explain
the complexity of interaction with different
stakeholders for a network company such as
Alliander NV.
Alliander felt that the alliance projects were useful in the knowledge support they provide to help Alliander
respond to the challenges posed by a society that is changing rapidly. As a metaphor for Alliander’s journey into
the future, a travel magazine “Going with the flow!” (“Met de Stroom mee!”) was made in which the results of each
project are presented in an accessible way for non-experts.
=
ProRail
Moreover, Next Generation Infrastructures contributed to formulating two large ‘calls’ for research proposals in
the areas of ‘intelligent rail infrastructure’ and ‘whole system performance’ for STW/NWO/ProRail funding (total
about 5 million). For Next Generation Infrastructures, cooperating closely with ProRail and the research funding
bodies in defining relevant research questions is an effective way of translating the NGINFRA body of knowledge
into their practice. Furthermore, it helps us in defining our research agenda for the future. In this way we connect
directly to the relevant issues in infrastructure sectors that require academic insights, present a long-term
perspective and profit from cross-sectoral learning. Bert Klerk, president of ProRail at the time, remarked about
the program in our magazine (2009):
“We moeten actief met onze vraagstukken de boer op. Vervolgens kunnen we met de oplossingen en
ervaringen weer terug naar binnen om ze toe te passen. We moeten er aan wennen om anderen inzicht
te geven in onze problematiek.” (p.28 Alles is Infra)
39
Documentaries
Documentary films have been made about the NGINFRA alliances with Alliander and the Port of Rotterdam (both
in Dutch): Empowering Networks (Alliander) and Next Generation Port Infra (Port of Rotterdam). Another
documentary was made for the Port of Rotterdam about the Asset Life Cycle Management project (in Dutch with
English subtitles). All films are available in a dedicated NGINFRA YouTube channel:
www.youtube.com/nextgenerationinfra .
Infra Spark Award
The NGINFRA programme has produced around ninety dissertations, which are an important factor in the
programme's success. NGINFRA has been able to really set things in motion, partly as a result of the 'spark' that
individual researchers were able to communicate. In order to illustrate this, an award was presented to the PhD
research that has had the greatest practical impact. Our aim with the Infra Spark Award was to draw attention to
the work of scientists whose theses have succeeded in translating theory into practice. Thirteen NGINFRA PhD
students participated in the preliminary round, pitching their research in a short film. More than 1,400 people
voted for their favourite candidates, as well as for their second and third preferences. The winner was chosen
from three finalists at InfraTrends 2014.
Asset Management Platform
During a plenary debate at Infratrends, fans of Asset
Management displayed their enthusiasm
spontaneously. Transforming Asset management was
one of the most-appreciated themes during the event.
40
We managed to convince both researchers and professionals that cross-sectoral learning is valuable. This has
become most clear in the vibrant community of the Asset Management Platform. An increasing awareness of the
life cycle of (physical) infrastructure assets in combination with new institutional settings with often distributed
responsibilities for different life phases, produces many challenges for infrastructure asset managers and owners.
In the Platform, we successfully facilitate the exchange of knowledge between our partners in different
infrastructure sectors. Managers from e.g. Heijmans, Enexis, Rijkswaterstaat, ProRail, TenneT and Alliander, and
many other infrastructure owners, operators and managers gather with researchers in the field to up-date each
other on the latest developments in the rapidly growing field of strategic Asset Management. (See appendix 4 for
a brochure about the Asset Management Platform)
Reliability network
Originating from the Networked reliability research projects, a reliability network was brought into existence. It
organized three successful workshops with reliability professionals from a wide variety of infrastructures, including
(but not limited to) electricity, rail, road, air traffic, telecommunications, chemical industry, financial sector, and
emergency services. This network also organized the follow-up for a much appreciated project on Benchmarking
Incident Management in the subprogram. The organizations that participated in the benchmark have joined the
network.
In addition to these network workshops, the NGI findings have been disseminated in presentations and workshop
in different parts of the public and private sector, most notably during an international governmental conference
on Protecting Our Critical Infrastructures: Issues for Resilient Design on April 18-19, 2007. This resulted in a
policy paper for Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations to address the future European policy making in
the field of Critical Infrastructure Protection.
Good and getting better
The societal impact is difficult to quantify in a program as diverse as NGI NFRA. Whereas researchers are used to
have the scientific impact of their work measured continuously, the societal impact is rarely judged. We have a
good overview of the way in which the program office facilitates exchange between practitioners and researchers
to augment the impact. However, on the level of the projects it is much harder to get a sense of the impact the
research generated.
Therefore, we commissioned the Rathenau Institute to perform a societal impact analysis and give us
recommendations on how to increase our societal impact. The Rathenau recommendations and our responsive
actions are summarized below:
Formulate more clearly a specific strategy to realize impact, taking into account the academic character
of the program.
 The alliances were steered for societal impact, with strong participation from the problem owners. The
strategic frameworks we used to realize impact were evaluated positively.
Map impact performances that relate to the impact strategy more systematically.
 Impact was systematically monitored by the Steering Committees of both alliances. The steering
committees convened every quarter and assessed monitoring information of the projects.
Build a database of stakeholders involved and/or interested in the programs, which can serve as a
means to improve regular stakeholder interactions.
 Infrabase was built as a database – among other contents, it keeps track of stakeholder relations.
Involve theme leaders and other core researchers in the programme more directly into the management
of impact.
 In the alliances the research leaders were directly connected to the project owners at Alliander and
the Port of Rotterdam, a.o. for the management of societal impact.
Create new dissemination themes on issues that reflect knowledge needs of stakeholders or critical
issues in current infrastructural developments around related projects.
 New dissemination themes are for example spatial data infrastructures and open data. Data is a
synergy theme across projects and awareness of the value of data is increasing.
Improve stakeholder interactions by creating proper mechanisms that assure that interested
stakeholders are kept informed during projects. Have graduate students involved in these interactions.
 In the alliances, many matchmaking events were staged that also invited external stakeholders. In
some projects, this led to much wider participation of industries beyond Alliander and/or the Port of
Rotterdam.
41
Develop stakeholder relations at different levels and with different expertise in the case of large
organisations.
 Within Alliander and the Port of Rotterdam we consistently expanded the network of relations through
workshops, poster sessions and presentations.
To date, in 2014, we can conclude that the Rathenau recommendations have been very helpful in designing the
strategic alliance programs’ management structure for the creation of user value. See appendices 5 and 6 for the
reviews of the strategic alliance programs.
4.5.
Internationalization
Involving international researchers
In the past ten years 176 projects were funded by NGINFRA. The list includes projects staffed by international
researchers and practitioners of about 50 different organizations, among which 20% are partners outside of the
Netherlands, in Belgium, Germany, Italy, France, Norway, China, India and Canada. Unfortunately, due to the
structure of our contracts, the only American university we were able to establish a contractual relationship with is
Syracuse University. However, this did not stop us from establishing good working relationships with several US
universities through visiting scholarships, such as with M.I.T. (Dan Frey, Richard DeNeufville), Carnegie Mellon
University (Eswaran Subrahmanian) and Michigan State University (Johannes Bauer). Thanks to the B SIK
funding, we were able to appoint leading power grid researcher Marija Ilic (Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh)
to the honorary chair of “Control of future electricity network operations” for five years (0.25 fte) at TU Delft.
International conferences
Initially, we set up an IEEE co-sponsored conference series on Next Generation Infrastructure Systems &
Services, supported by the IEEE Society for Systems, Man and Cybernetics. The first one of these conferences
was organized in Rotterdam (2008), followed by Chennai, India (2009), Shenzhen, China (2010) and Norfolk,
Virginia, USA (2011).
42
Prof. Granger Morgan, dean of the School of
Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie
Mellon University, addressing the first Next
Generation Systems & Services International
Conference, held at Rotterdam WTC, 2008.
Since 2013, this IEEE SMC conference series has been replaced by the ISNGI series: the International
Symposium for Next Generation Infrastructure, the first one being organized by the SMART Infrastructure Facility
of the University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia. ISNGI 2014 was hosted by the International Institute for Applied
Systems Analysis (IIASA), at its Laxenburg palace, in the direct vicinity of Vienna. The academic program was
designed in partnership between TU Delft/Next Generation Infrastructures (Prof. Margot Weijnen), Oxford
University/Infrastructure Transitions Research Consortium (Prof. Jim Hall), and University College
London/International Centre for Future Infrastructures (Prof. Brian Collins).
To date, the aforementioned conferences are still unique in catering for cross-sectoral and inter-disciplinary
research on infrastructure systems. However, NGINFRA has also invested in spreading its message to other
research communities. Prof. Margot Weijnen and Prof. Paulien Herder, both scientific directors of NGINFRA, are
founding fellows of the international Society of Engineering Asset Management (ISEAM), which set up another
relevant new series of international conferences (World Conference on Engineering Asset Management) where
many NGINFRA researchers and practitioners present their work.
Furthermore, NGINFRA supported many other relevant international conferences, such as the Annual Conference
on the Economics of Infrastructures (several years), the Thredbo International Conference Series on Competition
and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport (several years) and the 2011 IEEE International Conference on
Networking, Sensing and Control (ICNSC 2011).
Thematic workshops
NGINFRA sponsored and organized a multitude of workshops and expert meetings, mostly in the context of
specific research projects. Besides project and subprogram oriented workshops, we also staged workshops on
specific themes we wanted to explore, and with specific researchers and research groups with whom we
considered establishing collaborative relationships. An exhaustive list would cover pages, therefroe just three
examples:
We organized a workshop on ‘Electricity security in the Cyber Age: Managing the increasing dependency of the
electricity infrastructure on information and communication technology’in May 2009, Utrecht, which resulted in a
book publication by Springer: Securing Electricity Supply in the Cyber Age (Springer, 2010).
In the context of the ‘Understanding complex systems’ subprogram, Prof. Piet Van Mieghem organized several
workshops, including a workshop at TU Delft on the Robustness of Complex Networks, 14-16 November, 2010,
which featured the renowned Prof. Eugene Stanley as a keynote speaker. This workshop attracted top scientists
and engineers from around the world, including (besides Eugene Stanley) Shlomo Havlin, Alex Vespignani and
Dimitri Krioukov, collectively working on theories and applications of robust networks in diverse disciplines, to
exchange definitions and analysis methods and to share their latest approaches.
In the spring of 2013, a workshop on modeling and simulation of infrastructure networks was held with
representatives from the TU Delft NGINFRA community, the UK Infrastructure Transitions Research Consortium (in
which seven renowned UK research universities collaborate) and the Australian SMART Infrastructure facility.
Amongst others, this workshop resulted in Dr. Igor Nikolic, pioneer of Agent Based Modeling in NGI NFRA, to be
invited to the University of Oxford, where he spent six months in 2014 as a visiting senior research fellow to
Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute.
43
International journals
In the first phase of the program it was hard to find scientific output channels that accommodated the crosssectoral and inter-disciplinary work for which NGINFRA was established. As a result, most of the academic output
found its way to the traditional mono-sectoral and/or mono-disciplinary journals. As a result of the prevailing
academic performance ranking system, these journals have not lost their significance as output channels for
NGINFRA research. However, new journals have come into existence which do more justice to the core concept of
NGINFRA: infrastructures as complex adaptive socio-technical systems. Many of these younger journals find their
roots in the overwhelming academic interest into critical infrastructure protection which emerged after 9/11.
Among these is the International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, which is published by Inderscience since
2004.
As NGINFRA progressed, several publishers started showing an interest in establishing a new journal to
disseminate scholarly articles in the vein of Next Generation Infrastructures. In 2014, we launched Infrastructure
Complexity as a new Springer open access journal.
NGINFRA in India
NGINFRA inspired our Indian colleagues to set up a similar knowledge center in Bangalore, India, within the Center
for Science, Technology and Policy (CSTEP), in 2008. The interdisciplinary Next Generation Infrastructure
Laboratory (NGIL) at CSTEP conducted infrastructure systems research, education and training, building on the
work done elsewhere and applying it in the India context. If these large technological systems are to be designed
to enable sustainable development of the Indian economy and society as a whole, then a coherent perspective of
technology and institutions must be embedded in their design. Through frequent exchange of researchers
between Bangalore and Delft a win-win situation was created, in which Bangalore benefited from NGI NFRA‘s
pioneering work in simulation and gaming and in which the development of new NGI NFRA models was accelerated
with the help of the advanced IT expertise available in Bangalore. The collaboration efforts had a focus on
modeling and simulation, especially serious gaming. Projects included the development of a more robust version
of the electricity market game and the development of more complex simulation models of interconnected
infrastructure related markets.
In collaboration with NGINFRA, CSTEP-NGIL organized a workshop on the use of simulation and gaming in public
policy making in July 2009, which was attended and well received by many federal and Karnataka State
government representatives.In July 2011, TU Delft NGINFRA researchers Sebastiaan Meijer and Margot Weijnen
participated in the NGIL workshop Imagining Infrastructures, in Bangalore.
nd
In December 2009, CSTEP-NGIL organized the 2 International IEEE SMC Conference on Next Generation
st
Infrastructure Systems: Developing Infrastructures for the 21 Century, at the site of SSN Colleges in Chennai,
Tamil Nadu.
Since its establishment, the NGI Laboratory at Bangalore has grown dramatically (25 fulltime researchers in
August 2011) to the extent that it decided to separate from CSTEP. The new independent organization, Fields of
View, specialized in serious gaming, is hosted by the Bangalore Institute of Information Technology’s incubator.
NGINFRA in China
Also in China, the concepts of NGINFRA appeal to the imagination of researchers and policy makers. In June
2010, NGINFRA signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Shenzhen/Nanshan District, the
Shenzhen Graduate School of Harbin Institute of Technology (HITSGS), NICIS and TU Delft, at the occasion of a
joint workshop on next generation infrastructures for eco-cities.
44
Margot Weijnen signs on behalf of
Next Generation Infrastructures a
Memorandum of Understanding
with the Harbin Institute of
Technology, the city of Shenzhen,
the NICIS Institute and the TUDelft.
Eco-cities will be the focus.
A consortium of NGINFRA /TU Delft, the Shenzhen Graduate School of Harbin Institute of Technology (HITSGS)
and the Dynamic City Foundation was then invited by the government of Longgang district, Shenzhen, to develop
a strategic vision for the development of Pingdi, a sub-district of Longgang, into a world class eco-city. In the
process, the area under study was expanded across the Shenzhen municipal borders into the neighboring
municipalities of Dongguan and Huizhou.The strategic vision, which was presented in November 2010, has since
then been quoted in the Chinese media as the “Dutch approach” to the development of eco-cities. The plan is
embraced for a combination of four innovative components: (1) a smart spatial planning concept, (2) an
integrative approach to the development of smart and flexible infrastructures, (3) innovative governance and
business models, and (4) the inclusion of the cultural dimension. Since then, the Shenzhen and Longgang
governments have consolidated the formal collaboration with the cities of Huizhou and Dongguan (collaborative
framework agreement signed April 18, 2011) and they have taken the project to the National Reform and
Development Commission, which has resulted in the selection of Shenzhen as one of the eight prominent cities
for “low carbon” pilot projects. The strategic plan has furthermore been adopted as the core of a Sino-Dutch
Government-to-Government (G2G) project. It will be developed at three levels: (1) the intermunicipal development
of a low carbon eco-district, (2) the development of an open innovation campus for eco-efficient technologies and
services as a nucleus for this development, and (3) the establishment of a joint Sino-Dutch research centre for
Next Generation Metropolitan Areas, to be developed by the Southern China University of Technology (SCUT)
and Delft University of Technology. The plan was explicitly supported by the Dutch Minister of Economic Affairs,
Agriculture and Innovation, Maxime Verhagen, during his visit to China in June 2010. Early July 2011, a
delegation of Shenzhen and SCUT officials visited the Netherlands. End of August/early September 2011 their
visit was followed by a visit of a high level delegation, headed by the Vice-Mayor of Shenzhen, Prof. Tang Jie.
The initiative has resulted in active collaboration between Shenzhen and the Dutch municipalities of Amsterdam
and Almere.
rd
HITSGS and NGINFRA organized the successful 3 International IEEE SMC Conference on Next Generation
Infrastructure Systems: Next Generation Infrastructures for Eco-Cities in November 2010, which featured many
distinguished keynote speakers, among which leading scholar on urban development, Saskia Sassen. In
September 2011, a workshop in the framework of the G2G project was organized in Shenzhen, followed by a visit
of the Dutch Vice Minister for Environment in November 2011.
45
Prof. TANG Jie, Vice Mayor of Shenzhen,
giving his opening address to the 3rd
NGInfra international conference,
Shenzhen, China.
The conference was held in the library of
the university town campus of Shenzhen,
which architecture symbolizes a dragon.
The experiences in China opened our eyes to the relevance of NGI NFRA knowledge in the context of urban
planning. Since then, we have embarked on urban planning and urban infrastructure management issues as a
new line of research. Following a presentation on NGI NFRA models to the chair of the Guangzhou Urban
Management Council, an urban management research consortium agreement was signed between the
Guangzhou Urban Management Council, the Technology, Policy and Management faculty of TU Delft and the
Southern China University of Technology’s School of Public Administration, November 20, 2014. TU Delft and
SCUT already established a joint Urban Systems and Environment research center in 2012, which is further being
developed towards dual degree PhD and MSc programs.
NGINFRA as a role model
Other examples of how NGINFRA inspired others are the Infrastructure Transitions Research Consortium (ITRC)
and the more recently established International Centre for Infrastructure Futures (ICIF), led by Prof. Jim Hall
(Oxford) and Prof. Brian Collins (UCL), respectively. In Australia, at the site of the University of Wollongong, the
so-called SMART Infrastructure Facility was established by Garry Bowditch and Prof. Pascal Perez. Like
NGINFRA, all these more recent initiatives draw on complex socio-technical systems thinking, and application of
these concepts to a variety of infrastructure sectors. Like NGINFRA, they aim to deliver research, models and
decision support tools to enable analysis and planning of a robust national infrastructure system. As partners in
the international knowledge network, NGINFRA co-operates with these new centers whenever possible, by
exchanging researchers and co-organizing international workshops and conferences, for example, and by serving
in each other’s advisory boards. At the same time, these new initiatives show that NGI NFRA concepts are being
embraced and, as they are more widely adopted in the academic community, the international competition is
increasing. For NGINFRA the challenge is to hold its position at the intellectual forefront and, at the same time, to
serve its user community better by showing them the way to the best expertise available world-wide.
46
5.
Achievement of scientific and societal milestones
5.1.
Milestones
In the so-called ‘nulmeting’ in 2004 we defined milestones/performance indicators on six levels:
Knowledge content
Process of knowledge exchange between partners
Scientific impact
Societal impact
Knowledge dissemination
Products
Overlooking the entire program period, we conclude that we accomplished the milestones as promised, and in
many respects achieved far more than we had planned and hoped for.
In this paragraph we present a short summary, before going into a more detailed description of the knowledge
insights generated in paragraph 5.2.
Content milestones


Multi-sectoral and multi-disciplinary research:
o
The program includes at least the sectors: gas, electricity, (public) transport, telecommunications,
water and waste.
o
The program involves technical (engineering, math) en social sciences (law, policy management,
economics, organization and management)
Coherence between the sub-programs: there are at least two projects on program level (diagonal projects)
Realised:
√ We clearly met this target. All subprograms cover a variety of infrastructure sectors, from different disciplinary
perspectives, and combine theoretical and empirical research. The program spreads over all sectors. In the
majority of the projects, several sectors were covered under the heading of a general theme. Large in number are
projects that focus on telecommunications, energy and transport. Only ‘waste’ has received little attention in
comparison to the other sectors. In terms of disciplinary angles, the program has not only succeeded in engaging
a variety of engineering and social science researchers, but also includes researchers from the humanities
(philosophers and historians).
√ Multiple projects were developed across two or more subprograms, and several books were published in
collaboration between subprograms. Our strategic alliances with the Port of Rotterdam and Alliander were
developed from an overall program synthesis perspective. Also the InfraTrends book (2011) involved a synthesis
of findings over the program as a whole. The agent-based modeling platform and the gaming & simulation
platform were developed to serve researchers in all subprograms. The MOOC for Next Generation
Infrastructures, launched in 2014, also represents a synthesis of findings across the program, as it consolidates
the insights acquired in all subprograms and actually teaches students how to combine social and engineering
science perspectives in understanding and solving infrastructure problems.
Process:

The program has an active user council

At least three international universities participate

100% of the budget is allocated
47
Realised:
√ The program has a cross-sectoral user council (see p. 1), which was especially active during the first six years
of the program, helping us to shape the research projects towards the creation of user value. In the last phase of
the program, when we adopted a more demand driven perspective, the role of the user council was largely taken
over by the steering committees for the strategic alliances with Alliander and the Port of Rotterdam, by the user
organizations’ representatives participating in the Asset Management Platform, and by our interaction with the
founding fathers of the next NGINFRA knowledge initiative, starting in 2015. The latter developments give ample
evidence for vibrant NGINFRA knowledge exchange between the infrastructure providers and the academic
researchers. Moreover, they show that the infrastructure providers have come to appreciate the benefits of crosssectoral knowledge exchange, which is a main driver for the continuation of NGI NFRA beyond 2014.
√ More than 20 international universities participated in the program as formal contractual partners (see
appendix 1). With many more universities we collaborated in alternative ways, in research (e.g. Imperial College
London, University of Queensland, Carnegie Mellon University), in the organization of international conferences
(e.g. University College London, Oxford University, University of Wollongong) and in education and training (e.g.
Johns Hopkins University, London School of Economics, Comillas University Madrid, Florence School of
Regulation).
√ The budget is 100% allocated.
Scientific Quality

Scientific publications meet the level of TU Delft Speerpunt Infrastructuur (benchmark)

An active scientific advisory board exists
Realised:
√ The program far exceeded its targets in terms of scientific productivity. The quality of its publications increased
consistently and substantially throughout the years, as evident from a bibliometric analysis by CWTS Leiden. A
QANU (Quality Assesment of Netherlands’ Universities) assessment of research quality over the TU Delft,
Eindhoven and Twente technology, policy, management and innovation programs, executed in 2010, which
covered about 50% of the NGINFRA program, showed maximum scores for the TU Delft part and (almost
maximum scores for) the TU Eindhoven part. The QANU assessment committee referred to the TU Delft part of
the NGInfra program in terms of impressive, outstanding, off the charts, highly original, showing leadership and
intellectual depth, etc. See appendix 3 for the QANU research assessment report.
√ An active Scientific Advisory Board has been in place throughout the program (see p. 1). It played an important
role in giving us feedback on research methodological issues. More importantly, the involvement of the SAB in the
quality assessment of research project proposals, on the basis of which funding decisions were made, turned out
to be a crucial factor in ensuring the scientific quality of the program and its outputs.
48
Anish Patil - Brug slaan tussen onderzoek en praktijk
NGINFRA ondersteunt en stimuleert onderzoek dat maatschappelijk relevant is,
actueel, en gericht op het overbruggen van de kloof tussen wetenschap en
praktijk. Daarin zit hem volgens mij de kracht van het programma. Het
onderzoek richt zich op problemen en vraagstukken waarmee het snel
veranderende bedrijfsleven zich geconfronteerd ziet. Academisch onderzoek
heeft nogal eens de neiging om het bedrijfsleven of de gebruiker over het hoofd
te zien. Terwijl elk onderzoek zich daar eigenlijk op zou moeten richten. Bij
NGINFRA zag ik dat de gebruiker altijd betrokken was en regelmatig een actieve
rol had bij het opzetten van onderzoek door NGI NFRA.
Ik zie dit als een welkome nieuwe ontwikkeling. De manier waarop onderzoek
aan de universiteit wordt verricht zal veranderen, en daarmee de waardering
voor dit onderzoek bij bedrijven. Die verandering in perceptie zie ik nu al
optreden. Als ik af ga op mijn nog beperkte kennis van het Rotterdamse
bedrijfsleven, stel ik vast dat veel bedrijven trots zijn op hun samenwerking met NGINFRA . NGINFRA pakt
belangrijke kwesties op een passende manier aan.
Anish Patil won met zijn onderzoek naar energietransities de Infra Spark Award.
Societal Quality

Visible in public debate (newspaper, radio, tv)

Researchers are positioned in relevant committees

There are ‘derdegeldstroom‘ projects
Realised:
√ Many NGINFRA research projects and individual NGINFRA researchers were and are highly visible in the public
debate, such as Ernst ten Heuvelhof, Wijnand Veeneman, Aad Correljé, Laurens de Vries and Emile Chappin,
among many others. However, the co-funding structure of NGINFRA turned out to be a hindrance in creating high
visibility for the NGINFRA brand, as the media identify the researchers – and the researchers identify themselves,
first and for all with their home institutes. See paragraph 4.2 or media appearances of NGINFRA researchers.
√ For relevant committees see the list under 1.3 ‘Membership of ad hoc advisory committees’
√ Many ‘derdegeldstroom’ projects were acquired by TU Delft and other NGINFRA partners as a direct
consequence of research collaboration established in the framework of NGINFRA. At the time of the QANU
research assessment in 2010, the estimated total for the TU Delft faculty of Technology, Policy and Management
already ran in the order of € 6 million in cash funding, over the years 2004-2009, for projects building on NGINFRA
work, but mostly positioned outside the BSIK NGINFRA program. During the last four years, as a result of stronger
consistent profiling of the NGINFRA brand, NGINFRA succeeded in attracting more in-cash contributions, e.g. for
the HubHolland magazine (later INFRA magazine). Many other examples can be given, e.g. Master classes for
ProRail, Gasunie, Enexis and the Dutch Competition Authority, and commissioned research reports for
Rijkswaterstaat, ProRail, the Ministry of Economic Affairs, and many others.The most substantial contributions
were provided by Alliander and the Port of Rotterdam as matching funds for the strategic alliances with NGI NFRA.
49
Bert Klerk - Op het juiste spoor
Netwerkbedrijven moeten meer naar buiten en naar elkaar kijken om te
leren. Dat heeft de ervaring met NGINFRA bij ProRail mij geleerd.
Bedrijven als ProRail zijn van van nature erg gesloten en op zichzelf
gericht: onze vragen zijn zo specifiek, daar snapt de buitenwereld niks
van. De relatie tussen wetenschap en ProRail was geen
vanzelfsprekendheid.
De concrete toepassing, waarbij we met behulp van het gaming
instrument van NGINFRA de nieuwe dienstregeling van 2009 hebben
geoefend, was een enorme doorbraak. Een keer in de zoveel jaar wordt
er een compleet nieuwe dienstregeling ingevoerd; voor de spoorjongens
en meisjes het hoogtepunt in een spoors bestaan, maar tegelijkertijd
ook een nachtmerrie. De complexiteit is zo groot, de knelpunten zijn zo
talrijk dat er met behulp van de ons ter beschikking staande programma’s eigenlijk al sprake is van een niet te
ontwarren kluwen. Desalniettemin is het destijds gelukt de vrienden van NGINFRA naar binnen te kruien en met
behulp van het door hen ontwikkelde gaming instrument de kluwen te ontwarren en met succes.
De rol van het programma was dus groot, zowel op het niveau van de dienstregeling zelf, die daarna vrij
soepeltjes is ingevoerd, als op het niveau van het verbinden van twee netwerken, die nog niet verbonden waren!
De overeenkomsten tussen netbeheerders als RWS, ProRail of HbR zijn veel groter dan je wellicht zou denken
en de vragen die men gezamenlijk aan de wetenschap stelt waren in elk geval te beperkt. Het is en was
hoopgevend dat er meerdere bilaterale allianties kwamen tussen netwerkbedrijven en NGINFRA, maar de
toegevoegde waarde ligt toch vooral, wat mij betreft op het niveau van de cross-sectorale kruisbestuiving. Dat
begint te komen, maar het gaat aarzelend en vaak te technisch gedreven, terwijl vragen over governance,
inbedding en verankering van het publieke belang etc. de CEO’s zou moeten binden.
Bert Klerk is voormalig president-directeur ProRail en lid van de Gebruikersraad van NGINFRA
Knowledge dissemination

Visible exchange between science and practice

There are modules for education and training

There is a website
Realised:
√ Over the entire portfolio of NGINFRA projects range across the whole spectrum from fundamental science
oriented towards user oriented. Fruitful exchange between science and practice occurred not only on the user
oriented side of the spectrum, but also in many research projects where PhD (and Master) students conducted
case studies in user organizations to collect empirical data (e.g. Bauke Steenhuisen’s research on how public
values are made operational in organizations of infrastructure providers), and the other way around, in PhD
research projects conducted by practitioners (such as the research of Rob Schoenmaker, a practitioner based in
the RWS organization, on performance based contracting practices in the road sector). On the overall program
level, the mechanisms employed to stimulate knowledge exchange between science and practice are the User
Council, platforms such as the Asset Management platform, workshops and meetings such as InfraTrends, and
the HubHoland/INFRA magazine. Read more under paragraph 4.2.
√ NGINFRA education and training was realized in multiple ways:

The NGINFRA concepts and insights had a profound influence on the courses taught in the BSc
curriculum for Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management (SEPAM), the SEPAM MSc
curriculum and the Engineering and Policy Analysis (EPA) MSc curriculum.

Thanks to NGINFRA an Erasmus Mundus MSc curriculum for Economics and Management of
Infrastructuere Networks came into being, which is a joint effort between Comillas University Madrid
(coordinator), TU Delft, Université Paris XI, the European University/Florence School of Regulation, and
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
50

Bullding on the aforementioned Erasmus Mundus success, Comillas Univesity Madrid took the initiative
towards a joint doctorate program, which was also successful. The Erasmus Mundus joint doctorate
program on Sustainable Energy Technologies and Strategies (SETS) is run by Comillas Madrid, KTH
Stockholm and TU Delft. In September 2014, the first two SETS candidates successfully defended their
PhD theses at TU Delft.

A new and very successful PhD course module has been set up between TU Delft, University Paris I
(Sorbonne) and ETH Lausanne. This course module on Infrastructure Economics rotates between Delft,
Paris and Lausanne, and continues to be very popular with our PhD students.

For two consecutive years we offered courses for PhD students and young professionals through the
NGINFRA Academy. The Academy was a great success in terms of quality of content, students’ and
teachers’ enthusiasm. We decided, however, to discontinue the Academy as the business model was
not viable.

As an alternative we embraced the opportunity to produce a MOOC on the EdX platform, when TU Delft
decided to join the EdX initiative (originally a joint Harvard and MIT initiative). The MOOC for Next
Generation Infrastructures is designed for MSc level. In its first run, in the spring of 2014, more than
17,000 students enrolled, many of them engineering and science students, but also (more than 50%)
professionals already working in the world of infrastructures. The MOOC was a rewarding experience in
many ways, one of the reasons being the valuable case material (more than 3000 case studies)
contributed by the students on infrastructure problems all over the world. In 2015, the course will be
improved on the basis of the experience gained in 2014, a Chinese version (with Chinese content) will
be produced, and we will produce a version that can be integrated in the regular teaching at TU Delft (as
part of a minor on infrastructure systems).

Furthermore, several NGINFRA researchers contribute to the Dutch School for Public Management
(NSOB), the Florence School of Regulation, the TU Delft TopTech programs (such as the Master of
Business in Energy Systems) and other schools for post-graduate and post-experience education.
√ The website served as the vibrant business card for NGINFRA, its office and its researchers. In preparation for
the completion of NGINFRA, the website has been redesigned to serve as a repository for the NGINFRA project and
program outputs, for at least the next three years.
51
Products
√ In terms of products, the ‘nulmeting’ mentions only numbers for the first phase. We surpassed these
numbers and we added the theses (which were left out in the nulmeting, because they were likely to be
defended only in the second phase). Even though we agreed with AgentschapNL not to report on the
numbers, as they say nothing about the quality of the publications, it is good to see that the productivity of
NGINFRA in terms of numbers of publications and dissertations has far surpassed the expectations.
Scientific output
2014
Articles in scientific journals (refereed)
Academic books
Chapters in academic book
Conference papers
Theses
Total
359
14
101
718
90
1282
Table 3: number of scientific output
Economic/Societal output
Articles in professional journals
Professional book
External reports
Contribution in the media
Book reviews, lectures, workshops
Total
2014
71
1
76
51
458
654
Table 4: number of economic/societal output
52
5.2.
Cross-cutting scientific output
In view of its outspoken interdisciplinary knowledge ambitions, Next Generation Infrastructures made a consistent
and conscientious effort to create the conditions for truly cross-sectoral and interdisciplinary knowledge
generation. In each of the subprograms both engineering and social sciences are represented, and each of the
subprograms covers a variety of infrastructure sectors. Although the balance is different per sub-program (e.g. the
intelligent infrastructures sub-program is rather engineering dominated, whereas the public values sub-program is
social science dominated), the overall program was well-balanced in the opinion of the Scientific Advisory Board.
The construction of an entire subprogram (“understanding complex networks”) focused on unraveling complexity
in all dimensions of infrastructure systems is another crucial part of the effort towards interdisciplinarity. This
particular sub-program involved researchers from a variety of engineering disciplines, applied mathematics,
economics, public management, policy analysis, law, history and philosophy. It is through this subprogram that
the program strived to construct a framework in which, eventually, the insights emerging from all subprograms
and projects can be combined and synthesized. However, many other subprograms also contributed to the overall
analytical framework. In this section, we will focus on those cross-cutting scientific outputs that are especially
relevant for the overall program, and that constitute the solid basis on which we build the future NGINFRA program.
The program was structured along five dominant knowledge themes, as depicted in Figure 1.
Understanding complex networks:
‘Developing a formal specification methodology and (simulation)
models to characterize the different types of complexity in
infrastructures and to understand the structure and evolutionary
behaviour of complex networks’
Public Values
Intelligent
Critical
Flexible
Public values in infrastructures:
‘Developing policy and regulatory frameworks to steer multi-actor
decision making towards protection of short and long term public
interests’.
Complex Networks
Flexible infrastructures:
‘Developing design approaches, methods and tools to handle
uncertainties and meet flexibility requirements of infrastructures in
time, space and functionality’
Critical infrastructures:
‘Developing engineering and organisational control concepts to
reduce vulnerability and ensure high intrinsic reliability and safety
of network operation and management’
Intelligent infrastructures:
‘Developing smarter and more flexible networks and services
through application of distributed intelligence and innovations in ICT’
Knowledge Dissemination
Figure 1. Structure of the Next Generation
Infrastructures program.
Each sub-programme was designed



to cover a variety of infrastructure sectors
to involve a variety of disciplines from the engineering and social sciences (with some sub-programmes
also including the humanities
to involve theoretical and empirical research.
Two features embody the uniqueness of the NGINFRA programme: (1) the concept of infra-systems and (2) the
concept of cross-sectoral learning.
53
1.
the concept of infra-systems:
An infra-system consists of the physical infrastructure, the services that make use of and are generated
through the infrastructure, the market structure, the legislative and regulatory framework and the broader
institutional context. Hence, elements such as laws and governance structures count as an integral part
of the system instead of the context. To put it in another way: we consider infra-systems to be sociotechnical systems. Infra-systems are characterised by both physical and multi-actor (social) network
complexity. This is in stark contrast with the traditional engineering approach to infrastructures in which
the actors tend to be seen as part of the context and with the traditional approach of the social sciences
in which the actors are central and the physical infrastructure is considered a context variable.
Given their emergent behaviour we study infra-systems from the perspective of complex systems. A
schematic view of how infrastructure systems are composed of a complex physical network and a
complex social network, interacting in many ways, is depicted in Figure 2. This model also explains how
we see that NGINFRA knowledge will, in time, contribute to a better understanding of the interactions and
interdependencies between infra-systems and infrastructure convergence phenomena, within and across
infrastructure sectors.
2.
the concept of cross-sectoral learning:
As the infrasystems in all sectors are going through similar processes of technological, economic and
institutional change, as all infrasystems share a substantial number of complexity features, and as
infrasystems become more and more interconnected, within and across infrastructure sectors, a crosssectoral approach to infrasystems seems more logical than an infrastructure specific or a sector specific
approach. Through comparative analysis of infrastructures and developments in the infrastructure
sectors, we aim to gain fundamental insight into how technological, economic and institutional change
interact in shaping infrastructure development, and into the design criteria for infrastructure networks,
market structure and governance models in order to align infrastructure reform processes with the public
interests.
Physical Network
Actor Network
Physical Network
Actor Network
Socio-Technical Network
Physical Network
Actor Network
Physical Network
Actor Network
Infrastructure Interaction
Figure 2. Schematic representation of the multi-dimensional nature of infrastructures and of infrastructure
interactions caused by infrastructure convergence and interconnectedness.
54
Modelling and simulation platform
An important product of the cross-cutting Understanding Complex Networks subprogram is the simulation
platform we built, which offers a variety of simulation models, including serious games. Rather than aiming for
engineering optimization of infrastructure systems, NGINFRA set out to develop simulations of infrastructure
systems in order to explore infrastructure behavior in a range of what if scenarios. A simplified overview of how
simulation models (including simulation games) relate to the traditional deterministic models is given in Figure 3.
Simulation models, such as system dynamics models, discrete event models and agent based models, and
serious games provide the problem owners and stakeholders involved with a holistic view of the system and its
inherent complexity. It allows them to explore alternative futures in a safe setting, so that they can test alternative
strategies for their robustness in a wide scenario space. Especially in serious games, stakeholders’
communications can be improved, as they explore the future together and see how others react to their own
strategy. Through the game, shared intelligence is created.
All the simulation models and games presented in Figure 4 are so-called hybrid models, that embody a combined
representation of (aspects of) the physical and social complexity of the infrastructure system. None of the models
can contain the full socio-technical complexity of infrastructure systems. Depending on the type of problem to be
solved, a specific type of simulation model or a combination of models is selected. Through models, simulations
and serious games, actors can identify intervention strategies that are more likely to be successful in shaping the
evolution of the infrastructure system towards more desirable future states.
Figure 3. Simulation versus reality
55
Figure 4: Differences between simulations and serious gaming
A universal model for infrastructure systems is a futile quest, as the socio-technical complexity of infrastructure
systems defies such attempts by definition. The social and the physical dimension of infrastructure systems each
have their own ‘logic’. Hybrid models either take the physical reality paradigm, including actor elements and
behavior as if determined by causal relationships, or the other way around, they take the social dimension
paradigm, and let the actors intervene in the socio-technical system, governed by intentional relationships. In the
latter case, they will react to each others interventions and to the changing system behavior, and learn to
intervene more effectively to realize their strategic goals. In, for example, an agent based simulation model, actors
are embodied in software entities, which can be programmed to be boundedly rational, to be learning, and show
other types of real actor behavior.
Decision makers in large scale interconnected network systems
require simulation models for decision support. The behaviour of
these systems is determined by many actors, situated in a
dynamic, multi-actor, multi-objective and multi-level environment.
How can such systems be modelled and how can the sociotechnical complexity be captured? Agent-based modelling is a
proven approach to handle this challenge. This book provides a
practical introduction to agent-based modelling of socio-technical
systems, based on a methodology that has been developed at
TU Delft and which has been deployed in a large number of
case studies. The book consists of two parts: the first presents
the background, theory and methodology as well as practical
guidelines and procedures for building models. In the second
part this theory is applied to a number of case studies, where for
each model the development steps are presented extensively,
preparing the reader for creating their own models.
"Agent-Based Modelling of Socio-Technical Systems”, Springer
Book Series: Agent-Based Social Systems, Vol. 9. Dam, Koen H.
van; Nikolic, Igor; Lukszo, Zofia (Eds.), October 2013.
56
Besides the experiential learning and decision support environment that simulation models provide, the value of
building simulation models is also found in the fact that the model building process is conducive to establishing
the common vocabulary that is needed for effective communication and collaboration between researchers from
different disciplines and practitioners from different infrastructure sectors. The processes of knowledge exchange
across disciplinary and sectoral borders are furthermore stimulated by creating a variety of ‘live’ dialogue
platforms where researchers and practitioners from different backgrounds meet and work together.
NGINFRA produced a modeling platform that includes all types of simulation models depicted in Figure 4, except
for 3D serious games, and a range of deterministic optimization models, such as multi-agent models and game
theoretical models. In some cases, agent-based models were converted into serious games, allowing real actors
to play the role of the decision making agents. This is how the electricity market game was brought into being.
Coherence of technology and institutions
Some other important contributions to the synthesis of project and subprogram outcomes are presented in three
book volumes, which explore a large number of case studies of infrastructure deregulation, liberalization and
privatization, in the Netherlands and abroad. These books combine research findings from many projects, in
different subprograms, and include many contributions from authors abroad. They develop the case for better
coherence between technologies and institutions.
57
Institutional Reform, Regulation And Privatization
Process and Outcomes in Infrastructure Industries
Rolf W. Künneke, Aad F. Correljé, John Groenewegen
Edited by Rolf W. Künneke, Aad F. Correljé and John Groenewegen, Delft
University of Technology, The Netherlands
In Association with the Belgian-Dutch Association for Institutional and Political
Economy
Edward Elgar Publ. 2005
This book provides evolutionary and institutional perspectives on the reform of
infrastructure industries, tracing the development of this process in a number of
sectors and countries.
The contributors contend that infrastructure based industries such as
telecommunications, public transport, water management and energy have been
increasingly exposed to the dynamism of the market since becoming privatized,
and have therefore been stimulated into short-term efficiency and long-term
innovation. Drawing on institutional economic theory backed up with case studies
such as the California energy crisis, the Dutch gas industry, oil and electricity
companies in Spain and the privatization of Schipol airport in Amsterdam, the book
focuses on process, driving forces, and actors’ roles to explain how new balances
are established between competing institutions. The degree to which the
processes of institutional change are predictable and the effects of deliberate
strategic interventions of governments or private actors are explored. Specific
technical and sector aspects and their influence on institutional change in various
infrastructures are also discussed.
The Governance Of Network Industries
Institutions, Technology and Policy in Reregulated Infrastructures
Rolf W. Kunneke, John Groenewegen, Jean-François Auger
Edited by Rolf W. Künneke, John Groenewegen and Jean-François Auger, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands
Edward Elgar Publ. 2009
International Handbook Of Network Industries
The Liberalization of Infrastructure
Matthias Finger, Rolf W. Künneke
Edited by Matthias Finger, College of Management of Technology, ÉPFL – École
Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland and Rolf W. Künneke, Faculty of
Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, The
Netherlands
Edward Elgar Publ. 2011
In recent decades, all infrastructures have undergone significant restructuring.
This worldwide phenomenon is often labelled ‘liberalization’ and although
expectations were high with respect to lower prices, greater efficiency and
innovation, the expected gains have not always been fully realized. This extensive,
state-of-the-art Handbook provides a comprehensive overview of the various
experiences of liberalization across different sectors, regions and disciplines.
The multidisciplinary approach focuses on the economic, political and institutional
aspects of liberalization as well as, to a lesser extent, on technological issues. As
such, it constitutes a unique contribution, as this broad overview is often lost in the
sector-specific, country-focused and purely disciplinary approaches prevalent in
the current literature. Sectors explored include telecoms, the Internet, energy and
transport, while the truly global perspective incorporates unique case studies from
an array of developed and developing countries including the US, China, India and
the EU.
The International Handbook of Network Industries will become the definitive
volume for academics, researchers and students of economics, political science
and law interested in infrastructure regulation. It will also prove a valuable guide to
practitioners and policy-makers involved in liberalization and competition.
58
Inverse infrastructures
Another cross-sectoral synthesis contribution that resulted in a book volume, explored how a new bottom-up
model of infrastructure development is emerging, that may disrupt established infrastructure planning processes
and governance arrangements. In a society that is rapidly changing, users are more and more inclined to make
their own choices rather than accepting the standard solution for all that the established infrastructures provide.
By joining forces with other users, self-organizing networks evolve that may more rapidly and more effectively
bring the user the service he wants, and that respect the public values that he deems important.
Inverse Infrastructures: Disrupting Networks from Below
Tineke Egyed (Author, Editor), Donna Mehos (Author, Editor)
Edward Elgar Publ. 2012
The notion of inverse infrastructures - that is, bottom-up, user-driven, self-organizing
networks - gives us a fresh perspective on the omnipresent infrastructure systems that
support our economy and structure our way of living. This fascinating book considers the
emergence of inverse infrastructures as a new phenomenon that will have a vast impact on
consumers, industry and policy. Using a wide range of theories, from institutional economics
to complex adaptive systems, it explores the mechanisms and incentives for the rise of
these alternatives to large-scale infrastructures and points to their potential disruptive effect
on conventional markets and governance models.
The approach in this unique book challenges the existing literature on infrastructures, which
primarily focuses on large technical systems (LTSs). Rather, this study highlights
unprecedented developments, analyzing the differences and complementarity between
LTSs and inverse infrastructures. It illustrates that even large infrastructures need not
require a blueprint design or top-down and centralized control to run efficiently. The expert
contributors draw upon a captivating and wide ranging set of case studies, including:
Wikipedia; wind energy cooperatives, Wireless Leiden, rural telecom in developing
countries, local radio and television distribution, the collection of waste paper, syngas
infrastructure design, and e-government projects. The book discusses the feasibility of
temporary infrastructures and unheard of ownership arrangements, and concludes that
inverse networks represent a critical transformation of the accepted model of infrastructure
development.
Other synthesis findings
Besides the aforementioned cross-cutting synthesis products, we summarize some of the major NGINFRA findings
and achievements:
At the start of NGINFRA, we hypothesized that infrastructure systems should be studied as sociotechnical systems to acquire a deeper understanding of their behavior. The challenging part was to make
the socio-technical perspective operational in our research. We accomplished this through the building of
a range of hybrid simulation models which, moreover, required social science and engineering science
experts to work together. NGINFRA is especially known for its agent based simulation models and serious
games. Although these models cannot be validated in the traditional academic way, experts and
practitioners gained confidence by simulating historical infrastructure developments with agent based
models and, in the case of serious games, by actually playing the game and judging if the systems
reactions to actor interventions sufficiently captured the empirically known reality. With the modeling and
simulation platform available now, new models of specific infrastructure systems can be built faster, and
models of interconnected infrastructure systems and markets can be composed with relative ease out of
the modules available. While methodological questions still remain on how to systematically combine
and/or confront different modeling perspectives, we conclude that the modeling and simulation platform
has been indispensable in allowing researchers and practitioners to truly embrace the socio-technical
complexity of infrastructure systems.
59
NGINFRA’s research on the mechanisms safeguarding public values revealed that, contrary to theory and
intuition, public values have not suffered from institutional fragmentation in the infrastructure sectors.
This led us to look deeper into the mechanisms that create ‘networked reliability’ and how to re-inforce
those mechanisms under the current institutional conditions. Within organizations of infrastructure
providers and operators, detailed case studies were made across a range of infrastructure sectors to
examine how trade-offs are made between competing public values at different levels in the
organization.
Public values are ambiguous and dynamic: it is difficult to define them unambiguously in an arena of
several public interests and they are constantly being redefined under the influence of changing societal
and technological developments. As such it is a risky strategy to base strategies for protection of public
values on content and benchmarks. It is better to complement content and benchmarks based protection
with a process design that offers protection based on decision and cooperation rules between
stakeholders involved.
To protect and secure a complex set of public values, a patchworked strategy that involves a mix of
strategies is most promising. Such a mix should involve hard and soft protection mechanisms and
recognise the strengths and weaknesses of both hard (quantitative, auto-execute, hierarchical) and soft
(qualitative, context-sensitive, negotiated) mechanisms for protection of public values, using their
combined power to maximum effect.
5.3.
Main findings on the level of subprograms
5.3.1. Understanding Complex Networks
Infrastructures for transport, for telecommunication, or for the provision of drinking water and energy are
indispensable for modern society. They typically have evolved from small, local grids with limited numbers of
nodes and interconnections to vast, world-encompassing and yet finely meshed networks servicing billions of
people. These large-scale networked infrastructures are incredible feats not only of technology, but also of
governance. Operation, maintenance, and planning and design for further development pose ever more
challenging problems. Addressing these problems requires a fundamental understanding of the intricacies of
infrastructures and their associated institutions.
The aim of the Understanding Complex Networks (UCN) sub-program was to gain knowledge of the nature of
social and technical dimensions of infrastructures, with particular focus on the way institutional development
affects technological development, and vice versa. A better understanding of the dynamics of infrastructure
development should increase our capacity for assessing the consequences of policies, management regimes and
institutional reforms, while insight in systemic properties of infrastructures – notably robustness and the potential
for further evolution – could inform decisions on network design.
From the onset, the UCN sub-programme aimed for a fundamental understanding of infrastructure complexity.
We therefore primarily sought to develop frameworks, theories and models of infrastructures as complex networks
that would be applicable to all networked infrastructures, and as such could contribute to cross-sector comparison
and, in the longer term, learning. Formal approaches from mathematics and analytical philosophy have produced
abstract conceptualizations of infrastructures as complex socio-technical systems that are sector-independent.
These abstract frameworks provide a language for communicating about socio-technical complexity.
Computational graph theories have been applied to different types of complex networks to devise general metrics
as indicators for systemic properties such as robustness and survivability. Topological analysis and computational
experiments have shown (a.o.) that network connectivity can be determined faster using eigenvalues, that the
largest eigenvalue determines the speed of network failure or computer virus spreading, and what are the
necessary and sufficient conditions for a network to be susceptible to cascading failures.
Game theory has been used to model the response of infrastructure users to policies set by infrastructure
managers, and how mutual adaptation affects overall system performance. Analysis has shown that in liberalized
electricity markets three distinct classes of strategic game can be observed and investigated with mathematical
methods: retail electricity competition and peak load shifting, transmission congestion management and market
power mitigation, and electricity generation capacity investment.
60
Methods and tools for interdisciplinary development of agent-based simulation models have been developed and
tested empirically in different industry sectors. These models have shown to be policy-relevant, providing insight
in path dependency, economic viability and robustness on different time horizons, and how these aspects codepend on diversity within industrial clusters. The case studies demonstrate that simultaneous development of
agent-based models, formal ontologies and data analysis algorithms within a general framework on a platform
that supports consistency checking is feasible and productive.
The serious gaming approach to the layout of the ‘Tweede Maasvlakte’ greenfield industrial area increased the
participating professionals’ awareness of the importance of communication and cooperation between different
departments, while giving the researchers more insight in the design process. The suite of tools and building
blocks that has been compiled for the development of serious games provides a valuable platform for follow-up
projects.
The more qualitative research in the UCN sub-programme has produced descriptions of infrastructures in different
sectors, revealing sector-specific institutions and technologies, and allowing investigation of differences and
similarities. Cross-sector comparative research has focused on the co-development of, and the coherence
between, infrastructure-related institutions and technology. The findings suggest that technological constraints do
affect performance, but that institutions are the prime factors. The empirical data collected on the evolution of
electricity, railway, and telegraph infrastructures have been consolidated and disclosed in the form of statistical
atlas.
Finally, both qualitative and quantitative analyses of energy markets have led to insights as well as a variety of
models in support of energy market design. Analysis of the apparent lack of investment in seasonal gas storage
facilities suggests that the regulatory risk (notably the regulation of third-party access) and market risk (notably
the uncertain demand for storage services) for such investments are deemed too high. Model simulations of
electricity network balancing markets indicate that harmonizing and eventually integrating balancing markets can
improve efficiency. More intermittent generation capacity will increase the need for regulating reserves, which can
in part be provided by hydro based electricity production. This underlines the need for an integrated regulating
market.
In sum, the UCN-subprogram has advanced the state of the art in a variety of disciplinary fields, while developing
conceptual frameworks, methods and computer-based tools that support further investigation of complex
networked infrastructures.
5.3.2. Safeguarding public values
Infrastructures, the services they provide and the public values that are addressed and expressed by their
operation have been a key element in the NGI project. In the context of the major restructuring of the OECD
economies and their infrastructure systems over the past decades, the “Safeguarding public values” project has
examined and analyzed the way in which this restructuring has had an impact. From a number of different
perspectives, analyses were undertaken of public values related issues, associated with particular services and
the shifting public-private roles in the ownership, the management and the operation of infrastructural systems.
For example, the “Cultural perspective on safeguarding public values” examined whether and how the entrance of
(semi-) private actors would cause conflicts, since private companies are by definition not in the business of
providing public value and under what circumstances win-win situations would be possible.
An important aspect appeared to be the way in which public services were being opened up to the private
initiative, which have induced the analysis of tendering practices’ effectiveness in safeguarding public values, the
safeguarding of public values in public-private megaprojects in which public and private partners have different
interests and understandings of public values and negotiate about that.
As regards the issue of innovation in networks, the question was investigated whether legal regimes can made
more conducive to that, whilst at the same time being sufficiently resilient to protect public values; an outcome is
that such regimes particularly focus on the current systems and not to the next generation networks.
As regards state aid, the member states and the EU Commission realize that it is more or less inevitable to
safeguard public values, like availability and affordability, with public support. So, how to find a fair balance
between applying the economic approach market based approach on state aid rules while upholding the more
social objective of safeguarding public values? The project identified several ways to provide state funding without
encroaching upon the principle of the EU Treaty. Solutions may be found in the use of an open, transparent and
non-discriminatory tender procedures.
61
A final aspect which was covered by the programme addressed the question why the expected benefits of
restructuring often failed to materialize to the extent expected. One approach to this issue was to analyze the
strategic behavior of actors involved, like controlling bottleneck facilities and standards, the use of intertwined
relations with governments agencies and other actors, legal rules and contracts, the factor ‘time’ and financial
resources. Counter arrangements we designed, like competition engineering, consumer protection, hybrid
governance and regulation.
Another approach looked into the infrastructure companies, to examine their pursuit of competing public values,
uncovering tensions between the values and between the objectives of different regulatory bodies. Detailed
investigation of how planners, managers and operational workers cope with these tensions in daily practice,
showed how these tensions are pragmatically neutralized within the organization at the operational level. Despite
systematic planning and project implementation, trade-offs between competing public values often occur implicitly
and unintended. Particularly reliability and safety appear vulnerable in the course of these trade-offs.
5.3.3. Flexible Infrastructures
Uncertainties with regard to the future characteristics of and demands on infrastructure systems abound, and
come in many different forms, places and degrees. New technologies may develop, demands for capacity may
change, and institutional changes may require changes in management functions and coordination. Such
uncertain developments may significantly affect the performance of the infrastructure system at various levels and
in different ways. The subprogram ‘Flexible infrastructures’ aimed to develop principles, methods, techniques and
guidelines that contribute to greater flexibility of infrastructure systems and hence better and more efficient system
performance over time. The program constituted a variety of studies, each focused on a specific aspect, and,
often, a specific infrastructure. The study results may be summarized under three main lines of research:
uncertainty analysis and adaptive planning; incorporating flexibility in design; and asset management.
Uncertainty analysis and adaptive planning
We focused mainly on deep uncertainty, involving uncertainty with respect to the adequate representation of the
system at hand, about probability distributions, and about the evaluation of modeling outcomes. As existing
(quantitative) methods/techniques available for dealing with uncertainty mostly focus on lower levels of
uncertainty, such deeper uncertainties are often neglected, while their possible impacts may be far more
significant than those of lower-level uncertainties. As predictive planning approaches are likely to result in plans
that perform poorly under deep uncertainty, an alternative, adaptive planning paradigm has emerged. This
paradigm holds that one needs to plan dynamically and build in flexibility, to produce plans “devised not to be
optimal for a best estimate future, but robust across a range of plausible futures”. In order to operationalize this
approach, considerable efforts have been spent on the further conceptual and methodological development. First,
a classification of uncertainty and flexibility concepts has been developed. Next, Exploratory Modeling and
Analysis (EMA) has been adopted and further developed as an analytic tool, and combined with an adaptive
policy making framework, thus offering a methodological approach and toolkit (Adaptive Robust Design) for
actually improving (decision support in) policy making for dynamically complex issues under deep uncertainty.
Real Options Analysis which treats future uncertainty as an opportunity instead of a (downside) risk, provides an
important building block for this approach. Applications have been developed in various infrastructure sectors,
and the work has and still is generating considerable offspring in terms of new applications, grants from various
sponsors, and recognition in the international scientific community.
Flexibility in system design
The second line of research introduced the concept of infrastructure systems flexibility by design. A method was
developed to incorporate flexibility, reliability, availability, maintainability and economics performance metrics in
the conceptual design of infrastructures and large-scale process systems. Relating uncertainty to flexibility, a
generic framework is proposed for integrating flexibility. Central in this framework is a proposed "uncertainty
mapping" concept where the uncertainties identified are associated with the flexibility types to handle them. As the
unavailability of complete data has been identified as one of the barriers in the integration and analysis of the
performance indicators early in the design process, an adaptive model has been formulated to assist the designer
in using any prior data available at any point in the design process and later update such data when they become
available or more transparent.
62
We have also explored in what manner compatibility standards (i.e. widely supported technical agreements)
contribute to such flexible infrastructures. At first sight this may seem paradoxical for, intuitively, standards fix the
parameters of technology development. However, standards can also be a precondition for system flexibility. We
examined in what manner standards may contribute to infrastructure flexibility. It was concluded, first, that simple
standards (unambiguous, less options, easier to fully implement, better product interoperability, more flexibility)
rather than more comprehensive standards are likely to be effective as catalysts for change. Second, standards
that specify the targeted performance (performance standards) rather than product characteristics (product
standards) increase infrastructure flexibility. Finally, extrapolating from the case studies, we concluded that
standards are more likely to catalyse change in stable or expanding markets.
Asset management
Our research in the vein of strategic asset management focused on analyzing contracting practices to assess
their adequacy in dealing with uncertainties, and on developing methods and tools to (better) cater for flexibility in
contracting practices. An evaluation of international practices and methods that are used showed that most
countries still continued to use traditional methods (Design-Bid-Build) to procure capital investment projects,
except for England (UK) which already used alternative methods extensively. Especially the PPP model, which
incorporates private finance, was found to be gaining momentum. The main new methods uncovered during the
study were the “Alliance model” and Early Contractor Involvement” (ECI).
In general, there is however a tendency to a shift away from the traditional setting to a mix of innovative practices
that grant contractors more design freedom. These new models take time to develop, implement, and understand
all the “tricks of the trade”. Difficulties include issues such as relinquishing control, limiting the design
development, the need to have a majority of performance specifications fully developed, not using low-bid
principles, lack of a real teaming concepts, transparent information and communications, understanding risk
allocation and responsibility, and having the private industry understanding these practices. These new practices
also seem to increase the room for opportunistic behavior. To further investigate such effects, a role play/social
simulation called ‘Road Roles’ was developed. On the basis of a large number of international role plays, we
identified patterns of strategic behavior in public-private partnerships for road infrastructure projects.
We further empirically investigated how DBFM (Design-Build-Finance-Maintain) contracts enable or inhibit dealing
with unforeseen events. Whereas the literature suggests that PPP’s usually have a rigid contractual structure, it
turned out that most of the contracts were capable of handling change. Main concerns are the lead time of
implementing such change, and the financial repercussions. In particular the allocation of risk between principal
and contractor is evidently a major issue. Further literature review with a focus on delivery of maintenance
services lead us to identify four critical challenges - I.e. about the operational context, members, bonding and
process - that require intervention to increase delivery effectiveness.
We also developed a serious game in which players take on the role of service providers, striving to plan all their
maintenance operations in an optimal fashion in an uncertain and multi-agent environment. After five serious
gaming sessions, we found that planning and coordinating maintenance processes evolve gradually, with
incremental learning. Serious gaming appears to facilitate such learning.
The serious games developed are available for further use and development/learning.
Miscellaneous contributions
Many research projects in the Flexible Infrastructures subprogram focused on a specific infrastructure (e.g. power
grids, road networks, water supply infrastructure, port infrastructure) and therewith provided rich case study
material for the more methodologically oriented projects, as well as numerous sector- or application-specific
insights.
5.3.4. Reliable critical infrastructures
The subprogram identifies technological systems in the industrial domains of energy, telecommunication, water
and transportation as a set of interrelated infrastructures. These infrastructures are part of a larger set of services
and products that are considered essential to the functioning of modern economies and societies, also known as
critical infrastructures.
Deregulation in these systems (e.g. air traffic, electricity and telecommunications) has led to the unbundling of
utilities and breakup of other organizations operating the system. Increasing environmental requirements in water
and hydropower systems brought new organizations and mandates into the management of these large technical
systems. Technological innovations have enabled increasing participation of third-party service providers, the
outsourcing of critical infrastructure components, and the rapid deployment of new services. Terrorist threats have
brought to light unexpected links between different critical infrastructures and pose new vulnerabilities.
63
These and other developments have a common denominator: highly reliable services are more and more the
product of networks of organizations, rather than individual organizations. These networks pose new challenges
for reliability. Organizations operating and regulating critical infrastructures have to find new ways to ensure the
high reliability of these services. The core question we attacked in our research was: How can networks of
organizations, many with competing goals and interests, provide highly reliable services in the absence of
conventional forms of command and control and in the presence of rapidly changing circumstances, technologies
and demand?
Based upon the findings from various projects undertaken within the Critical Infrastructures subprogram, the
project has found that a shift takes place and that the reliable management of infrastructure industries shifts from
anticipation towards resilience. Several projects within the subprogram have studied how infrastructure operators
and service providers deal with the increasing complexity and rate of change of their networks. The conclusion is
that these organizations are, sometimes unknowingly, increasingly reliant on real-time operations for their
reliability. They are shifting resources from long-term planning to real-time operations, from design to
improvisation, from analysis to experience and from risk-avoidance to reliability-seeking.
In different sectors different reliability regimes have evolved which function in the current institutionally fragmented
environment. The findings led to a refocus and redefinition of the Critical Infrastructures subprogram to expressly
include institutions within its analytical and design domain. The focus shifted attention to how – given our
knowledge of the reliability regimes and how technological and organizational aspects in these regimes affect
reliability performance – reliability of service provision can be maintained or increased in our next generation
infrastructures. These ‘second-order’ research questions were designed to generate new and interdisciplinary
knowledge; especially about how reliability is guaranteed in more resilient ways.
The research program produced ample evidence that reliability research and knowledge are fragmented per
sector and even within sectors, and that scientific knowledge on how to maintain highly reliable services has not
kept up with the developments in critical infrastructures, which emphasizes the scientific relevance of our work.
System outages, legal battles and regulatory disarray in sectors like rail traffic, electricity provision and
telecommunications demonstrate only too often that networked reliability in critical infrastructures is not a given.
The subprogram gained a deeper understanding of how safety and security problems can eventually be improved
to increase reliability. To achieve this more in-depth knowledge was required of the intricate and highly complex
nature of reliability regimes that existed and the complex interplay between the various methods and ways (i.e.
organizational, technical) in which reliability was assured in for example the governance of Internet security, which
has provided the foundation of a highly successful research program on the economics and governance of
cybersecurity.
To conclude, the program teaches us how the complex and increasingly sophisticated institutional environment
that surrounds critical infrastructures shapes the way in which reliability is increasingly ‘managed’ in real-time and
that a thorough analysis of the various incentives of the different actors explains not only the rationales that
determine trade-offs in reliability but that they also provide an interesting perspective on how efforts that are
aimed at improving reliability should be aligned.
5.3.5. Intelligent Infrastructures
In the research sup-programme Intelligent Infrastructures different points of view on intelligent modeling and
control of infrastructure systems (such as power networks, road traffic networks, water networks, etc) were
brought together. In particular, the questions of how intelligence can contribute to solving problems related to 1)
capacity management, 2) reliability of service, 3) sustainability, and 4) safety are considered.
The operation and control of existing infrastructures is often insufficient or inefficient: too often we are confronted
with capacity problems and a lack of safety, reliability and efficiency. Nowadays, infrastructure operators are in
need of new routing protocols, path selection and capacity allocation algorithms and on-line monitoring methods.
The huge multi-actor complexity of today’s infrastructure networks entailing conflicting interests and demands, the
emergence of new technologies, regulations and societal demands, the increasing inter connectedness and interdependencies between infrastructures within and across infrastructure sectors, all hamper the effective and
efficient operation and control of these systems. The urgent need for improving the performance of critical
infrastructures creates a large demand for innovative optimization and control methods and challenges the
scientific research community in:

Acquiring a deeper understanding of the physical and social network complexity of infrastructure
systems and their socio-technical interactions;
64



Dealing with more and more deeply distributed autonomous control and its effects on overall network
behavior;
Coping with new needs for flexibility (in time and functionality) in combination with more stringent
demands on capacity utilization, reliability and quality of service, health, safety and environment;
Dealing with the need for a well-defined decision-making process to guarantee the efficiency and
effectiveness of decision making in the shorter and longer term for multi-actor, multi-level, multiobjective and dynamic problems.
The problems of different infrastructure sectors are similar: How to maximize use of the available capacity? How
to do this in the most efficient way? How to prevent congestion, without neglecting the proper safety precautions?
Therefore, it is a challenging task to develop generic modeling approaches and control methods that can actually
be implemented (e.g. by a regulatory authority) to influence local decision-making by a multitude of actors in
respect of societal (overall) interests. In such a distributed approach a leader can coordinate the decision-making
of distributed subsystems, but it is also possible that the interaction between the actors takes place without any
coordinator. In these settings the decision makers are authorized to make decisions regarding their domain while
agreeing to operate according to a common overall goal, or they interact in a non-cooperative way according to
their own goals anticipating the responses of other actors and sub-systems to their actions.
As large infrastructure systems are multi-level systems, composed of millions of physical components, involving
different owners, operators and users, all primarily pursuing their own local performance objectives, there are no
easy solutions to these problems. The Intelligent Infrastructures research programme accepted the challenge in
its endeavor to answer the following core research question:
How to influence the physical, organizational, economic and institutional configuration of an infrastructure system
in such a way that predefined (dynamic) objectives are satisfied taking into account market and system
constraints?
The research programme resulted in many new concepts aimed at improving operation and control in multi-actor,
multi-level and multi-control problems in energy, transport and water infrastructures as well as concepts
addressing problems common to various infrastructures by inter-sectoral learning. Together the contributions
create a broad and profound coverage of the main issues related to the intelligent operation of infrastructures
intended for researches, graduate students, policy makers, system operators, and managers working on
organization, modeling, optimization, or control of infrastructures today and in the future.
5.3.6. Empowering Networks
In the strategic alliance with Alliander, user value was created by (1) transformation of NGINFRA knowledge and
the NGINFRA way of working into applications in the organization of Alliander and its relationships with
stakeholders, and (2) demand driven knowledge creation. Both lines of work were developed in intensive
collaboration with the problem owners within Alliander.
In the first line, Alliander was given insight into its network of relationships with partners within and outside of the
traditional value chains, and into the catalysts and inhibitors of successful partnerships in innovative energy
transiton projects. This is relevant for Alliander in the ongoing proces of redefining its role as an operator of
energy networks. As an ‘unbundled’ network operator, Alliander’s mission to create value for the community it
serves, can only be accomplished in partnerships. Besides procurement relationships, Alliander has embarked on
many network relationships, and quite often it functions as a so-called boundary spanner between clusters that
would otherwise have no knowledge exchange, such as between Amsterdam Smart City and the Texel energy
transition initiative. In its relationships with stakeholders, such as residents affected by infrastructure construction
and maintenance works, room for improvement was found, especially at the operational level. Such improvement
requires more support from and coordination with the planning level. In this respect, lessons learned from other
organizations (KPN and MapsUp) are valuable for Alliander. In the context of Alliander’s ambition to become a socalled stakeholder firm, i.e. an organization driven by the needs and aspirations of its stakeholders, group model
building sessions on the energy transition were staged with a total of approximately 100 stakeholders. On the
basis of strategic interventions designed by the stakeholders in these sessions, we sought to overcome the gap
between established strategy practices and the strategy practice of a genuine stakeholder firm, with the aim to
support Alliander in designing more effective interventions serving the needs of its multiple stakeholders.
65
NGINFRA was intensively involved in the launch of Liander’s open data policy. Implementing open data comes with
risks of liability, data protection and data ownership and requires technical solutions to curb those risks and
maximise the use of data. In addition, open data implementation brings organizational challenges (who is
responsible for what and at which moment, when to involve whom, how many resources required, et cetera).
NGINFRA supported Liander in analyzing the institutional, legal, organizational and technical issues of open data
implementation and in developing a framework for measuring and monitoring the societal impact of open data.
Liander started with participation in several open data hackathons (province of Flevoland, city of Amsterdam) by
making open test data available as a pilot. In September 2013, one Liander dataset was published as open data:
the small user data (kleinverbruik). Liander assessed the NGINFRA contribution as a key component in the
process towards the successful implementation of the open data strategy at Liander. A first result is the energy
use app that was built on open Liander data (see www.verbruiksapp.nl). The workshops and meetings with
Liander in the course of this work had a big impact in the process towards creating management awareness of
open data, changing the thinking from “closed, unless” towards “open, on condition that”. A new project between
Alliander, TU Delft, Geonovum, TNO and Geodan has followed from this work, focusing on the technical
challenge of interconnecting information flows between the geo-, government and smart grid domain, independent
of the existing standards in these domains.
Biogas is one of the areas where Alliander is pursuing new activities. A substantial part of Alliander’s networks is
situated in agricultural regions, where farmers have embarked on decentralized biogas production. Previous
research (BioNet) revealed that it is energeticaly and economically more efficient to distribute biogas to local
users within the region, rather than collecting it centrally for upgrading to the natural gas standard and feeding it
into the natural gas distribution network. Since the European Gas Directive and the Dutch Gas Law do not apply
to local biogas networks, Alliander is entering terra incognita here and solicited advise on an appropriate market
design for local biogas. On the basis of a detailed analysis of the juridical, organizational and financial-economic
constraints for such a market, a model resulted that can support Alliander and its stakeholders in setting up local
biogas distribution systems and markets. The biogas market was furthermore used as a modelling test case for
horizontal governance simulations, in which a range of innovative modelling technologies was integrated: MAIA,
OperettA, Genius, and AgentScape. These technologies are specialized tools for domain modelling,
organizational modelling, negotiation simulations, and multi-agent simulations, respectively. Besides new insights
gained by the modeling team into the most appropriate technical tooling, Alliander gained new insights from the
simulator in terms of useful indicators, analyses and visual representations, and in terms of a deeper
understanding of the potential impact of horizontal governance of biogas distribution infrastructure. In the future,
the simulator might be used as a strategic decision support system in Alliander.
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is an important enabler for the operation and control of the new
energy system that will accommodate increasing shares of renewable energy resources, both at the central and
at the decentralized level. New stakeholders, products and services are emerging, for example households turn
from mere consumers of energy into producers of electricity and of new commodities: data and flexibility. This
may lead to data management and flexibility aggregator services as new actors in the system. The dependence
on ICTm however, also makes the system susceptible to cybersecurity issues, and security issues that arise in
the interaction between the cyber layer and the physical, institutional and human layers of the system. These
vulnerabilities need to be addressed from an integrated engineering systems perspective, in particular a systemsof-systems view across sectors and national borders, linked with policy, law and economics. This led us to make
an inventory for Alliander of the novel vulnerabilities that are arising, and the corresponding changes in risk
management required by the transition from traditional distribution grids to smart distribution grids. Unfortunately,
there is no stable definition yet of the smart grid. The system will at least accomplish the goals of supporting the
transition towards 100% renewable energy, and using the electricity infrastructure more efficiently to
accommodate an increasing electricity demand. Characteristic building blocks of the smart grid are: generation
technology, prediction algorithms for generation and loads, ICT for optimization and remote operation, market
design and user participation. New roles and commodities emerge, such as described in the role of flexibility
aggregator.
66
Technical vulnerabilities are mainly to be expected in the use of remote operation and control, and in the
increased complexity and interdependence of subsystems. These make smart grids vulnerable for cyberattacks
and cascading failures. Institutional vulnerabilities stem from the fact that markets, standards and laws need to be
in place. Also, scalability of the local-for-local approach to a national level is a challenge, as each location has
different characteristics. As smart grids’ performance hinges on user participaton, human vulnerabilities like
privacy and trust issues arise that may create resistance to participating. Smart metering produces data from
which individual behavior may be derived, and thereby become personal data. Other human vulnerabilities may
be the lack of education, lack of interest, or lack of time needed for participation. Also, the active role required of
user may exclude certain population groups. As technical, institutional and human vulnerabilities are interacting, a
holistic systems aproach is required to deal with them. Although current IT-security solutions help preventing and
dealing with vulnerabilities within the cyber layer of smart grids, they are not sufficient for vulnerabilities in the
interaction between the different layers of the multi-level smart grid. Risk management strategies on a general
level that are expected to work are (1) zoning: designing architecture of IT- and OT-layers in such way that in
case of problems in the IT-layer, the problematic parts of the system of the system can be disabled, and the
system can fall back on traditional operation; and (2) risk reduction through impact mitigation rather than
prevention: because of the complexity of the system and the unpredictability of developments, it seems more
effective to invest in anomaly detection and responding to reduce the impact, than in reducing the probability of
threats. Cybersecurity research provides a number of partial solutions (in the area of intrusion detection, data
integrity, identity management in machine to machine communication, confidentiality). However, research into the
interactions between different layers, e.g. into cyber-physical systems (such as SCADA systems), or sociotechnical approaches to cyber security, are relatively new. For complex, dynamic and multi-layered systems such
as smart grids, new types models are required that capture the interdependency between the different layers and
different actors involved.
Several new developments that are unfolding in the European electricity system do not fit in the current market
design and legal framework. For example, the re-integration of network operation and the operation of generation
assets and loads, which is proposed by some as a way to effectively and efficiently deal with fluctuations in
generation and with network issues, is clearly at odds with the idea of the unbundling of network operations from
competitive activities, one of the key principles of the current EU legal framework for the energy sector. Options
that do respect unbundling can be conceived, but appear to be sub-optimal. Evidently, changes in the technical
functionng of the system should co-evolve with changes in the market design and the legal framework. For this
purpose, the ‘function based legal design and analysis’ (FULDA) method developed in previous NGINFRA
research, was expanded so as to include a re-design functionality, in analogy with the concept of ‘adaptive
investment planning’. Moreover, a method for social cost benefit analysis was developed that (1) enables the
‘value’ of sustainability and reliability to be expressed in economic values that can be compared to (economic)
costs and benefits and (2) incorporates the value of flexibility for the future. In the project, the enhanced cost
benefit analysis was applied to a real life network operator investment case.
Some of the recommendations that followed are not addressed at Alliander but rather at the national and
European policy makers who are responsible for the design of the legal framework for the sector:




leave room for innovations (are there incentives, and what is the chance of adoption?)
create in the legislation/regulation a meta structure with flexibility (allow for differentiation, and build in
options before you may need them)
such a ‘meta structure’ must be accompanied by a sense of ‘continuous design’: periodically it must be
reviewed whether options should be used/implemented, and one has to think about identifying ‘flags’ that
indicate that a ‘new’ design decision is needed
think about the governance of the sector and more specifically the grid operator(s): what is the capability
to accommodate changing preferences? How easily can they be effected?
67
5.3.7. Next Generation Port Infra, powered by Maasvlakte 2
Flexibility was one of the kewords in the work done with the Port of Rotterdam in the context of the ‘Next
Generation Port Infra – powered by Maasvlakte 2’ alliance. The economic, technological and political environment
of seaports is constantly changing in both foreseen and unforeseen ways, requiring the port authorities and
companies operating in the port to adapt. Flexibility is therefore crucial - in different respects, at different levels of
the organization. We first set out to identify where and how flexibility is important for the future of the port. The
resulting framework is clustered in three domains: the external institutional framework, the port’s logistic network
and the port cluster itself (e.g. the composition of the port cluster and the characteristics of contracts with firms
operating in the port cluster). A deeper analysis was made of flexibility in four cases: concessions for container
terminals, the port hinterland network, the (re-structuring of the) petrochemical complex, and the common use rail
terminal. Bottlenecks were identified in all four cases, and recommendations given to ensure more flexibility in the
future.
One of the key methods developed in NGINFRA to deal with uncertainties, Exploratory Modelling and Analysis
(EMA), was used to analyze the development of container flows and identify key vulnerabilities of the Port of
Rotterdam with respect to possible future developments in these flows. Amongst others, the analysis shows that
for the future positon of Rotterdam as a competitive container port (competing with other ports in the Hamburg –
Le Havre range) the port hinterland travel time is a key variable, in combination with port efficiency (cost
reduction). The analysis gives deep insight into the combinations of variables that are relevant for Rotterdam’s
strategy and future planning, and convincingly demonstrated the user value of EMA.
The specific question of hinterland accessibility was researched in a parallel project that focused on governance
arrangements and the particular role of the Port of Rotterdam in solving major bottlenecks in hinterland
accessibility. One major bottleneck, the rail bundling issue at Maasvlakte 2, was selected for deeper analysis.
From a cost and efficient infrastructure use perspective, a virtual common rail terminal concept was found to
provide a viable solution. In this concept the existing rail terminal facilities of the individual terminal operators are
used in a collaborative planning model to load and unload full trains to the various destinations. Interterminal
transport is developed for bundling of rail containers with the same hinterland destination between the deepsea
terminals. Combined qualitative and quantitative analysis, based on the principles of coalitional game theory,
showed that a physical common rail terminal is more feasible than the virtual common rail concept: expected
operational complexity, its potential impact on the business models of the individual actors and a lack of trust
among each other are main factors. For the governance model a centralised neutral organization based on a
control approach (in stead of a trust approach) came out as the preferred solution.
While the Port of Rotterdam is already advanced in its master planning, in the sense that its master plan is
scenario-based (based on rubustness in alternative futures) and annually updated to incorporate the latest
developments, the master plan is only limited adaptive to structural uncertainties. There is no systematic
knowledge on the impact of structural uncertainties on Maasvlakte 2, and such uncertainties are not implemented
in the current Master Plan cycle. We therefore set out to implement the concept of adaptive port policy planning
for the Rotterdam Port. As previously described, adaptive planning makes use of exploratory modelling to identify
key vulnerabilities. For the current Master Plan (MP7) seven key vulnerabilities were identified, and for each of
these indicators were developed for monitoring the status of vulnerabilities. The challenge here is to find the
indicators that signal the development of threats in time for policy adaption. That implies that the indicators have
to monitor the root causes of adverse developments, rather than their eventual effects. Then it is possible to
define trigger values of specific indicators signalling that actions are needed. Besides monitoring hard, easily
quantifiable indicators, the monitoring program should include soft indicators, such as trends in technology
imporveents, shifts in industrial supply chains or consumer preferences. Finally, an analysis was made of the gap
between the information needed for adequate monitoring and the information available in the Business Analysis
and Information and the Corporate Strategy departments of the Port of Rotterdam. As it turns out, a lot of the
required data is already available, albeit not all of it. Moreover, the information is not readily available, as it is
fragmented over different departments. More interaction and exchange of information between these departments
would help to fill and apply an adequate monitoring system.
68
Flexibility also played a key role in another project that sought to accommodate the intermittency of wind power in
the Rotterdam industrial cluster. Wind power is associated with fluctuations – that can be the difference between
day and night, or seasonal, or in fact from minute to minute. These fluctuations are a big challenge for the
electricity supply system. Technically they can lead to reliability and availability issues and economically they can
cause price volatility. The sustainability drivers at the EU and national level will result in an increased share of
wind power in the generation portfolio. Large investments in offshore wind power capacity are underway. Rather
than leaving the challenge of accommodating wind power peaks to the transmission system operator, we looked
at the economic opportunities of wind power peaks for industry in the port. Two cases were explored, including
one for the production of steam in a combined gas and electricity fuelled steam boiler. This idea is promoted as
an open source business plan. Several companies have indicated their interest in realizing this option. The idea of
utilizing flexibility in the Rotterdam industrial cluster to reap economic benefits of wind peaks has not only
attracted a lot of industrial interest, but was also picked up by the media (Volkskrant, 1 July 2013 and 11 October
2013).
Another contribution of NGINFRA to flexibility in the port industrial cluster focused on the design of a synthesis gas
(syngas) infrastructure. Several studies showed the increasing potential of syngas as a strategic intermediate
mass and energy carrier in large industrial clusters. However, a syngas infrasructure is not likely to emerge
spontaneously, given the multitude of stakeholders involved. As the number of facilities and owners increases, the
combinatorial complexity will explode. Producers, consumers and system and infrastructure operators have to
negotiate on product flows, on product quality (particularly the H2/CO ratio), on who will invest in technological
installations for quality adjustment, on who will invest in the overarching infrastructure that falls outside the span
of control of individual companies, on the topology of the connecting infrastructure, on the institutional and
juridical arrangements, etc. One of the challenges encountered in such design problems is the consideration of
limited paths for the roll-out of new infrastructural networks in space-constrained areas. This challenge is
aggravated if the number and/or location of connectors is unknown. We applied a novel combination of graph
theory and concepts of exploratory modelling to allow for an analysis of most likely paths that maximise the value
for the planners. The design methodology developed is also applicable for other types of greenfield infrastructure,
besides syngas infrastructure, combining topological, technological, institutional and organizational perspectives
in a design methodology proceeding from strategic to detailed design.
Every new company settling on Maasvlakte 2 influences the possibilities for new industries, as path dependencies
are created that cast their shadow forward over decades. The future success of Maasvlakte 2, however, is more
than just the sum of individual companies’ performance. As in the current industrial complex, its success is to a
large extent determined by the networked interconnections that form between the individual companies, in other
words, by the synergies that are achieved in the industrial cluster. This implies that, for a virgin harbor area as
Maasvlakte 2, a targeted acquisition strategy aimed at attracting the right combination(s) of industries would be
more promising than a ‘wait and see’ strategy. Based on our understanding of the underlying princples of
successful cluster formation, an agent-based simulation tool was developed to support the Port of Rotterdam in
assessing the long term effects of selected new industries on cluster development on the Maasvlakte, under
different scenarios. The simulation is run via a user interface that is able to download the latest data from a
semantic wiki, which contans a dedicated page for every company, facility and product. A key difference from a
normal wiki is that a semantic wiki allows for structured data to be embedded on pages as well, which means that
this structured data can be retrieved and processed similar to how one would work with data contained in a
database. The Agent Based Model simulates the investment decision behaviour of simulated individual
companies. Once companies have started operation, they form trading networks among themselves and larger
aggregated markets. Based on this, we are able to track the flows of money and goods between agents, and
consequently between the port and the world market. The simulation produces a complex web of interconnected
facts that can be queried from different perspectives, for example to analyze the performance of an individual
company or to assess the total amount of port dues collected.
69
Another project with a focus on clusters concentrated on the established harbor-industrial complex in Rotterdam,
exploring as yet unused possibilities for synergy. The project has taken a modelling approach, focussing on the
transport flows of crude oil and its (volume-wise) most important derivatives (naphtha, ethylene, propylene,
benzene) and the associated flows of energy (heat, electricity). The modelling approach that has been used and
developed in the course of the work is based on the idea that models are constructed iteratively, starting with
global input-output diagrams that are quantified, and subsequently elaborated in more detail in so far as needed
to obtain relevant insights and in sof ar as possible in view of data availability. The models, and the analyses that
have been performed using them ( network optimizaton from the perspective of different actors under a variety of
external scenarios) provided insight into limiting capacities, robustness and flexibility of existing neworks (for
transport of matter, heat, etc.), the potential for (and present realization of ) recycling, and the allocation of costs
and benefits over different parties (in various use scenarios). Last but not least, the models showed how these
performance indicators change as a function of investments in networks and/or substitution of specific nodes, and
as a function of changes in contractual agreements among parties (concerning volumes, prices and tariffs, and
who does the dispatch). The project produced a proof of concept for the incremental “boxes within boxes”
modelling method for industrial clusters using open source data. The supporting software tool Linny-R is based on
classic linear optimization techniques. It combines the ease-of-use of a plain and simple graphical flowcharting
tool with the power of a fast linear porgram solver that remains transparent to the user. The model has been run
in numerous experiments to asess the impact of changes in production, integaton potential and profitablity under
a range of assumptions. In parallel with the model integration, a method for “tech mining” (analysis of large
datasets on industrial production in search for interesting patterns) has been tested to answer the question what
classes of products the Port of Rotterdam should focus on when seeking to attract new industries. The findings
indicate that organo-sulpur compounds, and possibly also heterocyclic compounds and nucleic acids, have good
potential for development in Rotterdam.
Whereas the Port of Rotterdam is full of hard infrastructures, a true 3D spatial data infrastructure (SDI) is still
lacking. True 3D information management is needed to support the internal and external information flow in the
Port of Rotterdam, the development of Maasvlakte 2 and the stakeholders in the port area and its vicinity. A new
3D approach and corresponding system architectures will increase the productivity and provide additional means
to check the up-to-dateness, correctness and consistency of data. In this project we focused on the seamless
integration of 3DGIS and BIM information and the customized and flexible semantic enrichment of 3D spatial data
models for enhancing interoperability. The integrated 3D model of Port of Rotterdam (3DMPoR) that resulted from
this work is based on international and national standards in the BIM and GIS domains. The underlying approach
reuses existing feature descriptions when possible and creates new ones only when descriptions and concepts
are missing. The system architecture proposed is based on the principle of maintaining the data by the individual
stakeholder. Integration of 3D information is then provided ‘as a service’ to be combined in real time. This
approach is now possible because the 3DMPoR is based on established standards for exchange of information.
Data for which the Port of Rotterdam is responsible are organised according to the same 3DMPoR in a DBMS
and according to their own requirements and needs. The interfaces developed for visualisation of 3D information
can be performed in different environments, i.e. desktop and web. Another outcome of the project was a new
extension to the IFC model capturing the semantics of quay walls, which helps closing a gap in data modelling
facilities for one of the most important infrastructural artefacts in harbours.
Another data driven project focused on the potential of real-time open data to fuel the emergence of new
applications for increased situational awareness which is relevant for many operations in the port. Current
interoperability solutions mainly support business transactions and are potentially able to provide status
information of these transactions as open data. However, this status information is not real time, since status
information provided by business transactions is mostly shared long after the business transaction has been
completed. In this project we set out to identify (types of) use cases that could benefit from real time open data,
the potential bottlenecks involved and the technical infrastructure required for providing the open data. Besides
raising awareness on the opportunities of open data within the Port of Rotterdam, various cultural, legal and
financial issues were found that need to be tackled before an open data strategy can be implemented. Not all
potential providers of real-time open data are convinced yet that open data can contribute to port attractiveness
and safety. Moreover, current systems need technical changes to be able to make data available. A major
contribution of this project is that it created a nucleus for change by means of a so-called hackaton, where a
number of software developers was invited to come up with ideas for and construct initial applications on data
provided by the Port of Rotterdam.
70
Based on the extensive body of knowledge acquired by NGINFRA on strategic asset management the Port of
Rotterdam indicated its interest in three specific topics in support of their asset life cycle management: the Port of
Rotterdam’s corporate values, lean asset management and asset management culture. With respect to the
corporate values the core question was: What are corporate values of the Port of Rotterdam and how can these
values be elicited so that the resulting values are recognized and accepted? Using an approach based on
Keeney’s Value Focused Thinking, interviews and text mining, five corporate values were defined and a risk
assessment matrix was constructed based on the corporate values. With respect to asset management culture
the core question was: In what way can we measure the asset management culture of the Port of Rotterdam to
help improve the Asset Management change program? We constructed a questionnaire for the employees
working in the asset management group, the results of which indicated a pro-active asset management culture
but a need for education. At a later stage, the questionnaire will be sent out again so that the results can be
compared over time. With respect to lean asset management the question was: In what way can the concept of
lean management provide added value to the asset management process; in particular, the management of data?
We found that the inherent drive towards improvement in asset management matches with the improvement
(reduction of “waste”) concepts of lean management. In other words: lean management can support the goals of
achieving world class asset management. Data management in particular can be described in a way that is
similar to industrial processing, which is the origin of “lean”. We used the opportunity of an internal lean learning
project to address the process of linking quay drawings to corporate information systems. Although the
improvements achieved are modest as compared to the effort involved (several sessions with five employees),
the use of lean management methods may spread the idea of continuous improvement within the organisation.
71
6.
Innovation, valorization and dissemination
We take our motto Improving by Understanding seriously. In the second phase of the program we focused on
disseminating the research findings and translating them to ‘useable’ knowledge to practitioners. This translation
process can be coined in terms of innovation, valorization and dissemination. In our experience these processes
are intertwined and difficult to report on separately. Many examples of knowledge dissemination and actual
adoption of NGInfra knowledge in practitioners’ organizations have already been provided in previous chapters of
this report, notably so in the sections dealing with the strategic alliances of NGINFRA with the Port of Rotterdam
and Alliander. Many more examples can be given, as we interacted with practitioners in almost each and every
project of the program. A comprehensive overview is therefore impossible. This chapter just adds some examples
of dissemination and valorization that again emphasize the variety of means that we employed and that
demonstrate how the program has achieved impact in the real world.
Inventing Europe – the Virtual Exhibit
In the framework of the Inventing Europe Virtual Exhibit, a pioneering collaborative project in which historians and
cultural heritage institutions throughout Europe together tell a new kind of history of Europe, one of the exhibits
developed focuses on the emergence and development of transnational infrastructures for transport, energy,
knowledge and communication that started emerging from the mid-nineteenth century onwards. The Virtual
Exhibit is part of the larger multidisciplinary international Making Europe programme that aims at writing and
communicating a new history of Europe that is pan-European, transnational and uses the lens of technology. The
content of the Virtual Exhibit is inspired by the Making Europe book series and with respect to the themes
‘infrastructures’ and ‘communication’ also by ongoing research within NGI NFRA.
The Inventing Europe Virtual Exhibit speaks to important current concerns in research, heritage and education:
The exhibit makes a broader audience aware of the importance of technology and the emergence of
transnational infrastructures.
For cultural heritage institutions the project comes at an important moment. Recent decades have seen an
increased push for digitization of, and online access to, cultural heritage collections. The Virtual Exhibit might
even be seen as a pioneer for the future of museum exhibits in a digital world. Some of the digitization efforts
by the heritage institutions have been driven by new national agendas, while, at the same time, there is also
considerable impetus toward transnationalization – and Europeanization – of cultural heritage collections.
The Virtual Exhibit is making use of the growing availability of digital heritage to show the complexities of
European histories.
In terms of education the Virtual Exhibit not only speaks to a growing need to make scholarly and scientific
expertise more widely available, it will also function as a pioneer in the new educational paradigm of how
students learn and engage with the material they are learning.
On August 27, 2012 the first version of Inventing Europe went online at www.inventingeurope.eu. Research
results, digital museum collections, web design and technology all come together in this one website. Visitors can
choose from 35 different museum tours.
Internet Governance
The practical relevance and topicality of Milton Mueller’s work on Deep Packet Inspection were very evident:
Milton Mueller was invited to present this data at a public and a private presentation at the Dutch regulator
OPTA in Den Haag, March 22, 2012.
Two online news outlets in Canada interviewed prof. Mueller after the release of the data on the web site in
October. A few weeks after these news reports in Canada, Bell Canada and Rogers promised to change their
use of DPI. Additionally, several specialist websites in the US and NL published reports on the web site.
At the UN Intemet Govemance Forum in Baku, which brings together civil society advocacy groups,
government policy makers and business people, Prof. Mueller was invited to discuss the research at a
workshop organized by the Council of Europe.
72
Sprint City
The SprintCity serious game developed by Delta Metropool, in collaboration with TU Delft and Movares, reached
over 300 practitioners in different provinces, city regions and municipalities, in a total of 30 gaming sessions.
While an early version of SprintCity was already presented at the NGI NFRA 2010 conference in Shenzhen and
discussed with the MTR corporation in Hong Kong, SprintCity has since then been presented in many countries
worldwide. In 2013, the SprintCity tool was demonstrated at KTH university in Stockholm, at the ISAGA 2013
conference, the regional planning agency of the State of São Paulo and the Institute of Architects and Urban
Planners in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and, last but not least, it was featured at the Beijing Design Week. In 2012,
experts from Curtin University, Perth visited Delta Metropool in 2012 to discuss the use of SprintCity in Australia.
The first international SprintCity simulation session was held via Google+Hangouts in Bangalore, Delhi and
Rotterdam in July 2013. A collaborative project with Fields of View (spin off from C-STEP) and Embarq (a
nonprofit program of the World Resources Institute) is currently being set up to investigate a transport corridor in
India, using the English version of the software. With Embarq – Turkey possibilities are being explored to use
SprintCity in support of sustainable transportation plannng in the metropolitan area of Istanbul.
Strategic Asset Management
The theme of strategic infrastructure asset management developed into one of the more visible and active
interaction arenas with practitioners. NGINFRA secured a leading role in the Netherlands in bringing scientific
knowledge about strategic, risk based asset management to the Dutch infra providers. Several activities were
successfully employed:
-
The NGINFRA asset management platform convened multiple times per year and attracted 30-40
infrastructure asset managers who discussed and shared best practices, new insights and challenges.
The meetings were kicked off by one or two brief lectures, by scientists and practitioners to kickstart the
discussion. The meetings were highly appreciated and attendance has grown continuously.
-
NGINFRA has developed a “maturity model” for asset management which has been used multiple times
for assessing the maturity of asset management practices for different infrastructure and asset providers
(RWS, ProRail, Port of Rotterdam, Hoogheemraadschap, VOMI). Especially Rijkswaterstaat has used
multiple maturity checks three years in a row to follow the progress of its asset management
implementation.
-
We have taken up a role in the ISEAM, the International Strategic Engineering Asset Management
Society. NGINFRA was a Founding Fellow and has since joined the Society with two Fellows (invitation
only)
-
NGINFRA has co-developed an asset management educational program for practitioners in the TopTech
program of TU Delft. This course was co-developed with Colibri Advies (Martine van den Boomen).
-
NGINFRA has set up a PhD network for PhD candidates that work on asset management related research
topics. This network has expanded and convenes regularly. PhD candidates discuss their work in
various infrastructure sectors.
-
NGINFRA has organized an event called “Gluren bij de Buren” in which asset managers were given the
opportunity to join a colleague from another sector during his or her work day. This was then reversed on
another day. The participants (about 20) were very enthusiastic and indicated that it had been a great
learning opportunity.
-
NGINFRA edited and published many books and special
issues. Examples are a book on Strategic Asset
Management (Springer). Contributions came from the
EURENSEAM (European Strategic Engineering Asset
Management network) which was chaired by NGI NFRA
researcher (Wijnia). Another example is a special issue in
Int J Strategic Engineering Asset Management, using 9
papers of CESUN2012 conference, held in Delft.
73
7.
Synergy with other BSIK projects
Throughout the years, NGINFRA kept in touch with other BSIK projects, in various ways:
We hired the former managing director of Ruimte voor Geo-informatie, Jacqueline Meerkerk, as an
account manager for our strategic alliances. The link with BSIK RGI-related projects therefore grew
significantly
In BSIK Freeband several researchers also connected to Next Generation Infrastructures participated
until January 2009, including Prof.dr.ir. P. Van Mieghem and Dr. H. Bouwman.
The BSIK KSI wrapped up its activities with a final conference in June 2010. Involved as linking pins in
KSI and Next Generation Infrastructures were Prof.dr.ir. W.A.H. Thissen and Prof. dr. J.W. Schot.
With BSIK Transumo we always maintained the closest ties. Three PhD theses were co-funded by
NGInfra and Transumo. We involved Transumo researchers in, for example, our Showcase Maasvlakte
2 (where logistics play an important role). We maintained close contacts with Jan Klinkenberg and Arjan
van Binsbergen of Transumo to learn from their processes and successes.
A more recent development is the relationship with EDGaR, the Energy Delta Gas research program. EDGaR
benefited from the energy markets modeling work done in NGINFRA, and NGINFRA researchers contributed new
projects to the EDGaR program, a.o. on the agent based modelling of interconnected gas and electricity markets.
74
8.
International positioning
Within the Next Generation Infrastructures program we not only supported research by Dutch research partners in
the Netherlands, but also funded international partners to contribute the best of their knowledge to NGI NFRA. This
helped us create a strong international network with universities and research institutes throughout Europe (such
as Turin, Bremen, Leuven, Paris and Trondheim) as well as in China (Harbin Institute of Technology and their
Shenzhen Campus), India (CSTEP), Canada (Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal) and Australia (Queensland
University of Technology, Brisbane). Through joint education programs, joint international conferences and
European research projects the network has continued to expand since. To report on international positioning in a
separate section therefore feels unnatural. Since the contents of the preceding chapters of this report have
already provided ample evidence of the international profile of NGI NFRA, this section is limited to a few highlights.
International conference series
Before establishing its own dedicated conference series, NGINFRA acquired visibility in the international scientific
community through its active contributions to the IEEE Society on System, Man & Cybernetics and the
Networking, Sensing & Control community. NGINFRA researchers contributed special sessions and conference
tracks to the annual international conferences of these IEEE communities, and were invited to present keynote
addresses. The 2011 IEEE Networking, Sensing & Control conference was held at Delft, featuring the theme Next
Generation Infrastructures. Within the framework of the IEEE SMC Society, Next Generation Infrastructures
established a Technical Committee for Infrastructure Systems & Services.
After the successful first international conference in Rotterdam, the series continued in Chennai, India. This year’s
International Conference on Infrastructure Systems and Services successfully brought worldwide perspectives
and strategies together. The title was "Developing 21st Century Infrastructure Networks". CSTEP organised the
conference in collaboration with SSN College of Engineering, which hosted the conference at its campus in
Chennai. Again, IEEE was the technical co-sponsor of the event that took place from Wednesday, 9 December,
2009 - Friday, 11 December, 2009.
The third annual conference on Next Generation Infrastructures addressed infrastructures for Eco-cities and was
held in Shenzhen, China, 11-13 November 2010. Shenzhen is a city well-positioned and with the ambition to
become a global eco city. It stimulates ideas to develop the appropriate infrastructures to evolve. The Next
Generation Infrastructures conference on infrastructures for Eco-cities was sponsored by Harbin Institute of
Technology (Harbin, China) and the Next Generation Infrastructures. Co-sponsors were HIT Shenzhen Graduate
School, Delft University of Technology, the City of Shenzhen and IEEE Systems, Man & Cybernetics Society.
Keynote speakers were:
Saskia Sassen on global eco cities; Philip Cooke on regional innovation systems; Peter Newman on transport
infrastructures for global cities; Lan Zhiyong on next generation urban planning in China; Geert Deconinck – smart
infrastructures for smart cities; Jin Guangjun – Introduction to eco city planning in China; Yuval Portugali –
Toward a complexity theory of urban infrastructures; Mee Kam Ng on urban planning styles in China; Hugo
Priemus on Global Eco Cities: climate change and flood risk; Slavis Poczebutas on eco city development; Vladan
Babovic on Sustainable urban water management
.The third annual conference
on Next Generation
Infrastructures addressed
infrastructures for Eco-cities
and was held in Shenzhen,
China, 11-13 November 2010.
75
The 2011 conference took place in Virginia, USA. The central theme of this conference was critical
infrastructures, a theme strongly embedded in the local, military community of Virginia. The conference was
organized by Old Dominion University.
The 2013 conference was the launch of the International Symposium for Next Generation Infrastructure (ISNGI)
series, organized and hosted by the SMART Infrastructure Facility of the University of Wollongong, Australia.
ISNGI 2014 was organized by a consortium of University College London, University of Oxford, Delft University of
Technology and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), and hosted by IIASA in
Laxendurg, Austria.
In the renowned annual international conference series on Infrastructure Economics sponsored by NGINFRA and
organized by NGINFRA researchers, the 2010 conference: ‘The governance of next generation infrastructures:
st
readjusting the political and economic institutions to meet the challenges of the 21 century’ was a highlight,
featuring 2009 Nobel Prize laureates Oliver Williamson and Elinor Ostrom as keynote speakers.
Deepening scientific cooperation
Many workshops were organized with other knowledge institutions for the specific purpose of exploring
opportunities for research collaboration and formulating joint research projects. NGINFRA organized and/or
contributed to workshops with a.o the Centre for Science, Technology & Policy, Bangalore; Queensland
University of Technology, Australia; Keio University, Japan; Harbin Institute of Technology, China; Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, USA. Next Generation Infrastructures also organized international workshops focused on
specific knowledge areas, such as “security of electricity supply in the cyber age”, which resulted in the book:
Lukszo, Z Weijnen, MPC & Deconinck, G (2009). Securing electricity supply in the cyber age. Exploring the risks
of information and communication technology in tomorrow's electricity infrastructure (Topics in Safety, Risk,
Reliability and Quality, 15). s.l.: Springer (ISBN 978-90-481-3593-6).
Exchanging scientists
Furthermore, PhD’s, post-doc’s, research fellows and visiting professors were exchanged with prominent partner
universities, such as M.I.T. (Dr. Dan Frey), Carnegie Mellon University (Prof. Marija Ilic, Prof. Eswaran
Subrahmanian), ETH Lausanne (Prof. Mathias Finger), Paris I – Sorbonne (Prof. Claude Ménard) and Syracuse
University (Prof. Mlton Mueller).
76
8.1.
European visibility
Within the European Network for Strategic Engineering Asset Management (EURENSEAM) a benchmark of the
different members (ten technical universities and two technical research institutes from ten different European
countries) was carried out. This benchmark fuels two activities. First, a book that collects the state of the art from
the different universities, edited by T. van der Lei, Y. Wijnia, and P. Herder. Second, future collaboration projects
th
are prepared for funding under the EU 7 Framework Programme.
In the subprogram Intelligent Infrastructures, we cooperated closely with the European Joint Research Centre in
Ispra (Italy). Among others, this has resulted in the SESAME project, an FP7 funded project contributing to the
development of tools and an appropriate regulatory framework for improving the security of the European power
grid against natural hazards, accidental and malicious attacks. Other European projects that evolved in the
context of the Inteligent Infrastructures theme are the FP7 STREP project: ‘Hierarchical and Distributed Model
Predictive Control of Large-Scale Systems’, and the European COST project ‘Towards Autonomic Road
Transport Support Systems’.
Another large European network which NGINFRA helped building, is the network revolving around the theme of
Economics of Infrastructures. For many years NGINFRA supported the annual conferences of this network and the
work of several of the researchers involved.
The UNECOM project is another international consortium which NGINFRA supported. The aim of UNECOM is to
analyze and measure the effects of vertical unbundling. Such an assessment needs to take economic, technical
and legal issues into account. However, comprehensive studies on the actual effects of unbundling are rare.
Many of them focus on one of these aspects, leaving neighboring questions more or less open. More importantly,
quantitative assessments of welfare effects are still scarce, which is predominantly due to a previous lack of data.
This project aimed at filling these knowledge gaps. The research institutes involved are Jacobs University,
Bremen; Bochum Ruhr Universität, Wirtschafts Universität Vienna, Tilburg University and Delft University of
Technology.
8.2.
Profile in the scientific and
practitioners community
In the international scientific community NGINFRA secured its visibility through international NGINFRA conferences
and workshops and by the many contributons of NGI NFRA researchers to other international conferences and
workshops, to international scientific journals, to PhD committees, to European projects, et cetera. NGI NFRA is
especially known in the engineering asset management commnity, as two of its scientific directors are founding
fellows of the International Society of Engineering Asset Management, and as NGI NFRA researchers have been
active contributors to the World Conference series on Engineering Asset Management. In the area of intelligent
infrastructures, NGINFRA is especially known for its contributions to the international knowledge communities on
smart grids and power grid security. Practitioners are also involved in these networks, for example, in the
SESAME power grid security project, a range of practitioners’ organizations is involved, including regulators (e.g.
OfGEM, ACER), technology providers (e.g. Siemens, Alstom) and infrastructure (service) providers (ENEL,
Scottish Power). It is impossible to give an exhaustive list of the contacts and network relations established as a
result of NGINFRA.
In the national community of practitioners, the best evidence we can give of the impact made by NGI NFRA is the
willingness of Dutch infrastructure providers to secure the continuation of NGI NFRA. All efforts made to
disseminate the knowledge and ideas of NGINFRA through the HubHolland and INFRA magazines, the NGI NFRA
website, the Innovation Relay and InfraTrends events, the strategic alliances with Alliander and the Port of
Rotterdam, and a multitude of case studies in practitioners’ organizations, have brought the infrastructure
providers to conclude that NGINFRA is a vital hub in the knowledge infrastructure they need to face the challenges
of the future.
77
9.
Project funding 2004-2014 in relation to project
budget
The financial details are sent as a separate appendix.
78
Appendix 1 - Next Generation Infrastructures Partners
National knowledge institutions


















Delft University of Technology
o Faculty of Civil Engineering
o Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management
o Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Telecommunications and Computer science
o Faculty of Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering
o Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering
OTB Research Institute
Eindhoven University of Technology
Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen School of Management
Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Law
DRIFT, Dutch Research Institute for Transitions
VU University Amsterdam
Wageningen University
ECN, Energy Research Center of the Netherlands
TNO - TNO FEL, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research - Physics and Electronics
Laboratory (Research Centre)
Universiteit Twente
Universiteit van Tilburg
Universiteit Utrecht
Strategy Academy
Stichting Waternet
Deltares
Almende
SEO Economisch Onderzoek Stichting Historie der Techniek
International knowledge institutions



















SITI, Torino, Italy
Instituto Politecnico Torino, Italy
Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium
Universiteit Gent, Belgium
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland
Univ. Paris I, Pantheon Sorbonne/Centre ATOM, France
EC JRC Institute for Protection and Security of the European Citizen, Ispra, Italy
EC JRC Institute for Energy and Transport, Petten, the Netherlands
Sintef, Trondheim, Norway
University of Staffordshire, UK
Wirtschaftuniversität Wien, Austria
Ruhr Universität Bochum, Germany
Jacobs University Bremen, Germany
Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada
Harbin Institute of Technology, People’s Republic of China
Harbin Institute of Technology/Shenzhen Graduate School, PR China
Center for Study of Science, Technology and Policy (CSTEP), Bangalore, India
Syracuse University, Virginia, USA
Infrastructure managers, operators and service providers




KPN Mobile
Orange
Essent Netwerk
LVNL
79







ProRail
Enexis
Alliander
Tennet
EON
Proton Ventures
Rotterdam Port of Rotterdam
Contractors



Oranjewoud
Heijmans
Imtech
Governmental bodies





Ministry of Economic Affairs. Agriculture and Innovation (EL&I)
Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment (I&M)
Directorate General of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (Rijkswaterstaat)
Ministry of Finance
Municipality of Shenzhen, China
Consultants








Berenschot Procesmanagement
Goudappel Coffeng
Perquirimus ltd
Ramboll Finland Oy
AT Osborne
Inno-V
Stratelligence
APPM
Representative bodies



VNO-NCW
CDA Scientific Institute
Vereniging Deltametropool
80
Appendix 2 - Next Generation Infrastructures PhD Thesis
Series on Infrastructures
Next Generation Infrastructures PhD Thesis Series on Infrastructures
(from number 17 onward the PhD research has been subventioned by BSIK)
1.
Strategic behavior and regulatory styles in the Netherlands energy industry
Martijn Kuit, 2002, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
2.
Securing the public interest in electricity generation markets, The myths of the invisible hand and the
copper plate
Laurens de Vries, 2004, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
3.
Quality of service routing in the internet: theory, complexity and algorithms
Fernando Kuipers, 2004, Delft University of Technology, the Netherl ands.
4.
The role of power exchanges for the creation of a single European electricity market: market design and
market regulation
François Boisseleau, 2004, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, and University of Paris IX
Dauphine, France.
5.
The ecology of metals
Ewoud Verhoef, 2004, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
6.
MEDUSA, Survivable information security in critical infrastructures
Semir Daskapan, 2005,Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
7.
Transport infrastructure slot allocation
Kaspar Koolstra, 2005, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
8.
Understanding open source communities: an organizational perspective
Ruben van Wendel de Joode, 2005, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
9.
Regulating beyond price, integrated price-quality regulation for electricity distribution networks
Viren Ajodhia, 2006, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
10. NetworkedrReliability, Institutional fragmentation and the reliability of service provision in critical
infrastructures
Mark de Bruijne, 2006, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
11. Regional regulation as a new form of telecom sector governance: the interactions with technological
socio-economic systems and market performance
Andrew Barendse, 2006, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
12. The Internet bubble - the impact on the development path of the telecommunications sector
Wolter Lemstra, 2006, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
13. Multi-agent model predictive control with applications to power networks
Rudy Negenborn, 2007, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
14. Dynamic bi-level optimal toll design approach for dynamic traffic networks
Dusica Joksimovic, 2007, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
15. Intertwining uncertainty analysis and decision-making about drinking water infrastructure
Machtelt Meijer, 2007, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
16. The new EU approach to sector regulation in the network infrastructure industries
Richard Cawley, 2007, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
17. A functional legal design for reliable electricity supply, How technology affects law
Hamilcar Knops, 2008, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands and Leiden University, the
Netherlands.
18. Improving real-time train dispatching: models, algorithms and applications
Andrea D’Ariano, 2008, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
19. Exploratory modeling and analysis: A promising method to deal with deep uncertainty
Datu Buyung Agusdinata, 2008, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
81
20. Characterization of complex networks: application to robustness analysis
Almerima Jamaković, 2008, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
21. Shedding light on the black hole, The roll-out of broadband access networks by private operators
Marieke Fijnvandraat, 2008, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
22. On stackelberg and inverse stackelberg games & their applications in the optimal toll design problem, the
energy markets liberalization problem, and in the theory of incentives
Kateřina Staňková, 2009, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
23. On the conceptual design of large-scale process & energy infrastructure systems: integrating
flexibility,reliability, availability,maintainability and economics (FRAME) performance metrics
Austine Ajah, 2009, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
24. Comprehensive models for security analysis of critical infrastructure as complex systems
Fei Xue, 2009, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy.
25. Towards a single European electricity market, A structured approach for regulatory mode decision -making
Hanneke de Jong, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
26. Co-evolutionary process for modeling large scale socio-technical systems evolution
Igor Nikolić, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
27. Regulation in splendid isolation: A framework to promote effective and efficient performance of the
electricity industry in small isolated monopoly systems
Steven Martina, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
28. Reliability-based dynamic network design with stochastic networks
Hao Li, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
29. Competing public values
Bauke Steenhuisen, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
30. Innovative contracting practices in the road sector: cross-national lessons in dealing with opportunistic
behaviour
Mónica Altamirano, 2010, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
31. Reliability in urban public transport network assessment and design
Shahram Tahmasseby, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
32. Capturing socio-technical systems with agent-based modelling
Koen van Dam, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
33. Road incidents and network dynamics, Effects on driving behaviour and traffic congestion
Victor Knoop, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
34. Governing mobile service innovation in co-evolving value networks
Mark de Reuver, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
35. Modelling risk control measures in railways
Jaap van den Top, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
36. Smart heat and power: Utilizing the flexibility of micro cogeneration
Michiel Houwing, 2010, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
37. Architecture-driven integration of modeling languages for the design of software-intensive systems
Michel dos Santos Soares, 2010, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
38. Modernization of electricity networks: Exploring the interrelations between institutions and technology.
Martijn Jonker, 2010, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
39. Experiencing Complexity: A gaming approach for understanding infrastructure systems.
Geertje Bekebrede 2010, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
40. Epidemics in Networks, Modeling, Optimization and Security Games.
Jasmina Omic, 2010, Delft University of Technology Delft, The Netherlands
41. Designing Robust Road Networks: A general method applied to the Netherlands.
Maaike Snelder, 2010, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
42. Simulations of Energy Transitions.
Emile Chappin, 2011, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
43. De ingeslagen weg, Een empirisch onderzoek naar de dynamiek van de uitbesteding van onderhoud in de civiele
infrastructuur. Rob Schoenmaker, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, 2011
82
44. Safety Management and Risk Modelling in Aviation: the challenge of quantifying management influences.
Pei-Hui Lin, 2011, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
45. Transportation modelling for large-scale evacuations
Adam J. Pel, 201,1 Delft University of Technology, Delft
46. Clearing the road for ISA Implementation?: Applying Adaptive Policymaking for the Implementation of
Intelligent Speed Adaptation
Jan-Willem van der Pas, 2011, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
47. Designing multinational electricity balancing markets.
Reinier van der Veen, 2012, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
48. Understanding socio-technical change. A system-network-agent approach.
Catherine Chiong Meza, 2012, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
49. National design and multi-national integration of balancing markets.
Alireza Abbasy, 2012, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
50. Regulation of gas infrastructure expansion.
Jeroen de Joode, 2012, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
51. Governance Structures of Free/Open Source Software Development. Examining the role of modular
product design as a governance mechanism in the FreeBSD Project.
George Dafermos, 2012, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
52. Making Sense of Open Data – From Raw Data to Actionable Insight.
Chris Davis, 2012, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
53. Intermodal Barge Transport: Network Design, Nodes and Competitiveness.
Rob Konings, 2009, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
54. Handling Disruptions in Supply Chains: An integrated Framework and an Agent -based Model. Behzad
Behdani, 2013, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
55. Images of cooperation; a methodological exploration in energy networks.
Andreas Ligtvoet, 2013, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
56. Robustness and Optimization of Complex Networks: Spectral analysis, Modeling and Algorithms, Dajie
Liu, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
57. Wegen door Brussel: Staatssteun en publieke belangen in de vervoersector,
Nienke Saanen, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
58. The Flexible Port,
Poonam Taneja, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
59. Transit-Oriented Development in China; How can it be planned in complex urban systems?,
Rui Mu, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
60. Cross Culture Work; Practices of collaboration in the Panama Canal Expansion Program,
Karen Smits, 2013, University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
61. Structuring Socio-technical Complexity; Modelling Agent Systems Using Institutional Analysis, Amineh
Ghorbani, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
62. Towards Playful Organzations; How online gamers organize themselves (and what other organizations
van learn from them),
Harald Warmelink, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
63. Electricity without borders; The need for cross-border transmission,
Carlo Brancucci Martinez-Anido, 2013, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
64. The Power of Electric Vehicles; Exploring the Value of Flexible Electricity Demand in a Multi -actor
Context, Remco Verzijlbergh, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
65. The impact of the policy mix on service innovation. The formative and growth phases of the sectoral
innovation system for Internet video services in the Netherlands,
Martijn Poel, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
66. Acceptance-by-Design; Elicitation of Social Requirements for Intelligent Infrastructures,
Layla AlAbdulkarim, 2013, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
83
67. ‘Publieksvriendelijk’ versnellen van innovatie in netwerksectoren. Een exploratie van wetstechnische
mogelijkheden ter bevordering van innovatie in de telecomsector, met behoud van de bescherming van
publieke belangen,
Lesley Broos, 2014, University of Twente, The Netherlands.
68. Spectrum Trading in the United Kingdom: Considering Market-Based Liberalization from Two
Perspectives,
Rajen Akalu, 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
69. Platform Dilemmas: Collective Action and the Internet of Things,
Fatemeh Nikayin, 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
70. Scripting Transitions: A framework to analyse structural changes in socio-technical systems,
Anish Patil, 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
71. Eco-transformation of industrial parks in China,
Chang Yu, 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
72. Market-based support schemes for renewable energy sources,
Riccardo Fagiani, 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
73. Strategic Behavior in the Liberalized Electricity Sector: Game Theoretical Formal Modeling in Policy Analysis,
Sertaç Oruç, 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
74. European short-term electricity market designs under high penetration of wind power,
José Pablo Chaves Ávila. 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
75. The Princess in the Castle: Challenging Serious Game Play for Integrated Policy Analysis and Planning,
Qiqi Zhou, 2014, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
76. Fostering Climate Resilient Electricity Infrastructures,
Lynn Andrew Bollinger. 2015, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Theses in progress:
77. Chittur Ramaswamy P. “Grid reconfiguration in distribution networks with distributed energy resources” (expected
in 2015)
78. Caner Hamarat . PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands (expected in 2015).
The following theses are funded by NGI NFRA, but are not part of the NGI NFRA publication series
79. Integration of Regulating Power Markets in Northern Europe, 2012
Stefan Jaehnert, NTNU, Norway
80. Integrated Power System Balancing in Norhtern Europe- Models and case studies, 2012
Hossein Farahmand, NTNU, Norway
81. Vertical Economies of Scope in Electricity Supply -Analysing the Costs of Ownership Unbundling, 2011, Roland
Meyer, Jacobs University Bremen, Germany
82. Electricity And Gas Supply Network Unbundling In Germany, Great Britain And The Netherlands And The Law Of
The European Union: A Comparison, 2009, Eckart Ehlers, Tilburg University, The Netherlands
83. Investment, Unbundling, and Vertical Governance in Energy Markets. 2011.
Nele Friedrichsen, Jacobs Universiteit Bremen, Germany
84. Effects of Regulation on energy prices, welfare and company behavior, 2011
Christoph Bremberger, Wirtschafts Universitat Wien, Austria
85. Resilient response: A gaming study of multidisciplinary coordination in emergency management teams. 2014.
Theo van Ruijven, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands.
86. Configurable Agents for Strategic Management Simulations and Games (in progress)
Rick van Krevelen, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
87. Gaming to Speed Up Energy Transition: from experiments to multi-actor systems gaming (in progress) . Iman
Mohammed, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
88. Behavioural Responses and Network Effects of Time-varying Road Pricing, 2009,
Dirk van Amelsfort, TRAIL, The Netherlands
89. Institutional and Organisational aspects of internet security governance, 2014,
Andreas Schmidt , Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
90. Multi-level Reconfigurable Self-organization in Overlay Services, 2013,
Evangelos Pournaras, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
84
Appendix 3 - QANU Research Quality Assessment Report
This appendix is extracted from the QANU (Quality Assurance Netherlands Universities) Research Review of
Tehnology, Management, Policy and Industrial Engineering (2011).
85
86
87
Appendix 4 - Brochures
List of brochures:

10 Jaar improving by understanding, Next Generation Infrastructures krijgt spannend vervolg.
Ter gelegenheid van het 10 jarig jubileum van Next Generation Infrastructures

Met de Stroom Mee
De reismagazine is een uitgave van Alliander en Next Generation Infrastructures

Next Generation Infrastructures, Alles is Infra

InfraTrends 2011
Available on issuu: http://issuu.com/nginfra
INFRA Magazines

Infra = Ruimte, december 2014, nr. 4

Wildwest onder de grond, september 2014, nr. 3

Onze infra is topfit, april 2014, nr. 2

De grens geslecht, februari 2014, nr. 1

Geen paniek, november 2013, nr. 4

De burger bediend, augustus 2013, nr. 3

Grip op kennis, mei 2013, nr. 2

Contractvormen ontrafeld, februari 2013, nr. 1

Wat brengt de toekomst, december 2012, nr. 4

Wie vult 155.000 vacatures in?, september 2013, nr. 3

Moet het nog slimmer?, juli 2012, nr. 2

Hoe robuust wil je zijn, februari 2012, nr. 1
Available on http://www.elba-rec.nl/kennis/archief
88
Appendix 5 - Summary of final review and reflection and
conclusions on Next Generation Port Infra, powered by
Maasvlakte 2
Samenvatting beoordelingen:
Door de projecteigenaren bij het HbR zijn alle projecten gescoord op de volgende aspecten:
- Bereikt wat werd uiteengezet in het projectvoorstel, met redelijke aanpassingen
- Innovatieniveau van het onderzoek
- Relevantie van de output voor de maatschappij
- Bijdrage tot het profiel van Next Generation Port Infra of een van de partners
(HbR, Next Generation Infrastructures)
Door de wetenschappelijke directie van NGInfra zijn alle projecten op dezelfde aspecten gescoord, met in plaats
van innovatie niveau: kwaliteit van de academische output.
Vervolgens zijn de resultaten besproken in de Adviesraad van de alliantie, en de resultaten ingebracht en
vastgesteld door de Stuurgroep.
Het merendeel van de projecten heeft hoog gescoord in de beoordeling: 1 project is als excellent beoordeeld
Flexibliteit door exploratief modelleren), twee projecten als zeer goed tot excellent (3D SDI en Flexibel afvangen
van windenergiepieken), drie projecten als zeer goed en het merendeel als goed tot zeer goed. Een project is als
voldoende beoordeeeld. Over de projecten zijn ook afspraken gemaakt over vervolgacties bij het Havenbedrijf
Rotterdam voor verdere verankering.
Reflectie en Conclusies
Daarnaast is door de Adviesraad een aantal reflecties en conclusies op een rij gezet en besproken in de
Stuurgroep.
Reflectie inhoud:
•
Breed gevulde portefeuille met mooie projecten, gekoppeld aan de ‘duurzame efficiente haven’
en ingaand op de veranderende rol van het HbR daarin (meer regie)
•
Interactieve workshops (en betrekken juiste mensen daarbij) waren cruciaal voor totstandkoming
projecten en synthese tussen projecten
•
Enkele resultaten boven verwachting concreet toepasbaar, maar echte waarde zit in vergroten
inzicht in complexe vraagstukken (improving by understanding)
•
Draagvlak projecteigenaren HbR van wisselend niveau, groeiend in de tijd
•
Resultaatgerichte, projectmatige aanpak vanuit onderzoekers was aandachtspunt, eveneens
groeiend (in dialoog met HbR)
Reflectie proces:
•
Bij elkaar brengen van: verschillende werelden, verschillende talen, verschillende tijd-horizons
•
Meerjarig groeiproces
•
Interactieve aanpak voorwaardelijk en interactieve workshops inspirerender dan uitvoerige
rapportages
•
Goede organisatie helpt
•
Lange termijn budget op alliantieniveau helpt
•
“onderzoek is niet uitbesteed maar de organisatie ingebracht” (co-creatie)
89
•
•
Verbeterpunten:
•
verdere verbreding van het netwerk met verrassende nationale/internationale
partijen (nu zijn vooral ‘bekende’ partijen als TU, TNO en EUR betrokken)
•
administratief: worsteling met complexe subsidieregeling en bij de start van
NGInfra gekozen inrichting van de financiën en contractenstructuur
Verduurzaming in NGInfra 2.0
Conclusies mb.t. hoofddoelstelling:
•
Er zijn nieuwe inzichten en concrete bijdragen geleverd aan het hoofddoel van een duurzame,
efficiënte haven, waarbij is ingegaan op de veranderende rol van het HbR (meer regie)
•
Belangrijkste meerwaarde: vergroten inzicht in complexe vraagstukken. De meerwaarde ontstond
vooral in synergie met de Havenvisie en daarbuiten ‘out of the box’ denken; de bijdrage aan
ontwikkeling Maasvlakte 2 zelf bleek beperkter dan verwacht omdat deze al in een vergevorderd
stadium was
•
De resultaten zijn nog breder te benutten voor HBR, onder meer bij de afdeling Strategie
•
De kennisbasis van NGInfra is benut en verbreed
Conclusies m.b.t. proces samenwerking:
•
Samenwerking Next Generation Port Infra was een groeiproces dat heeft geresulteerd in een
duurzaam kennisnetwerk (NGInfra2.0).
•
Cocreatie-aanpak was hierbij cruciaal.
•
Succes van de alliantie bleek afhankelijk van:
•
onderzoeks-rijpheid organisatie (is men in staat om zich te laten verrassen, open
mindset, oog voor langere termijn)
•
valorisatie-rijpheid onderzoekers (is men geïnteresseerd in toepassing kennis en
praktijkproblemen, open mindset, cases)
•
skills voor projectmatig werken (bij onderzoekers)
•
sponsoren/rolmodellen bij beide partijen
•
open staan voor verbreding netwerk (en daardoor vernieuwing)
•
slagkracht alliantie (organisatie, budget etc.)
•
lange adem
Conclusie - wat maakt deze alliantie uniek?
•
Langetermijngerichtheid
•
Combinatie van concrete havenvraagstukken met fundamenteel wetenschappelijk onderzoek
(elkaar durven uitdagen en verrassen)
•
Samenhangend onderwerp Next Generation Infrastructures met dito netwerk
•
Aanpak samenwerking via co-creatie op alle niveaus (Stuurgroep, Adviesraad, Coördinatieteam,
Projecten: geen “wij – zij” maar samen en open)
•
Inspiratie en slagkracht
Aanbevelingen:
1.
Nazorg en verankering: invullen randvoorwaarden om het succes nog beter voor het voetlicht te
brengen en de olievlek binnen & buiten HbR te vergroten
2.
Vervolgstap: van bilateraal naar integraal kennis ontwikkelen en delen, met andere externe
partijen (bedrijven, overheden) en meer internationale blik
3.
Over ca. 5 jaar evalueren wat er echt is voortgekomen uit deze alliantie
90
Appendix 6 - Summary of final review and enquete
Empowering Networks
Samenvatting beoordelingen
Door de beoordelaars van Alliander zijn alle projecten gescoord op de volgende aspecten:
- Bereikt wat werd uiteengezet in het projectvoorstel, met redelijke aanpassingen
- Innovatieniveau van het onderzoek
- Relevantie van de output voor de maatschappij
- Bijdrage tot het profiel van Empowering Networks of een van de partners
(Alliander, Next Generation Infrastructures)
Door de wetenschappelijke directie van NGInfra zijn alle projecten op dezelfde aspecten gescoord, met in plaats
van innovatie niveau: kwaliteit van de academische output.
Conclusies vanuit de beoordelingen:






Op geen van de onderwerpen scoorde een project onder de maat.
De meeste projecten hebben goed geleverd wat was afgesproken in het projectvoorstel; een project
scoorde hier matig.
Twee projecten scoorden maximaal op innovatieniveau (Modelling Complexity, en Kwetsbaarheid) en
een aantal vlak dooronder.
Vier projecten scoorden hoog op de kwaliteit van de academische output (Institutional arrangements,
Omgevingsinteracties, NeGoM, Kwetsbaarheid)
Drie projecten scoorden maximaal op de maatschappelijke relevantie (Modelling Complexity en
Institutional Arrangements en Omgevingsinteracties), daarnaast scoorde Marktmodel Biogas hoog.
De bijdrage aan het profiel van Empowering Networks, of een van de partners, was bij een project een
echte showcase (Institutional Arrangements); daarnaast scoorden Open Data, Modelling Complexity en
Kwetsbaarheid hier hoog.
Terugblik door Programmaraad
Verder heeft de Programmaraad in haar laatste vergadering teruggeblikt op de portefeuille. Terugkijkend is het
een mooi, relatief smal netwerk, dat vooral is opgebouwd vanuit bestaande contacten (veel TBM) door de
tijdsdruk die op het geheel stond; het was nuttig geweest als ook buitenlandse partijen projecten zouden hebben
ingediend. De gekozen vraagstelling was vrij breed. Het was lastig dat de doorlooptijd te kort was voor een phdtraject, hier zijn oplossingen voor gevonden. Er is in de volle breedte een mooie portefeuille opgebouwd. Qua
resultaten en impact springen onder andere het Open Data project en Omgevingsinteracties er positief uit naar de
mening van de Programmaraad. Alle projecten zijn inhoudelijk geaccepteerd door de Programmaraad.
Samenvatting mini-enquete
Via een mini-enquete zijn 4 vragen uitgezet bij de beoordelaars van Alliander en projectleiders. Per onderwerp
volgt hier een korte terugkoppeling.
1)
Samenwerking
 De samenwerking is over het algemeen zeer positief ervaren. Over het algemeen was er veel energie en
commitment en waren de contacten informeel.
 Een project was hierop een uitzondering: de samenwerking werd als rommelig ervaren met weinig
contact; de projectleider had hiervan een positiever beeld.
2a) Verrassingen
91



De medewerkers van Alliander vonden vooral de nieuwe ideeën en deskundigheid en
oplossingsgerichtheid van de onderzoekers zeer verrassend. Verder was de impact verrassend van het
feit dat een onderzoeker een dag per week bij Alliander werkte.
Vanuit de onderzoekers werd als verrassend gezien: de open houding en het meedenken vanuit
Alliander.
Verrassend was verder de toegevoegde waarde van de synthesebijeenkomsten waarbij verbindingen
tussen de projecten werden gelegd.
2b) Teleurstellingen





3)
Bij een project speelde meermalen een wisseling van contactpersonen bij Alliander
Verder was een project teleurgesteld over de beperkte contacten met de wetenschappelijke staf
Toekomst
 Bijna alle personen zouden in de toekomst weer meedoen met een dergelijke samenwerking

4)
Teleurstellend was met name de administratieve rompslomp (contracten, financiële regeling e.d.) en de
onduidelijkheid daarover aan het begin.
Daarnaast viel het tegen dat zaken soms meer tijd kostten dan verwacht, b.v. de implementatie van
beleid binnen de organisatie of het afstemmen van deelprojecten op elkaar.
Twee projecten waren wat teleurgesteld over de koppeling tussen de theorie en de praktijk
Tips daarbij: hou het administratief zo eenvoudig mogelijk, zorg voor brede borging over meerdere
personen binnen de organisatie, zorg voor meer inhoudelijke sturing bij de samenstelling van de
portfolio, knip een groot project op en besteed deze los aan, laat onderzoekers een deel van hun tijd bij
Alliander hun werk uitvoeren, verspreid resultaten eerder binnen het bedrijf zodat meer mensen kunnen
meedenken, zorg voor intensief contact met de wetenschappelijke staf.
Wat heeft de samenwerking opgeleverd



De samenwerking heeft nieuwe inzichten en kennisverdieping opgeleverd en daarnaast veel
netwerkcontacten, vooral binnen maar ook buiten de alliantiepartijen.
Daarnaast heeft het vanuit Alliander ook inzicht gegeven in de mogelijkheden om zaken aan te besteden
bij universiteiten, en vanuit de onderzoekers: inzicht in het belang van projectmatig werken en veel
publicaties en publiciteit.
Enkele concrete output: geaccepteerd open data beleid met impact in de sector, input voor nieuw beleid
vanuit Kwetsbaarheid Intelligente Distributienetwerken.
92
Appendix 7 - Intentieverklaring het Nieuwe NGInfra
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
Appendix 8 - Preliminary outline of the contents of the
State of the Infrastructure report
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
Appendix 9 – Detailed findings of the subprograms
5.3.1. Understanding Complex Networks
Understanding infrastructures as complex physical networks
Whereas complex networks were traditionally modelled as random graphs, the emerging science field of the
‘physics of networks’ recognizes that the complex networks encountered e.g. in the internet, the WWW, power
grids, transportations systems and food webs have some common inherent organizing principles. Various network
models (e.g. small-world and scale-free models), beside the traditional ones, have been proposed and
investigated in depth. Also the corresponding properties, which try to capture in quantitative terms the underlying
complex principles, have been studied extensively. However, many open questions remained, particularly about
the relationship between the underlying network structure and the robustness of networks to different types of
perturbations. In the NGINFRA program we unravelled the critical topological topological parameters that
determine the network robustness, in order to gain new insights in the form of quantitative measures that could be
applied to improve the robustness of current complex networks. The research proceeded in two steps, the first
one focusing on topological metrics that can characterize and define the robustness of networks, and the second
one dealing with threats, especially virus spread in networks:
Characterization of complex networks
Recent advances in the science of complexity have revealed that complex networks exist on many scales and in
many different domains, including infrastructures. Such networks, it is now well established, share common
properties in terms of their non-trivial network structure, called the network topology. We have surveyed a
particular line of complex networks research, mainly concerned with the characterization of non-trivial topological
properties of complex networks. We expanded on this research by analyzing those elementary graph measures,
further classified into structural and spectral measures, that are of interest when quantifying topology-related
aspects of the robustness of complex networks. We specifically addressed the following themes:
1.
Analysis of relations among a variety of proposed graph measures to propose a definite set, capable of
expressing the most relevant topological properties of complex networks.
2.
Study of the applicability of spectral measures to classify the qualitative topological properties that
characterize specific classes of complex networks.
3.
Study of the applicability of spectral measures to quantify different topological aspects of robustness of
complex networks.
4.
Practical application of spectral measures to quantify how the robustness to different types of failures
manifests itself in the underlying complex network structure.
At first, we analyzed relations among a variety of existing graph measures so as to make a first fundamental step
in proposing a definite set, capable of expressing the most relevant topological properties of complex networks.
We extended this study by focusing on the topological properties in relation to the eigenvalues of the network’s
characteristic matrix. In particular, we adopted spectral graph theory to analyze the spectral properties of
theoretical and empirical networks and showed how this method aims at qualitative characterization of different
classes of networks. We further illustrated the use of spectral measures to the question of quantitative
characterization of different topological aspects of the robustness of complex networks: we introduced a particular
eigenvalue of the network’s characteristic matrix, referred to as the algebraic connectivity, as a quantifier of the
robustness to disconnection or component separation in complex networks. Herewith we also introduced another
particular eigenvalue of the network’s characteristic matrix, referred to as the spectral radius, as a quantifier of the
robustness to virus propagation in complex networks. Having suggested possible quantifiers of topology-related
aspects of robustness, we analyzed the relationship between the algebraic connectivity, and the classical
measures of the extent to which a network can cope with its component failures. Finally, we studied the practical
application of the algebraic connectivity to quantify how the robustness to different types of failures manifests
itself in the underlying complex network structure.
Epidemics in Networks
124
Epidemic theory has a wide range of applications in computer networks, from spreading of malware to information
dissemination algorithms. Many of these networks rely to a large extent on decentralization and self-organization.
While decentralization removes obvious vulnerabilities related to single points of failure, it leads to a higher
complexity of the system. A more complex type of vulnerability appears in such systems. For instance, computer
viruses are imminent threats to all computer networks. We studied the interaction between malware spreading
and strategies that are designed to cope with them.
The main goals were:
1.
to analyze the influence of network topology on infection spread
2.
to determine how a topology can be used for network protection
3.
to formulate and study optimization of malware protection with respect to topology
4.
to investigate the non-cooperative game of security
We used analytical tools from various fields to answer these questions. First of all, we developed a homogeneous
and heterogeneous N-intertwined, susceptible/infected/susceptible (SIS) model for virus spread. This model is
used to determine the influence of topology on the spreading process. For the N-intertwined model, we showed
that the largest eigenvalue of the adjacency matrix of the graph rigorously defines the epidemic threshold. The
results of the model also predict the upper and lower bounds on epidemics as a function of nodal degree. The
epidemic threshold is found to be a consequence of the mean field approximation.
However, slow convergence to the steady-state justifies the application of the threshold concept. We used the
exact 2N-state Markov chain model to explore the phase transition phenomenon for two contrasting cases,
namely the line graph and the complete graph. The N-intertwined model assumes that the infection spreading
over a link is a Poisson process. By introducing infection delay, we studied the influence of deviation from the
Poisson process assumption on epidemic threshold for the special case of a complete bi-partite graph. Due to the
special structure of bi-partite graphs we were also able to derive an approximate formula for the extinction
probability in the first phase of the infection.
In the case of SIS epidemic models, the effects of infection depend on the protection of individual nodes. We
studied optimization of protection schemes for different networks. We used the results from heterogeneous Nintertwined model to determine the global optimum at the threshold. Above the threshold, the problem is a sum of
ratios fractional programming problem, which is NP-complete. Therefore, we only determined an upper bound on
the optimum. Contrary to common understanding, reducing the probability of infection for higher degree nodes
pushes the network out of the global optimum.
Computer networks are generally distributed systems and protection cannot be globally optimized. The Internet is
an extreme example: there is no global control center, and obtaining complete information on its global state is an
illusion. To approach the issue of security over a decentralized network, we derived a novel framework for
network security under the presence of autonomous decision makers. The problem under consideration is an N
players non-cooperative game. We have established the existence of a Nash equilibrium point (NEP). The
willingness of nodes to invest in protection depends on the price of protection. We showed that, when the price of
protection is relatively high for all the nodes, the only equilibrium point is that of a completely unprotected network;
while if this price is sufficiently low for a single node, it will always invest in protecting itself. We determined
bounds on the Price of Anarchy (PoA), that describes how far the NEP is from the global optimum. We have also
proposed two methods for steering the network equilibrium, namely by influencing the relative prices and by
imposing an upper bound on infection probabilities.
Quarantining is another possible measure against an epidemic. A quarantine on a set of network nodes separates
them from the rest of the network by removing links. The concept of threshold and the N-intertwined model
provides a tool to analyze how quarantining improves the network protection. We studied several different
networks from artificially generated to real-world examples.
Output
125
Graph Spectra for Complex Networks
Piet Van Mieghem
Cambridge University Press 2010
Analyzing the behavior of complex networks is an important element in
the design of new man-made structures such as communication systems
and biologically engineered molecules. Because any complex network
can be represented by a graph, and therefore in turn by a matrix, graph
theory has become a powerful tool in the investigation of network
performance. This self-contained book provides a concise introduction to
the theory of graph spectra and its applications to the study of complex
networks. Covering a range of types of graphs and topics important to
the analysis of complex systems, this guide provides the mathematical
foundation needed to understand and apply spectral insight to real-world
systems. In particular, the general properties of both the adjacency and
Laplacian spectrum of graphs are derived and applied to complex
networks. An ideal resource for researchers and students in
communications networking as well as in physics and mathematics.
Performance Analysis of Complex Networks
and Systems
Piet Van Mieghem
Cambridge University Press 2014
This rigorous, self-contained book describes mathematical and, in
particular, stochastic and graph theoretic methods to assess the
performance of complex networks and systems. It comprises three parts:
the first is a review of probability theory; Part II covers the classical theory
of stochastic processes (Poisson, Markov and queueing theory), which
are considered to be the basic building blocks for performance evaluation
studies; Part III focuses on the rapidly expanding new field of network
science. This part deals with the recently obtained insight that many very
different large complex networks - such as the Internet, World Wide Web,
metabolic and human brain networks, utility infrastructures, social
networks - evolve and behave according to general common scaling
laws. This understanding is useful when assessing the end-to-end quality
of Internet services and when designing robust and secure networks.
Containing problems and solved solutions, the book is ideal for graduate
students taking courses in performance analysis.
This line of research has been very productive in terms of high impact journal papers and conference papers,
besides three PhD theses. Selected publications:

Jamakovic, A. (2008). Characterization of Complex Networks, Application to Robustness Analysis, PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands

Omic, J. (2010). Epidemics in Networks - Modeling, Optimization and Security Games, PhD thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands.

Liu, Dajie (2013). Robustness and Optimization of Complex Networks: Spectral Analysis, Modeling and
Algorithms. Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands

Van Mieghem, P., J. S. Omic and R. E. Kooij, 2009, "Virus Spread in Networks", IEEE/ACM Transaction
on Networking, Vol. 17, No. 1, February, pp. 1-14.
The influence of the network characteristics on the virus spread is analyzed in a new – the N-intertwined Markov
chain – model, whose only approximation lies in the application of mean field theory.

Omic, J., A. Orda and P. Van Mieghem, 2009, "Protecting against network infections: A game theoretic
perspective", IEEE INFOCOM 2009, April 19-25, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.
126
We propose a unified framework that combines the N-intertwined, SIS epidemic model with a non-cooperative game
model.

Jamakovic, A. and P. Van Mieghem, 2008, "On the Robustness of Complex Networks by Using the
Algebraic Connectivity", IFIP Networking 2008, May 5-9, Singapore.
The second smallest eigenvalue of the Laplacian matrix, also known as the algebraic connectivity, plays a special role
for the robustness of complex networks since it measures the extent to which it is difficult to cut the network into
independent components. In this paper we study the behaviour of the algebraic connectivity in a well-known complex
network model, the random graph.
Understanding infrastructures as complex social networks
When analyzing or designing infrastructures, researchers reduce the multi-actor complexity of such systems by
selecting certain aspects for inclusion in a model while ignoring the rest. Actors can be modeled at many different
system levels, and at each system level, the relations between actors and the behavior of actors can be
represented according to many different paradigms (rational choice, social relations, regulation, strategic
behavior, evolution, etc.). Each paradigm reduces the complexity of multi-actor systems (MAS) along different
dimensions, and, inevitably, the resulting models and insights will be partial and of limited validity and use. The
key question addressed in the research line on how to ‘harness’ multi-actor system complexity is how to facilitate
knowledge sharing among MAS researchers in interdisciplinary projects. More specifically, the following questions
have been leading in our research:
1.
What are the conceptual models of MAS that researchers use in the field of designing networked
infrastructures? What aspects of multi-actor systems are represented by different conceptual models? What
are the dimensions along which various researchers of multi-actor systems (MAS) reduce complexity?
2.
To what extent are conceptual models shared among MAS researchers? Are there conceptual
incompatibilities in the sense that the meaning of terms and/or the semantic relations between concepts are
contradicting?
3.
How can knowledge sharing among researchers in interdisciplinary projects be facilitated? How is knowledge
shared in interdisciplinary research projects? What factors inhibit such sharing? How can the transaction cost
of knowledge sharing across disciplines be lowered?
In the course of the project, these methodological questions evolved as a result of applied case studies:
1.
By what methods can the MAS concepts used by researchers from different disciplines be identified, and how
can such methods be validated?
2.
What are the concepts used to represent MAS in different paradigms and can they be fit in a concept
hierarchy (from generic to specific) that is internally consistent and allows cross-disciplinary comparison of
models?”
3.
In what way can ICT tools (notably for document analysis and glossary development) support these
methods?
As it turned out, most actor representations are based on the rational actor paradigm. The difference in
representation mainly follow from how, and in what amount of detail, the mechanism of deliberation / decisionmaking of actors is represented. We found that the ambiguity of some concepts (e.g., ‘belief’) could not be
resolved by conceptual analysis.
Even if validated by the participating researchers, the results of conceptual analysis must be employed judiciously
in support of interdisciplinary dialogue. When the analysis indicates a strong similarity or a clear distinction
between concepts, this should be seen as a strong suggestion to the researchers to treat them as such in their
discussions. When the analysis indicates that a concept is ambiguous or ill-defined, this should be seen as a
strong suggestion to negotiate its meaning. Although this would lead to the type of grounding effort we aimed to
circumvent with our method, it should be noted that in this case conceptual analysis indicates very specific focus
points for such negotiation and thus may be able to prevent redundant discussion about topics of which the
meaning would later turn out to be shared anyway.
127
Our study showed that conceptual analysis can be used to validly identify a researcher’s conceptual notions,
provided that selective analysis of the researcher’s publications is complemented with validating interviews.
Although conceptual analysis initially takes some effort, this effort appears to diminish with every new researcher
whose work is added to the analysis. It further showed the feasibility of eliciting MAS concept nets using
conceptual analysis. Our experiences with processes in which researchers themselves collaboratively develop
concept definitions indicate a need for procedures that lead to convergence on such definitions. We found that
this aspect of joint development of concept maps or ontologies is presently absent from the literature on ontology
development. We see the institutional design of such procedures as an important subject for further research.
Last but not least, an ICT tool for participatory glossary construction has been field-tested, confirming its
functionality but also highlighting the need for procedures mentioned above.
Output
The output generated in the course of the project can be structured in four clusters:
 Literature review on design in multi-actor contexts (Bots 2005, 2007) and knowledge processes (Beers et
al. 2006).
 Data collection on multi-actor systems research: Data on different paradigms, theories, models and their
operationalization and use have been collected by analyzing key publications in the field of MAS. The
results from the analysis of the negotiation literature have been formalized as the Nego pattern language
(Bots and Frantzeskaki 2006). The results from the analysis of the literature on solidarity have been
formalized, and subsequently tested on two agent-based modeling platforms (Bots et al. 2008). Data
obtained by analyzing the work of four researchers within the Understanding Complex Networks subprogram has been structured into a ‘master model’ that provides the concepts in terms of which the
conceptual models of the four researchers have been expressed.
 Method development: The method for conceptual analysis has been developed and formalized in a series
of articles (Beers and Bots 2007a,b,c; Nikolic, Beers and Dijkema 2007; Beers and Bots 2009). Findings
from analysis of participatory research projects have been consolidated in a conceptual framework and
methodological recommendations (Barreteau, Bots and Daniell 2010).
 Operationalization of the meta-model: A web-enabled system (with Wiki-like features) to support
participatory glossary development has been developed, field-tested, and extended to support the
construction of the MAS concept network developed in this project.
Selected papers:
Bots, P.W.G. (2007). Design in socio-technical system development: Three angles in a common framework.
Journal of Design Research 5(3): 382-396. ISSN: 1569-1551.
Bots, P. W. G., O. Barreteau, and G. Abrami. (2008). Measuring Solidarity in Agent-Based Models of Resource
Sharing Situations. Advances in Complex Systems 11(2): 337-356. ISSN 0219-5259.
Beers, P. J., and P. W.G. Bots. (2009). Eliciting conceptual models to support interdisciplinary research. Journal
of Information Science 35(3): 259-278. ISSN 0165-5515.
Understanding infrastructures as complex socio-technical systems
Philosophical perspective
In our philosophical research we ventured to clarify the conception of infrastructures as socio-technical systems.
Within an engineering context the functioning of infrastructures is approached mainly from a ‘technological’
(hardware) point of view. However, once infrastructures are implemented it is seen that their functioning depends
for a large part on social factors as well. This raises serious questions concerning the way infrastructures are to
be understood, what the nature of the relationships is between the various types of constitutive elements, what is
to be considered the functioning or malfunctioning of infrastructures, and how infrastructures and their context are
to be modeled in the process of designing them. Infrastructures are a prime example of artefacts that have a
systemic character: they are made up by different kinds of elements among which many different kinds of
interrelations exist. In the case of infrastructures, the various elements are of such diverse and hybrid nature,
partly physical or technical, partly human or social, that infrastructures can be characterized as socio-technical
systems. The aim of this project was to clarify from a formal, systems-theoretic point of view the conception of
infrastructures as socio-technical systems. The specific research questions that were addressed are:
128
1.
How can we model socio-technical systems in a formal way and what does it mean to conceptualize
infrastructures as socio-technical systems? What kinds of elements may be considered to be constitutive for
infrastructures and on what grounds?
2.
In what ways and to what extent are human dealings with technology (by users, legislators, bystanders, etc.)
modeled and co-designed in the course of the design process?
3.
Which specific and possibly new problems are associated with the integral design of socio-technical
systems, in particular with the integration of strictly technical and social components?
The project results were of two different kinds. First, a proposal for describing socio-technical systems has been
developed, as part of a more general framework for describing systems in technology. This framework takes the
notion of an instrumental system, defined in terms of three different roles, as its starting point. Several of these
roles can be filled by people, and some of them must even be filled by people. Additionally, they can be filled by
entities that are themselves complex, i.e. that can be analysed as involving several roles, some of which again
can or must be filled by people. In this way, the complex interrelatedness of the social and physical aspects on
multiple levels, which is typical for socio-technical systems, can be modeled. The adopted approach to the
conceptualization of systems in technology, and the analysis of socio-technical systems contained in it, was
extended to a proposal for reconsidering the crucial notion of malfunction. Second, the consequences of
conceptualizing infrastructures as socio-technical systems for the practice of engineering design were
investigated both in general and for some specific technical contexts. This resulted in a series of publications in
which it is argued that current methodological standards for engineering design, including systems-engineering
design, are unfit to take the various ways in which people can be involved in large-scale complex systems – as
users/interferers of the system or as users/operators in the system – into account, and equally unfit to frame the
problem of setting the boundaries of the system and thereby delineate the design task. An adequate preparation
of engineers for the designing of socio-technical systems requires a rethinking of these standards.
Although the project did not involve empirical research, input from researchers in engineering or with close links to
engineering was actively solicited, in an international network setting, involving the Department of Development
and Planning at the University of Aalborg, Denmark, the Department of Infrastructure at the Royal Institute of
Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (prof. Joseph Sussman,
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Engineering Systems). Postdoc researcher Bjørn
Jespersen spent several weeks at the Department of Informatics and Computer Science of the Technical
University of Ostrava to work with prof. Marie Duží on the ontology and semantics of systems.
Output
Selected papers:
P. Kroes, M. Franssen, I. van de Poel & M. Ottens (2006), ‘Treating socio-technical systems as engineering
systems: some conceptual problems’, Systems Research and Behavioral Science 23, 803-814.
M. Franssen & B. Jespersen (2009), From nutcracking to assisted driving: stratified instrumental systems and the
modeling of complexity, in Engineering systems: achievements and challenges, papers presented at the Second
International Symposium on Engineering Systems, MIT, Cambridge, Mass., June 15-17, 2009,
http://esd.mit.edu/symp09/submitted-papers/franssen-paper.pdf.
M. Ottens (2010), ‘Limits to systems engineering’, in I. van de Poel & D.E. Goldberg, eds., Philosophy and
engineering: an emerging agenda, Philosophy of engineering and technology vol. 2,
Dordrecht/Heidelberg/London/New York: Springer, pp. 109-122.
M. Franssen (2011), ‘Sociotechnical systems’, ch. 5 in P. Vermaas, P. Kroes, I. van de Poel, M. Franssen & W.
Houkes, A philosophy of technology: from technical artefacts to sociotechnical systems, Morgan & Claypool, pp.
67-81.
Historical perspective
Inspired by current EU infrastructure policies, we explored the geographic variation in the fluctuations of crossborder flows in relation to the governance of transnational infrastructures in Europe. The project stipulated three
sub-questions in relation to this core concern for electricity, railways, and the telegraph:
1. What are the phases in the internationalisation of infrastructure-supported flows and what is their weight vis-avis national flows?
2. How can we explain the transition from one governance structure to the other?
3. What future developments for the conning decade can reasonably be expected on the basis of this historical
perspective?
129
The first question has been answered in the introduction to the special issue "Infrastructural Europeanism", where
Schipper and Schot identify four phases:
o
1815-1921. Implicit infrastructural Europeanism
o
1921-1947. Experimental infrastructural Europeanism
o
1947-1992. Explicit infrastructural West-Europeanism
o
1992-onwards. Enlarged infrastructural Europeanism meets globalization.
Explanations for the transition from one governance structure to the other vary per infrastructure and per
transition. Overall, external factors, such as the World Wars and the ending of the Cold War, have certainly left
th
their mark. Sector-specific organisations have been set up since the 19 century, and infrastructure organizations
(starting with the Rhine Commission in 1815) have been singularly important in developing new types of
international organizations.
As for the future, trade and travel have decisively moved into a pan-European direction in recent decades.
Furthermore, a change can be noted from compartmentalized policies designed for each individual infrastructure
sector towards a more comprehensive overall framework in the fourth phase. This trend is most likely to continue
in the foreseeable future.
Output
The three most important scientific outcomes of the project are, in chronological order:
1. Erik van der Vleuten and Vincent Lagendijk, ‘Interpreting transnational infrastructure vulnerability:
European blackout and the historical dynamics of transnational electricity governance’. Energy Policy 38,
no. 4 (April 2010): 2053-2062.
On the basis of the publication, the authors were invited to participate in a session on energy at the
Society for the Advancement of Socio- Economics conference (June 24-26 2010, Philadelphia, USA) by
Catherine Grandclément, working for the sociology team of Electricité de France Research and
Development. As a result, Vincent Lagendijk co-organized three sessions on 'Governance and the Grid:
Delivering Electricity, Establishing Markets, ShapingConsumption', and presented a paper as part of it.
2.
3.
Johan Schot and Frank Schipper, "Experts and European Transport Integration 1945¬1958," Journal of
European Public Policy 18, no.2 (2011): 274-293.
The potential of the paper to reach different audiences is symbolized in the Dr. Cornelius Lely Prize on
mobility history and policy that the paper received at the Luzern conference of the International
Association for theHistory of Transport, Traffic and Mobility. The prize, sponsored by the Dutch Ministry
of Infrastructure and the Environment, is awarded each year for the best paper connecting history with
current problems of policy and planning. It testifies to the relevance of the historical insights generated in
this research
.
Frank Schipper & Johan Schot edited a special issue, entitled ‘Infrastructural Europeanism’, History and
Technology 27, no.3 (2011), which includes articles by advisors to the project (Griset, Henrich-Franke).
This article is especially significant as a vehicle to reach the academic community in the history of
technology. This journal is one of the main journals in the field.
Simulations – serious gaming
Serious gaming emerged in NGINFRA as a promising tool for simulating complex socio-technical systems. It stems
from the combination of technology and game mechanics of the entertainment game industry and experiences
from simulation gaming. With the current computational power available, infrastructure systems have come into
the reach of serious gaming. The supposed strength of a serious game is in the direct feedback it gives to the
players on the results of their interventions in the system. In this line of research we set out to assess how
powerful serious gaming is as a tool to simulate infrastructure systems and how useful serious gaming is as a tool
for decision makers (policy makers, designers, operators) in helping them understand and embrace the
complexity of the system.
In this research we followed a design research approach. The fundamental principle of design research is that
knowledge and understanding of a design problem and its solution are acquired in building and application of the
artefact. Therefore, the design research approach combines the environment, the design research and the
knowledge base. This is done in three design research cycles: the rigor cycle, the relevance cycle and the design
cycle.

The rigor cycle in this research discusses theories about gaming and complex adaptive systems. The
objective of the rigor cycle is to get a better understanding of what complex adaptive systems are and
why gaming can support the understanding of these systems. Therefore, the research started with a
130
literature study and the development of a framework for understanding infrastructure systems. Literature
about gaming was used to analyse whether games can be used to simulate complex adaptive systems,
and if so, under which conditions. This leads to a set of criteria for choosing a serious game and
developing a serious game about complex adaptive systems.

In the relevance cycle, the Maasvlakte 2 case was studied to identify the questions of the Port of
Rotterdam Authority. Their aim is to synchronize the building and exploitation process in such a way that
no empty spaces are left open in this area. They would like to know what long-term consequences this
‘building on demand’ policy might have and where bottlenecks could emerge. The reason for using
gaming was to be able to gain more insights into these processes. After development, the game was
evaluated on the system level. The question explored was whether it is possible to identify patterns of
complex system behaviour. Secondly, the game was evaluated on the level of the individual player. The
main question was: did the players improve their understanding of complex systems and Maasvlakte 2?
In answering these questions, analytical methods were used, based on simulation outputs and surveys.

The design cycle is concerned with the actual development and evaluation of the game. The SimPortMV2 game is about the development of a new port area, Maasvlakte 2, in the Port of Rotterdam, The
Netherlands. In the development the questions of the relevance cycle and the foundations and criteria of
the rigor cycle have to be taken into account, in the development as well as in the evaluation of the
serious game.
This research contributed to the analysis of socio-technical systems and their characterization. It also embarked
on the development of a game research methodology, structuring the research of serious games and making a
first step towards the creation of an academic game research field. Furthermore, our research aimed to provide
empirical evidence as to if and why games give us an increased understanding of complexity. Serious gaming
was found to contribute in two ways to the understanding of complex infrastructure systems: by simulating the
dynamics of a complex adaptive socio-technical system (observer’s perspective) and by allowing one to
experience the complexity of being part of the system (player’s perspective):

By analysing the dynamics and outcomes of multiple gaming sessions, policy makers can learn about
the behaviour of the system and the players, the variables for which the system is robust or instable, and
which bottlenecks can be observed en route to the desired end state. The results of SimPort-MV2 show
that gaming can be used to simulate different paths into the future (incl. the emergence of path
dependencies) and to analyse the emergent behaviour and other properties on the system level, as well
as to show the network dynamics and increase insights into the behaviour of adaptive agents.

Participants of the game go through a learning experience. Players act and react in a complex
environment and experience the dynamics of the system. By participating in this learning experience,
they increase their cognitive knowledge about the complexity of the system. The case showed that
SimPort-MV2 increased the participants’ knowledge and insights into long-term effects of the Maasvlakte
2 system. This learning is influenced by the engagement in playing the game, the relevance and quality
of the game, the fun of using a computer simulation and the quality of the interfaces and facilitation.
In conclusion, we asserted that serious games are powerful in simulating the complexity of infrastructure planning
and that they are useful in supporting planners/decision makers. Even if the game is not designed to simulate the
real world complexity down to the smallest detail, it is particularly useful in revealing patterns of system behavior,
that can be induced by certain policy interventions. Gaming also provided new insights into the relations between
parallel policy processes and the dilemmas thus raised.
In this vein of research, many simulation games were developed for the purpose of (policy making on) spatial
planning, which will be discussed under ‘spatial perspective’.
Other games were developed to support infrastructure providers, in particular the railway infrastructure provider
ProRal, in capacity management. Gaming was a.o. used to explore and validate alternative organizational
methods for the management of rail cargo capacity. Various scenarios for the organization of rail cargo capacity
management were played out, tested, and extensively debriefed in three project phases. The gaming sessions
demonstrated that open information sharing among stakeholders does not depend on the introduction of price
mechanisms and is, indeed, a more effective way of managing capacity. The research concluded that it is vital to
introduce gaming gradually and build up organizational acceptance for this method. However, once acceptance
has been achieved, gaming can generate valuable insight into strategic behavior and the performance of
sociotechnical infrastructures.
Additional research was done to investigate the use of simulations and games in Dutch higher education. This
research was inspired by the perception that students belong to the 'gamer generation' or 'net generation': a
generation that has grown up with computer games and other technology affecting their preferred learning styles,
131
social interaction patterns and technology use generally. It is often argued that in education this generation
prefers active, collaborative and technology-rich learning, i.e. learning methods that involve extensive computer
use and collaboration among students. Gaming is then proposed as a new teaching method which addresses
these requirements. A survey between 2005 and 2009, covering 1432 respondents from eight Dutch institutes of
higher education, revealed that there is little difference, and no statistically significant difference, in active,
collaborative and technology-rich learning preferences between the representatives and non-representatives of
the net generation. Furthermore, no large or statistically significant differences were found between
representatives and non-representatives of the net generation with respect to the value they accorded to gaming
in education. However, regardless of whether respondents represented the net generation or not, they in general
preferred collaborative and technology-rich learning and deemed games a valuable teaching method.
Output - PhD theses
Geertje Bekebrede (2010). Experiencing complexity: a gaming approach for understanding infrastructure
systems. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Harald Warmelink (2013). Towards playful organizations: How online gamers organize themselves (and what
other organizations can learn from them). PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Qiqi Zhou (2014). The Princess in the Castle: Challenging Serious Game Play for Integrated Policy Analysis and
Planning. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Theo van Ruijven (2015). Configurable Agents for Strategic Management Simulations and Games. PhD thesis (in
progress), Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Rick van Krevelen (2015). Gaming to Speed Up Energy Transition: from experiments to multi-actor systems
gaming. PhD thesis (in progress), Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Selected publications:
Lei, T.E. van der, Bekebrede, G. & Nikolic, I. (2010) Critical infrastructures: a review from a complex adaptive
systems perspective. Int. J. Critical Infrastructures, 6(4), 380-401
Bekebrede, G., Warmelink, H., Mayer, I.S. (2011) Reviewing the need for gaming in education to accommodate
the net generation. In: Computers and Education: Volume 57 Issue 2, September, 2011 Pages 1521-1529
Meijer, S., Mayer, I., Weitenberg, N., van Luipen, J., (2012) Gaming Rail Cargo Capacity Management: Exploring
and Validating Alternative Modes of Organization. In: Gaming & Simulation 02/2012; 43(1):85-101.
DOI: 10.1177/1046878110382161
Sebastiaan Meijer (2012), Gaming Simulations for Railways: Lessons Learned from Modeling Six Games for the
Dutch Infrastructure Management, Chapter 9 in: Infrastructure Design, Signalling and Security in Railway Edited
by Xavier Perpinya, ISBN 978-953-51-0448-3, Publisher: InTech, Chapters published April 04, 2012 under CC
BY 3.0 license. DOI: 10.5772/2405
Harteveld, C. & Bekebrede, G. (2011). Learning in Single- versus Multiplayer Games: The More the Merrier?
Simulation & Gaming 42(1) 43-63
Mayer, I., (2009) The Gaming of Policy and the Politics of Gaming: A Review. In: Simulation & Gaming: 40(6)
825–862. First online September 2009 as doi: 10.1177/104687810934645
Mayer, IS, Bekebrede, G, Bilsen, A van & Zhou, Q (2009). Chapter ten - Beyond SimCity: Urban Gaming and
Multi-Actor Systems. In E Stolk & M te Brommelstroet (Eds.), Model Town. Using Urban Simulation in New Town
Planning (pp. 168-181). Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SUN.
Bekebrede, G, & Mayer, IS (2006). Build your seaport in a game and learn about complex systems. Journal of
design research, (ISSN 1569-1551), 5(2), 273-298.
Simulations – agent based modelling
132
Infrastructure systems for energy, water, transport, information, etc., are large-scale sociotechnical systems that
are critical for achieving a sustainable world. They were not created at the current global scale at once but have
slowly evolved from simple local systems through many social and technical decisions. If we are to understand
them and manage them sustainably, we need to capture their full diversity and adaptivity in models that respect
Ashby's law of requisite variety. Models of evolving complex systems must themselves be evolving complex
systems that cannot be created from scratch but must be grown from simple to complex. It is this insight that
inspired us to create evolving and complex Agent-Based Models (ABMs) for understanding the evolution of largescale sociotechnical systems such as infrastructures. The NGI NFRA program is recognized for its pioneering work
in simulating the evolution of infrastructure systems under different constraints (market designs, regulatory
regimes). To arrive at such models, we developed a socio-technical co-evolutionary modelling process. It
involves the continuous co-evolution and improvement of a social process for model specification, the technical
design of a modular simulation engine, the encoding of formalised knowledge and the collection of relevant facts.
The Agent-Based Modelling framework was developed in close collaboration with the Intelligent Infrastructures
subprogram. Over the years, an extensive ontology was built, which now covers a variety of energy
infrastructures (primary energy carriers, electricity, heat), industrial processing networks (including the
petrochemical and base metal industry), transport systems and supply chains, so that simulation models can be
built of co-evolving infrastructures and industrial networks. Examples of case studies completed include the
simulation of the historical co-evolution of energy infrastructure and industrial cluster in the Eemsdelta, and
simulations of the (future) co-evolution of biomass based energy infrastructure and industrial networks.
A significant innovation step in the ABM framework was the integration of life cycle assessment (LCA) to provide
environmental information on an energy (or another) infrastructure system while it evolves. We were able to
integrate a simplified LCA into an ABM by aligning and connecting the data structures that represent the energy
infrastructure and the supply chains from source to sink. By using an appropriate database containing life cycle
inventory (LCI) information and by solving the scaling factors for the technology matrix, we computed the
contribution to global warming in terms of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents in the form of a single impact indicator
for each instance of technology at each discrete simulation step. These LCAs may then serve to show each
decision making agent the impact of its activities at a global level, as indicated by its contribution to climate
change. Similar to economic indicators, the LCA indicators may be fed back to the simulated decision making in
the ABM to emulate the use of environmental information while the system evolves.
A breakthrough innovation in our agent-based modelling research was the development of the MAIA framework
for Modelling Agents based on Instuitutional Analysis. This work was the first to make the concept of social
structure and institutions operational for agent-based modeling of large technological systems (socio-technical
systems) in a meaningful way. The MAIA framework allows agents to interact within a social structure, and it
allows the social structure to evolve during the simulations, as in the real world. This work, for which Amineh
Ghorbani received her PhD degree with honours, uses Elinor Ostrom’s elaborate and sophisticated Institutional
Analysis and Design (AID) framework, enriched with other institutional theories.Ghorbani designed a multi-level
modeling framework, which allows institutional and technical content experts to co-design and validate the model
at the abstraction level of social and technical system structure and elements, while keeping the conversion to
lower levels of executable software “out of sight” by providing automatic code generation, which she developed
through the use of model driven software development.
Given the data-intensity of our models, a parallel line of research was inspired venturing into the realm of open
data mining, which led to Christopher Davis’ PhD thesis and to innovative research into semantic web analytics.
PhD theses
Igor Nikolić (2009). Co-evolutionary process for modeling large-scale socio-technical systems evolution. PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Koen van Dam (2009). Capturing socio-technical systems with agent-based modeling. PhD thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands
Chris Davis (2012). Making Sense of Open Data – from raw data to actionable insight. PhD thesis, Delft
University of technology, the Netherlands
Catherine Chiong Meza (2012). Understanding socio-technical change: A system-network-agent approach. PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Amineh Ghorbani (2013). Structuring socio-technical complexity: Modelling agent systems using institutional
analysis. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
133
Other selected publications:
Chris Davis, Igor Nikolić and Gerard P. J. Dijkema (2009). Integration of Life Cycle Assessment Into Agent-Based
Modeling - Toward Informed Decisions on Evolving Infrastructure Systems. Journal of Industrial Ecology 13(2) pp.
306–325
Igor Nikolic, Gerard P.J. Dijkema (2010) On the development of agent-based models for infrastructure evolution.
Journal of Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 6(2) pp. 148-167
A Chmieliauskas, EJL Chappin, CB Davis, I Nikolic (2012). New Methods for Analysis of Systems-of-Systems and
Policy: The Power of Systems Theory, Crowd Sourcing and Data Management - System of Systems. InTech,
2012/3/31 pp. 77-98
A Ghorbani, P Bots, V Dignum, G Dijkema (2013): MAIA: A Framework for Developing Agent-based Social
Simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 01/2013; 16(2).
A. Ghorbani, G.P.J. Dijkema, P. Bots,, H. Alderwereld, V. Dignum (2014). Model-driven agent-based simulation:
Procedural semantics of a MAIA model. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 12/2014; 49:27–40. ·
Amineh Ghorbani, Francien Deschene, Virginia Dignum, Catholijn Jonker (2014). Enhancing ABM into an
Inevitable Tool for Policy Analysis. Journal on Policy and Complex Systems. 03/2014; 1(1):61-77.
Coherence of technology and institutions
Many of the issues encountered in the turbulence of today’s infrastructure sectors can be framed as issues of
(in)coherence between technologies and institutions. Since infrastructures are complex systems in which
technology, economics and institutions are closely interacting, it is important that changes in the different
elements cohere, that is, that changes in the technology correspond with supporting changes in the institutions
and vice versa. When government decides about changes in the institutions—introduction of competition, laws,
regulations, and new modes of governance—it is vital that the coherence with the technological elements of the
system is taken into account. The restructuring of various infrastructures such as telecommunication, energy,
water and railway transport is often solely perceived as a matter of institutional change, ignoring the relationships
with the other elements of the infrastructures as a complex system. Parts of the activities in the respective value
chains are exposed to competition and are treated as commodities exchanged on anonymous markets. Networks
are typically regulated since they often inhibit characteristics of natural monopolies. New regulatory frameworks
are established including independent system operators and regulators and stronger private sector involvement.
Up to now, the possible relations of these profound institutional changes with the technological features of
infrastructures were not addressed as a potentially disturbing matter. Supporters of the deregulation process, at
least the mainstream economists supporting it, believed—and still believe—that introducing market-based trading
in infrastructure industries would by definition create or reinforce incentives for technological innovation, and
hence readjustment in accordance to the novel institutional frameworks. Thus the coherence between technology
and institutions would be re-established as a consequence of the newly evolving market-driven allocation
processes. The issue of incoherence between institutional change and the technological status quo was
overlooked or, at least, underestimated.
In the past years, however, significant unexpected side effects appeared such as large scale electricity black outs
and deadly train accidents. These effects pinpoint to insufficient institutional safeguards to guarantee the proper
technical functioning of these complex systems. Besides, there is increasing concern about the long term security
of supply and the technical reliability of infrastructure systems. Firms operating on competitive markets are
experiencing other incentives as compared to regulated monopolies. Among others, they are facing regulatory
and commercial risks that influence their economic behaviour, for instance with respect to innovation, investments
and maintenance. This has repercussions for the technical functioning of infrastructures. Apparently there are
certain critical technical functions that need to be pertained in order to safeguard the proper technical functioning
of infrastructure systems. These critical technical functions are typically related to network related activities like
capacity management, system management, interconnection and interoperability. In this vein of research we
explored how effective and efficient these critical technical functions are safeguarded in various infrastructures
under liberalized market conditions. What are the lessons to be learned for government and industry? How to
improve the performance of infrastructures by realizing coherence between institutions and technology? How to
establish sustainable infrastructure systems in which there is coherence between technology and institutions,
while allowing for more competition and private sector involvement?
Selected output
134
Kunneke, R.W., Correljé, A.F., Groenewegen, J.M.P., eds. (2005), Institutional Reform, Regulation and
Privatization (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).Künneke, R.W., Groenewegen, J., and Auger, J.-F, eds (2009), The Governance of Network Industries:
Institutions, Technology and Policy in Regulated Infrastructures (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).C. Menard, Regulation, Deregulation, Reregulation. Coeditor (and contributor) with M. Ghertman, E. Elgar Pub.,
2009. 15 Contributions in honor of O.E. Williamson (who later received the Nobel Prize in Economics)“Why to reform infrastructures and with what institutional arrangements? The case of public private partnerships
in water supply.” In R. Kunneke, J. Groenewegen and Jean-François Auger (eds), The Governance of Network
Industries. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publisher, chap. 2, pp. 25-45.«
Oliver Williamson and the Economics of Hybrid Organizations » in Mario Morroni (ed.) Corporate Governance,
Organization Design and the Firm. Cooperation and Outsourcing in the Global Economy. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar, chap. 5, pp. 87-103.
Railway sector
One of the projects in this line of research explored the (in)coherence between technologiy and institutions in the
European railway sector. This study answered the question as to how institutional unbundling affects technical,
economic, and social performance of the railway industry, and as to whether and how appropriate institutional
governance mechanisms can help mitigate such effects. These themes were a.o. illustrated through a detailed
case study on the development and deployment of the European Rail Train Management System (ERTMS), as
the introduction of the new technology provides a concrete illustration of the necessity to ensure coherence
between institutions and technologies in the sector. The study of ERTMS is particularly relevant given the
difficulties encountered in deploying the new technology successfully across the European railway system.
Technical harmonization represents only a part of the problem to solve and railway stakeholders are painfully
learning that operational harmonization is as much if not even more important.
While the liberalization of the European railway marketwas aimed at increasing its competitiveness, making train
and track work together on a given project in practice seems to be harder now than prior to unbundling
ofinfrastructure management and train operations. In the case of ERTMS one couldargue that the EU went the
wrong way by pushing for unbundling before achievingtechnical harmonization. The task is made even harder
since it is taking place in an environment moving from cooperative agreements to competition in international
traffic. At the same time, the bottom-up approach to deal with technology harmonization (from national rules to
international rules to international agreements) has been reversed (from TSI to European standards to national
rules). In addition to the question of sequencing, the study of the deployment of ERTMS in Switzerland has
highlighted the importance of proximity and close cooperation between actual projects and all the stakeholders
involved. Only an integrated ecosystem of actors can ensure the successful deployment of ERTMS. As the
current deployment levels of ERTMS show in the rest of Europe, the mere existence of ERA, the availability of
safety rules and the interoperability directives are necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for seamless crossborder rail services in the Internal Market. By the same token, interoperability is often reduced to the much more
simplified concept of technical compatibility. The question of further harmonizing operational rules and
philosophies on a European level remains at the center of the creation of a single rail market. The issue of coordination goes further than simply resolving technical issues. For sure, the increase of commercial projects will
diffuse know-how and reduce interoperability issues. Similarly, operational rules will slowly get harmonized
through the running of international trains along corridors. The real challenge for the European railway sector will
be to make sure that the emergent institutional framework remains coherent with the technologies it aims to
develop and deploy.
Energy sector
Within the understanding complex networks subprogram, many additional projects were focused on the energy
sector, especially the electricity sector, as this was – and still is to date – the most turbulent sector in terms of deand re-regulation. In the UNECOM (UNbundling of Energy COMpanies) research consortium a set of PhD
research projects was conducted to explore the social benefits of unbundling in the electricity sector. The aim of
UNECOM was to analyse and measure the effects of vertical unbundling, taking economic, technical and legal
issues into account. Comprehensive studies which address all these issues were not yet available at the time,
and especially quantitative assessments of welfare effects were largely lacking. The study focused on the
135
research questions (1) Will it be worth it? Will the benefits of ownership unbundling, over and above effective legal
and functional unbundling, outweigh the cost? And (2), if dome form of unbundling is implemented, how should it
be done? What works and what not?
The outputs generated by the UNECOM consortium show that ownership unbundling destroys vertical synergies
in the electricity value chain. While the literature already provides theoretical and empirical evidence for vertical
economies in the value chain, UNECOM added quantitative assessments of vertical synergies, based on
econometric cost estimations and a frontier benchmarking approach. Frontier benchmarking was also applied to
measure economies of scope between the vertical stages of electricity supply in the U.S. electricity industry. By
comparing different frontiers for integrated and unbundled provision of electricity based on a bootstrapping DEA,
two types of vertical unbundling were analysed. Separating the generation stage from networks and retail appears
to be the more costly alternative with an average cost increase of 19 percent. In another scenario, covering one of
the options for transmission unbundling to be implemented in the European Union, an average cost increase
below 2 percent was found. We analyzed these effects based on a panel of 16 European OECD countries over a
time period from 1995 to 2007, in which we found that the introduction of ownership unbundling leads to higher
investments in the overall electricity industry, but has no significant effect on consumer prices. In contrast, legal
unbundling does neither seem to affect investments nor final consumer prices.
Unbundling creates a coordination problem between investments in power plants and the power grids. In
unbundled electricity systems, firm-internal coordination no longer applies. A formal approach was developed to
examine whether simple information exchange (‘cheap talk’) could restore coordination. In this approach we
adopted a three-stage profit-optimized investment model, with a (regulated) monopoly network and two
asymmetrical Cournot-type generators. To analyse the credibility of ‘cheap talk’ we applied the concept of selfsignalling in a game with incomplete information and positive spillovers. From this analysis we concluded that
cheap talk cannot generally solve the investment coordination problem and as a result separation may actually
cause a costly coordination problem. Cost-reflective locational network pricing is proposed as a coordination
device to internalize the incentive problem.
The next years should bring about a rapid transformation of the electricity sector towards high levels of renewable
generation. Smart grids are seen as the silver bullet responding to the challenge of integrating renewables,
managing flexibility, and keeping the costs down in distribution networks. Network unbundling on the other hand is
essential for competition in the liberalized electricity industry. It forces independence of the networks and thereby
eliminates concern that incumbent integrated (network) firms discriminate against new entrants. With smart grids
the unbundling questions become relevant for distribution networks because active control in smart grids entails
discrimination potential. However, smart grids exhibit coordination needs for system efficiency and unbundling
eliminates firm-internal coordination. An appropriate compromise solution to solve this problem was found to be
an independent system operator. This eliminates discrimination incentives and serves coordination needs,
thereby striking a balance between both competition and efficiency goals.
In parallel with the UNECOM projects, another research line was set up to design markets and regulatory
frameworks building on the deeper understanding we gained of the relationships between technology and
institutions. In this vein of our research, energy sector regulation, and especially the design of electricity markets
and electricity network regulation, developed into a subprogram in its own right. It is this line of research that
made us attractive as a research partner for the European Union Joint Research Center and for the Erasmus
Mundus joint doctorate program for Strategic Energy Technologies and Strategies, the latter being run by
Comillas University Madrid, KTH Stockholm and TU Delft. The topic of electricity market design was topical when
we started NGInfra and has remained so over the years.
At the start of NGINFRA, in 2004, our holistic socio-technical systems approach to the design of electricity markets
was a novel approach. By now we can say that it has been embraced. Our research has yielded valuable insights
in questions of electricity market regulation that are currently being applied and built upon.
This research vein started as a follow-up to Laurens de Vries’ doctoral research into the question of how to
maintain generation adequacy in competitive markets. This project was executed in the TU Delft inter-faculty
prorgam on design and Management of Infrastructures, the predecessor prorgam of NGI NFRA. Around the time of
publication, in 2004, this dissertation research generated much interest in the media. The first NGINFRA project
that addressed the sector in its entirety started from the following question:

How to design a coherent legal framework, that takes into account the technical characteristics of the
electricity sector?
136
This was the doctoral research of Hamilcar Knops, which was completed in 2008. It resulted in a methodology for
designing market rules, given the technical functionality and specificities of the sector. The method was designed
to be applicable to other sectors and has later been used to structure the thinking about how to organize and
regulate smart grids in the NGINFRA ‘Empowering Networks’ alliance with Alliander.
The second generic project addressed the question of:

How to explain the long-term dynamic development of electricity markets, in particular the phenomenon
that despite a common economic rationale for liberalization and more than a decade of experience since
the onset of electricity market liberalization in Europe, no two markets have evolved towards the same
model?
This resulted in a book chapter (Correljé and De Vries, 2008) that provided a theoretical framework that describes
the factors that affect market design. In this framework, market design is considered as an evoluationary process,
rather than the static view that was used at the time of liberalization. In this process, changing policy priorities and
external developments (such as technology development) provide a contiously shifting ideal for the electricity
market, whereas local conditions, technical and economic constraints and physical and institutional path
dependence create local constraints to the development of electricity markets.
As a specific case of long-term sector development, the doctoral research project of Emile Chappin evolved,
addressing the question:

What is the impact is of the European Emission Trading System for CO2 on the development of an
electricity market, in particular upon investment choices in electricity generation capacity?
This research question was tackled with an agent based simulation model that clearly showed that the ETS is not
the best choice for reaching the European CO2 emission reduction goals. Taxation of CO2 emissions is an
economicaly more efficient instrument, that would yield the desired reductions faster at lower costs. This
dissertation attracted wide interest in the media, including an article in the Wall Street Journal (July 15, 2010) on
Europe’s Flawed Carbon-Trading System. The market simulation model has since then been converted into a
serious game, which is widely used in education and training, also at universities abroad (Cambrdige, UK, and the
Florence School of Regulation, European University).

The question of how to choose a governance mode for the particularly complex issue of European
interconnectors?
was addressed in a PhD project by Hanneke de Jong. She developed a structured approach for European
regulatory mode decision-making (including the STARMODE decision tool) with which to enable and encourage
the European Commission to make more informed decisions, on an ex ante basis, about the way in which it
creates the rules and regulations that govern the European electricity markets and inherently their integration
process.
Many PhD theses followed in this productive research vein, with emphasis on (1) the challenges posed by the
international dimension of the European electricity markets, addressing the questions of cross-border
interconnector capacity (not only for electricity, but also for gas) with respect to how regulatory regimes influence
investment adequacy, (2) the challenges of integration and/or harmonization of national electricity markets in the
European system, and (3) the questions of how to efficiently accommodate renewable energy resources in the
European electricity infrastructure, exposing cross-border market distortions in both short-term and long-term
electricity markets caused by national policy instruments. Part of this research was executed in collaboration with
the Norwegian and Dutch Transmission System Operators, Statnett and TenneT, respectively, with involvement
of Sintef and the Technical University of Trondheim.
Another project developed in this vein of research, in collaboration with the ’Flexible infrastructures’ subprogram,
focused on the regulation of gas infrastructure expansion projects. We examined this situation (selected cases
involved specific gas infrastructure investment projects in (Northwest) Europe, such as the BBL gas
interconnector between the Netherlands and the UK, and the Bergermeer gas storage facility), and found that
there is more room for competition in investments in the gas infrastructure. The existing regulations do not fully
realize the benefits of competition, leading to unnecessary costs for society. However, in order to boost
investments in new gas infrastructure, Europe has implemented the option to obtain an exemption to the Third
Party Access (TPA) regulations and, as it turns out, requests for TPA exemption are more often granted than not.
A key recommendation from this project therefore is that regulaors should distinguish better between different
types of gas infrastructure. With respect to natural gas transport pipelines, more flexibility could be achieved by
allowing private parties to invest in specific pipelines and by organizing competitive tenders. For gas storage and
LNG import terminals, it is recommended that the current principle that prioritises regulation be replaced by a
focus on competition instead. The project delivered an analytical framework that may assist policy-makers and
regulators in deciding about the regulatory framework for future gas infrastructure expansion projects.
137
Output
PhD theses
Knops, H.P.A. (2008). A Functional Legal Design for Reliable Electricity Supply. How technology affects law. PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology. Antwerp: Intersentia.
De Jong, H.M. (2009). Towards a Single European Electricity Market, A Structured Approach for Regulatory Mode
Decision-making. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Ehlers, E. (2009). Electricity And Gas Supply Network Unbundling In Germany, Great Britain And The
Netherlands And The Law Of The European Union: A Comparison. University of Tilburg, the Netherlands
Martijn Jonker (2010). Modernization of electricity networks: Exploring the interrelations between institutions and
technology. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology.
Chappin, E. (2011). Simulations of Energy Transitions. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology
Roland Meyer (2011). Vertical Economies of Scope in Electricity Supply - Analysing the Costs of Ownership
Unbundling, Jacobs Universität Bremen, Germany
Nele Friedrichsen (2011). Investment, Unbundling, and Vertical Governance in Energy Markets. Jacobs
Universität Bremen, Germany
Christoph Bremberger (2011). Effects of Regulation on energy prices, welfare and company behavior. Wirtschafts
Universität Wien, Austria
Stefan Jaehnert (2012). Integration of Regulating Power Markets in Northern Europe, Norges TekniskNaturvitenskapelige Universitet, Trondheim, Norway
Hossein Farahmand (2012). Integrated Power System Balancing in Northern Europe- Models and case studies,
Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet, Trondheim, Norway
Van der Veen, R. (2012). Designing multinational electricity balancing markets. PhD thesis, Delft University of
Technology, the Netherlands
Abbasy, A. (2012). National design and multinational integration of balancing markets. PhD thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands
De Joode, J. (2012). Regulation of gas infrastructure expansion: Rethinking regulation. PhD thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands
Brancucci Martinez-Anido, C. (2013). Electricity without borders: The need for cross-border transmission. PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Fagiani, R. (2014). Market-based suport schemes for renewable energy sources. Erasmus Mundus SETS joint
doctorate, PhD thesis defended at Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Chaves Ávila, J.P. (2014). European short-term electricity market designs under high penetration of wind power.
Erasmus Mundus SETS joint doctorate, PhD thesis defended at Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Selected key publications:
A.V. Gheorghe, M. Masera, M.P.C. Weijnen and L.J. de Vries (eds.). 2006. Critical Infrastructures at Risk,
Securing the European Electric Power System. New York: Springer.
De Vries, L.J. (2007). Generation adequacy: Helping the market do its job. Utilities Policy Vol. 15 No. 1 pp. 20-35.
Knops, H. P. A. and H. M. de Jong (2007). “Chapter 16: Regulated vs. Merchant Transmisison Investment”. In:
European Energy Law Report IV. M. M. Roggenkamp and U. Hammer. Antwerpen-Oxford, Intersentia.
De Vries, L. and P. Heijnen (2008). ‘The impact of electricity market design upon investment under uncertainty:
The effectiveness of capacity mechanisms’. Utilities Policy 16 (3): 215-227.
138
Correljé, A.C. and L.J. De Vries (2008). ‘Hybrid electricity markets: the problem of explaining different patterns of
restructuring’. In: F.P. Sioshansi (ed.), Competitive Electricity Markets, Design, implementation, performance.
Elsevier.
Knops, H.P.A. (2008). ‘The impact of the technical characteristics of network industries upon the governance of
infrastructure adequacy’, in: G. Arts, W. Dicke en L. Hancher (red.), New Perspectives on Investment in
Infrastructures, WRR-Verkenningen nr. 19, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, blz. 201-240.
Johann-Christian Pielow & Eckart Ehlers (2008). Ownership unbundling and constitutional conflict: a typical
German debate? European Review of Energy Markets, volume 2 (3).
De Vries, L.J., De Joode, J.J. and Hakvoort, R. (2009). “The regulation of electricity transmission networks and its
impact on governance”. European Review of Energy Markets 3 (3).
Margarethe Rammerstorfer (2010). Constrained divestiture and ownership unbundling. Competition and
regulation in network industries 11 (3) p. 264-286
Remco Verzijlbergh, Carlo Brancucci Martinez-Anido, Zofia Lukszo and Laurens de Vries (2014). ‘Does controlled
electric vehicle charging substitute cross-border transmission capacity?’ Applied Energy 120, pp. 169-180.
Richstein, J.C., Chappin, E.J.L. and De Vries, L.J. (2014). “Cross-border electricity market effects due to price
caps in an emission trading system: An agent-based approach.” Energy Policy. Vol. 71., pp. 139–158.
Infrastructures in spatial perspective
Institutional integration of transport and spatial planning
Various studies have concluded that growing mobility causes accessibility issues at the regional level cannot be
solved by merely building new infrastructures, and that stronger coordination between the policy fields of land-use
planning and transport planning is needed. This coordination should focus on (a) reducing the need for travelling
and (b) increasing the use of more environmentally friendly modes of transport. This coordination is hampered by
the different institutional context of both policy fields: organizational structure, rules for policy making and
implementation, culture and discourses are different in both fields. In our research we therefore focused on the
institutional perspective: the formal and informal rules by which major decisions are made.
This is less easy than it seems. Reducing an accessibility problem in a region implies a lengthy process that
involves many actors, many formal and informal decisions, and many options to consider (ranging from toll
systems to constructing a new bicycle network). Decisions are prepared, considered, taken, rejected,
reconsidered, changed. To systematize the analysis of real-world practices we needed a policy reconstruction
model. The conceptual model we used is based on the so-called Structure of Provision approach focusing on
strategic policy making in a multi-actor setting, ownership of ideas and assets, the translation into project
organization and on heuristics for interpretation. The SoP model was specified for four levels: the societal
discourse, the strategic planning debate, the tactical planning debate and the operational planning debate.
We applied the model to the city region Arnhem-Nijmegen. The analysis of the institutional arena of this city
region confirmed the complexity in legislation, organization and discourses. Three detailed case studies of
projects in the region (Waalspring, Nijmegen; RegioRail KAN; A15) revealed that the interaction between
transport planning and land-use planning is still very limited. Whereas the implementation of a regional authority
as a coordinating institution has had a positive impact at the strategic policy level, project arrangements at the
operational planning level, however, hardly showed interactions between both policy fields in terms of institutions,
actor responsibilities and funding. As it turned out, even in a well planned and organized region as the city region
Arnhem-Nijmegen, in practice still little attention is paid to the transport – land-use integration, resulting in a less
than socially optimal use of space and public investment funds. Ongoing effort is needed to improve this situation.
This work resulted in a number of conference papers (AESOP 2006, Bristol and CVS – Colloquium
Vervoersplanologisch Speurwerk 2007 and 2008), and an article by Caspar Stelling: ‘Over institutionele
beperkingen van ruimtelijk mobiliteitsbeleid’ in Rooilijn (2008).
SprintCity
Another research project which investigated the interaction between mobility and spatial development is
SprintCity, which focused on the Netherlands’ Randstad. In the last few decades, development has mostly been
139
planned outside the reach of the railway network, thereby overloading the road transport system and contributing
to congestion, suburban sprawl, and decreasing valuable agricultural land in the Green Heart of the country. To
enhance accessibility and to avoid further sprawl, the national government has set two goals for future
urbanisation: (1) increase densification in the areas surrounding existing railway stations and (2) nearly double the
train frequency in the Randstad. The current economic crisis and political situation pose additional challenges and
priority shifts. Government spending on station area development has dwindled and the newly elected
government is expected to focus more on roads and less on transit-oriented, sustainable development. SprintCity
set out to address all of these concerns while also contuing the conversation around transit-oriented development
(TOD). To curb spending and maximize efficiency, the future for TOD lies in transforming existing infrastructure
on a smaller scale requiring multiple stakeholders and investors. SprintCity focuses on exactly that plus facilitating
close collaboration between the railways (providing higher frequency) and the municipalities (planning urban
development).
SprintCity used two main research tools to investigate and determine the connection between mobility and spatial
development around rail stations: (1) a comprehensive survey of 80 station areas (1200m around each station), in
which we collected detailed information of municipal/national development plans up to the year 2030, resulting in
aggregate geospatial socio-economic, connectivity, and land use indicators (e.g. building density, Floor Space
Index), and (2) simulation software. The SprintCity computer-based simulation game simulates station area
development, job growth, ridership, and change in train frequency for several stations along a rail corridor, until
2030. The game is played by 6 teams of 2 people at the same time, each of whom have different role in the
process and who are actual stakeholders (urban planners, the Ministry of Transport, municipalities, housing
corporations, rail infrastructure managers, etc.). The tool has been used by over 300 participants in over 30
simulation sessions.
With over 30 SprintCity simulation sessions completed and participation from 5 provinces, 6 city regions, and 13
municipalities, SprintCity demonstrated that this knowledge can help decision makers to plan station area
developments on a network scale instead of being limited to the municipal scale, thus saving time and resources.
Because the simulation Is based on real data and requires the participation of all stakeholders, the simulation
sessions lead to in-depth discussions and a better understanding of the transport-land use interaction, which is
essential for promoting and establishing TOD. The gaming sessions transfered scientific knowledge to real
stakeholders and created new ways of cooperation between the many public and private actors in the
development process.
Selected output
Duffhues J, Mayer I S, Nefs M, van der Vliet M (2014). "Breaking barriers to transit-oriented development: insights
from the serious game SPRINTCITY" Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 41(5) 770 – 791
Kickert C C, Berghauser Pont M, Nefs M (2014). "Surveying density, urban characteristics, and development
capacity of station areas in the Delta Metropolis" Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 41(1) 69 – 92
Miscellaneous research contributions
PhD theses
Staňková, Kateřina (2009). On Stackelberg and inverse Stackelberg games & their applications in the optimal toll
design problem, the energy markets liberalization problem, and in the theory of incentives. PhD thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands
Sertac Oruc (2014). Strategic Behavior in the Liberalized Electricity Sectors: Game Theoretical Formal Modeling
in Policy Analysis, PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
Selected output
Stankova, K., Olsder, G.J., Bliemer M.C.J. (2006). Optimal toll design problem solved by the inverse Stackelberg
games approach. In: C.A. Brebbia and Dolezel (Eds.). Urban Transport 12 (pp. 871-880). Southampton: WIT
Press.
L.M. Hermans, S.W. Cunningham, J.H. Slinger (2013). Adaptive Co-management and Learning: Developments in
Coastal Management in the Netherlands from 1985 to 2010. In: V. Grover & G. Krantzberg (Eds.), Water CoManagement. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, Florida. P. 266 - 291.
Leon M. Hermans, Jill H. Slinger, Scott W. Cunningham (2013). The use of monitoring information in policyoriented learning: insights from two cases in coastal management. Environmental Science & Policy 29: 24 - 36
140
J. H. Slinger, S. W. Cunningham, L. M. Hermans, S. M. Linnane, C. G. Palmer (2014). A game-structuring
approach applied to estuary management in South Africa. EURO Journal on Decision Processes (2014) 2:341–
363
Leon M. Hermans, Scott W. Cunningham, and Jill H. Slinger (2014). The usefulness of game theory as a method
for policy evaluation. Evaluation 20(1):10-25
Oruc, Sertac, and Scott W. Cunningham (2014). Game-like Characteristic of Engineering Design. Infranomics:
Sustainability, Engineering Design and Governance. Ed. Gheorghe, Adrian, et al. Norfolk: Springer, 2014. 324.
ISBN 978-3-319-02492-9
Oruc, S. (2013), Financial Transmission Rights: A Coupled Electricity-FTR Model. International Energy Workshop,
International Energy Association: Paris
http://www.internationalenergyworksbop.org/docs/IEW%202013_5C3Oruc.pdf
Oruc, Sertac, and Scott W. Cunningham (2012a). Transmission Rights to the Electrical Transmission Grid in the
Post Liberalization Era. Journal of the Knowledge Economy (2012): 1-20.
141
5.3.2. Safeguarding public values
Strategic behavior in network industries
In practice, the expected benefits of deregulation, unbundling and privatization in infrastructrue sectors: better
services at lower prices, often do not materialize, at least not to the extent expected. One of the reasons for these
disappointing results is the adverse ‘strategic behavior’ of the actors involved. On the basis of a variety of case
studies we set out to identify examples and develop a typology of strategic behavior. The diversity of case studies
included Enron, AT&T, Microsoft, the EU-US 2007 Open Skies Treaty, and the UMTS spectrum autions in the EU.
The dominant patterns of strategic behavior we observed are:

Strategic use of control over bottleneck facilities and other crucial technical facilities and standards

Strategic utilization of intertwined relations with governments agencies and other actors

Strategic use of rules: legal rules and contracts

Strategic use of the factor ‘time’

Strategic use of financial resources
The counterarrangements we designed to combat the erosion of public values in the infrastructure sectors can be
grouped into five categories:

Competition engineering

Skimming returns

Consumer protection

Hybrid governance

Regulators
Output
The main outcome of this line of research is the book Strategic Behaviour in Network Industries, published by
Edward Elgar.
Strategic Behaviour in Network Industries: A
Multidisciplinary Approach
Ernst ten Heuvelhof, Martin de Jong, Mirjam Kars, Helen Stout
Edward Elgar Publ. 2009
Institutional changes such as privatisation and liberalisation of network
industries (transport, energy, telecommunications) can regularly be
disappointing. The expected positive benefits such as lower prices,
innovation and better services fail to materialise, often because the
number of competitors is low. The authors demonstrate how 'strategic
actor behaviour' of one or more of the firms involved can help explain
these failures. This book elucidates the concept of 'strategic behaviour'
and portrays it in real life examples to aid our understanding of this
important phenomenon in terms of policy and organisational decision
making.
142
Other selected publications:

Heuvelhof, E.F. ten & Stout, H.D. (2008). Innovative Counterarrangements to combat Strategic
Behaviour. Case study: Network-based industries. In P. Herder, P. Heijnen & A. Nauta (Eds.),
Proceedings of the International Conference on Infrastructure Systems, Building Networks for a Brighter
Future, pp 1-7, Delft, IEEE

Ernst ten Heuvelhof and Helen Stout, Strategisch gedrag in netwerksectoren, Tijdschrift voor Toezicht,
2010/2, pp. 26-39, ISSN 1879 8705
Competing public values in organizations of infrastructure (service) providers
This study examined three infrastructure companies – railway service provider NS, rail infrastructure provider
ProRail, electricity service provider ENEXIS – and their pursuit of competing public values. By transecting these
companies with a qualitative research approach, our research uncovered tensions between the values and
analogously, between the objectives of different regulatory bodies. Through detaled investigation of how planners,
managers and operational workers cope with these tensions in daily practice, we found that many tensions
between public values are neutralized in the capillaries of the organization, at the operational level. Despite
systematic planning and project implementation, trade-offs between competing public values often occur implicitly
and unintended. Particularly reliability and safety appear vulnerable in the course of these trade-offs.
Selected output
Steenhuisen, B. (2009). Competing public values. Coping strategies in heavily regulated utility industries. PhD
tesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
Steenhuisen, B., Van Eeten, M. (2008) Invisible trade-offs among public values: inside Dutch Railways. Public
Money & Management, vol. 28, nr. 3, pp. 147-152.
De Bruijn, J.A., De Bruijne, M.L.C., and Steenhuisen, B.M. (2008) Managing infrastructure performance. An
empirical study on the use of performance management systems in two network industries. Competition and
Regulation in Network Industries, vol. 9, nr. 1, pp. 75-91.
Steenhuisen, B., Dicke, W., De Bruijn, H. (2009) "Soft" public values in jeopardy: reflecting on the institutionally
fragmented situation in utility sectors, in: International Journal of Public Administration, vol. 32, nr. 6, p. 491-507.
Steenhuisen, B.M. (2010) A coordination challenge among multiple regulatory objectives (editorial), in: Network
Industries Quarterly, vol. 12, nr. 2, p. 3-6.
A law perspective on safeguarding public values
Legal regimes for innovation
In this vein of research, the leading question was: Can legal regimes for public values be made more adaptable
and at the same time more facilitative and indeed conducive to innovation, whilst at the same time being
sufficiently resilient as to offer adequate legal certainty and protection of other public values in the face of
changing infrastructure technologies? The research focused on the relationship between regulation and
innovation in the telecommunication sector, especially on the question of how fostering innovation while upholding
present public values’ safeguards. A crucial outcome of his research is that several elements in the regulatory
framework seem to be concentrating on stimulating innovation in same generation networks rather than in next
generation networks. Some regulatory possibilities are evidently not being used. The next question that arose is
whether these regulatory choices interfere with the protection of other public values than innovation. Although in
many cases they appeared to do so, this research did identify possibilities to optimize the probability of innovation
while upholding present public values safeguards, for example by re-considering the mechanisms governing
frequency auctions, by facilitating the portability of frequency permits, by taking away delay in several
administrative procedures (f.e. concerning rights of way) et cetera. However, optimizing all innovation scenario’s
appeared to be a mission impossible; the conclusion that followed from this work is that a political choice is
needed to stimulate specific innovation scenarios more than others.
143
Selected output:
Lesley Broos (2014). Publieksvriendelijk’ versnellen van innovatie in netwerksectoren. Een exploratie van
wetstechnische mogelijkheden ter bevordering van innovatie in de telecomsector, met behoud van de
bescherming van publieke belangen. PhD thesis, University of Twente, the Netherlands.
L.C.P. Broos (2011). The unlikely emergence of Next Generation Networks in the Light of prevailing Telecom
Regulation, in: M.A. Heldeweg and E. Kica (Eds.), Regulating Technological Innovation: A Multidisciplinary
Approach, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011, pp. 97-114
M.A. Heldeweg (2011). Legal Design of Smart Rules and Regimes: Regulating Innovation, in M.A. Heldeweg and
E. Kica (Eds.), Regulating Technological Innovation: A Multidisciplinary Approach, Basingstoke: Palgrave
MacMillan, 2011, pp. 97-114
Heldeweg, M.A. (2011). Towards Legal Design of Smart Rules and Regimes. Seminar on Legal Theory,
Stockholm University: Stockholm, Sweden (2011, maart 15 - 2011, maart 15).
Wessel, R.A. (2011). Regulating Technological Innovation through Informal International Law: The Excercise of
International Public Authority by Transnational Actors, in M.A. Heldeweg and E. Kica (Eds.), Regulating
Technological Innovation: A Multidisciplinary Approach, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011, pp. 97-114
Wessel, R.A. (2011). Regulating Technological Innovation through Informal International Law: An Expression of
International Public Authority? Workshop Regulating Technological Innovation: Legal and Economic Regulation of
Technological Innovation: University of Twente, Enschede (2011, April 14)
Infrastructures and state aid
Until the nineteen nineties, the European Commission and the member states did not see state aid for the
transport sector as problematic in the light of the state aid rules. It was either not seen as state aid in the meaning
of the E(E)C Treaty at all, or as not distortive since there was no competition. This changed considerably after
liberalization took place. Now, member states did not only have to think about how to legally qualify a government
contribution to the transport sector, it also had to deal with the notification obligation and the standstill clause of
the E(E)C Treaty. At the same time, both the member states and the European Commission realized that
government contributions to the transport sector were more or less inevitable because many public values
inherent to the sector, like availability and affordability, would not be safeguarded without those contributions. This
opened up a new area to explore: how to find a fair balance between applying the essentially economic state aid
rules and upholding the more social objective of safeguarding public values? This research addressed the
question: What possibilities does state aid law offer to safeguard public values in the transport sector?
The research showed that state aid law offers quite a few possibilities to safeguard public values with government
contributions. Although in almost all cases the contributions can be granted, it is not always clear which legal path
to choose. In some cases, the contribution does not qualify as a state aid measure. In other cases, when it does,
it may be exempted from the obligation to notify the EC or the EC may declare the state aid measure compatible
with the internal market. EC decisions show that public procurement plays a positive role in the state aid
assessment. Legal certainty can be increased if the EC as well as the European Courts will accept that there is no
state aid measure if a public procurement procedure is used to award a government contribution for the
safeguarding of public values. The research provides arguments to support this (potential) legal assumption.
The research furthermore showed that the state aid regime for government contributions to the
telecommunication infrastructure is not fundamentally different than for other competitive sectors. As in the
transport sector, there are ways to provide state funding without having to notify the government contribution as a
state aid measure to the EC, for example if public investments conform to market conditions. Another example is
compensation of costs if the infrastructure can be considered as providing a service of general economic interest
or if the infrastructure has a multifunctional purpose. However, governments should be aware of the risk that state
aid issues can arise when they contribute to the realization of infrastructure.
State funding of energy infrastructure does not involve state aid on the condition that the Market Economy
Investor Principle is applied or that the Altmark-criteria are met. In order for state aid to be justified, a public
interest should be at stake in a given type of energy infrastructure. Besides market failure, the Treaty on the
functioning of the EU provides a number of justification grounds. The rules regarding state funding of
infrastructure respond to a large extent to the need to balance EU energy policy objectives. However, there are
some problems with the design and consequences of national aid measures. A solution might be found in the use
144
of an open, transparent and non-discriminatory tender procedure as well as in giving the market a fair chance to
provide for the energy infrastructure on its own terms. However, the EU should do justice to the fact that striking
the right balance between free and fair competition and safeguarding public values is not costless and should not
make necessary state funding more difficult than it already is.
Most important output of this research vein is:
Nienke Saanen (2013). Wegen door Brussel. Staatssteun en publieke belangen in de vervoersector. PhD thesis,
Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Nienke Saanen (2013). ‘De invloed van aanbesteden op de staatssteun rechtelijke beoordeling van
overheidsbijdragen ter borging van publieke belangen’, Tijdschrift voor Aanbestedingsrecht 2013, p. 208-218
Investigating tendering practices’ effectiveness in safeguarding public values
Through de-regulation, unbundling and privatization, competitive market forces have made their way into the
public transport sector throughout Europe, in both rural and urban transport, as the market was thought to provide
better safeguards for public values like cost-efficiency of operation and service quality. In many countries,
tendering of public transport service concessions has been implemented as a means to realize the benefits of ‘the
market’. Also in the Netherlands, since the Passenger Transport Law came into effect in the year 2000, regional
authorities are obliged to tender out public transport service concessions for public transport services outside the
major urban areas and the backbone rail network. The exact form of tendering was not prescribed in the law,
leaving a lot of room for the authorities to find their own best practice.
The evaluation of the first experiences with tendering in 2003-2004 did not provide more than a qualitative glance
of the successes and failures of tendering practices in the first few years. Our research stepped into the void that
exists of a more quantitative evaluation of the relation between tendering and the original goais of tendering:
improved efficiency and quality of service. It set out to find a relation between the tender characteristics and the
performance of the public transportation service, taking into account the specific environmental/regional
characteristics of each tender, such as road density, household density, car density, cars per household and
average income per Household (data provided by the National Bureau of Statistics, CBS). Tendering variables
include: tendering (yes/no), ), the type of contract (gross/net/suppletion), the duration of the contract, the start
year, the possibility for a bonus on quality and the possibility for a bonus on patronage.
In our econometric analysis, we did not find a positive correlaton between tendering and performance. We defined
the concept of performance in public transport services as a combination of cost efficiency and customer
satisfaction. Cost efficiency was measured on a scale from 0 to 1, and determined with a stochastic frontier
analysis. Clean satisfaction was measured through surveys. The main conclusion of this research is that
tendering, short term contracts and bonus possibilities for good quality, generally lead to lower cost efficiency, if
we control for environmental characteristics. There is no indication for an effect of the tender characteristics on
client satisfaction.
Output
One of the main outputs of this work is a database, largely assembled with the cooperation of 27 local and
regional transport authorities. The methodology and its outcomes have been presented at the 2013 Thredbo
conference:
Veeneman, Wilschut, Uriings, Blank and Van de Velde (2013). Efficient frontier analysis of Dutch public transport
tendering; a flrst analysis. Thredbo Conference Series (full paper).
Veeneman and Van de Velde (2013). Developments in public transport governance in the Netherlands; a brief
history and recent developments. Thredbo Conference Series (full paper)
The full report: Tendering in Dutch public transport; the relation between contract and efficiency (2013) is targeted
towards policy makers at both the national and local level, and designed to support them in designing new
tenders for pubic transport service concessions.
145
In addition to the econometric analysis, tendering was also studied from the perspective of strategic actor
behavior (see also previous section). Whereas tendering is one of the instruments designed to safeguard public
values, it can only effectively do so if service providers’ room to manoeuver strategically is harnessed. On the
basis of many case studies in the Netherlands and elsewhere Europe we learned how tendering was successful
and problematic to accomplish specific public values. We compiled an overview of how other countries prioritize
public values in the provision of public transport services, and mapped the successes and failures of securing
these values through tendering and alternative governance forms.
Selected outputs:
Van de Velde, D.M. (2005), "Coordination, integration, and transport sector regulation", In: Handbook of Transport
Strategy, Policy & Institutions (Eds.: Hensher, D.A. and K. Button), Handbooks in Transport, Vol. 6, 115-134,
Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Veeneman, WW (2007). Chapter 42. How Regional Authorities Improve Public Transport Governance. In R
Macario, J Viegas & DA Hensher (Eds.), Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport (pp. 759-777).
Elsevier Science.
Velde, DM van de , Veeneman, WW & Lutje Schipholt, L (2008). Competitive tendering in The Netherlands:
Central planning vs. functional specifications. Transportation Research Part A -policy and practice, 2008(42),
1152-1162.
Veeneman, WW, and Groot, F, (2010) Changing public transport governance in Dutch metropoles: To tender or
not to tender. Research in Transport Economics (Special issue on Public Transport Governance)
Veeneman, WW, and Koppenjan, JFM (2010) Securing public values in public transport projects: four Dutch
cases on innovation. Research in Transport Economics (Special issue on Public Transport Governance)
A cultural perspective on safeguarding public values
Private strategies versus public values
In Europe, which used to be dominated by public monopoly structures in the infrastructure sectors, one of the key
changes brought about by deregulation, unbundling and privatization of the infrastructure sectors, has been the
entrance of private actors and semi-private actors (corporatized public utiltiies) into the playing field. This led us to
analyze if, and if so, how, the behavior of private actors in safeguarding private values conflicts with public values.
The general assumption is that conflicts will arise, since private companies are by definition not in the business of
providing public value – their task is to maximize value for their private owner(s), a function which is deeply rooted
in and protected by the property law system of any modern industrial economy. Yet, the achievement of public
and private values need not be a zero sum game. It is conceivable and, in fact, can be observed, that a win-win
situation is possible, where both private and public values are being maximized, without being at each others
expense. As companies do not exhibit the uniform competitive behavior that is assumed in macroeconomic
models but, instead, can draw on a variety of decision making patterns to maximize their private value in a
competitve market, we set out to investigate wich strategic biases concur with (shich) public values. The analysis
involved an investigatation into 42 private companies in four different infrastructure industries in five countries,
and looked into a potential relationship between three types of stategic biases and the achievement of (a
selection of five different) oublic values. Such relationships could be established in three cases:

a network strategy bias towards cooperation increases the public value of reliability

a corporate strategy bias towards synergy increases the public value of overall quality

a purpose strategy bias towards responsibility increases the public value of access
Despite huge differences in cultural context, we found that strategic biases in companies’ decision making are
neither significantly related to the country of origin of the company, nor to the industry in which it operates.
Therefore there are no self-fulfilling mechanisms of regulatory ambition operating which would account for the
above results. Strategic biases in decision making differ enough across the sample, such that it can be shown
that the strategic stance of a company is a choice of the company’s management, not a result of the industry
condition. Moreover we found that, in the sample analyzed, there is no trade-off observable in the achievement
between public values, i.e. the maximization of the one having to be at the expense of the other.
146
Selected output:
Van der Veen, Ederer, Rotileanu, Fortanier, De Wit, ‘Strategy Decision Making Behavior in Private
Infrastructure Companies and the Achievement of Public Values – An empirical research comparison’, in: J.
Groenewegen and R. Kunneke (eds), Govenance of infrastructures revisited: redefining roles and
responsibilities in telecom, energy and water’, forthcoming
Research report: ‘Strategy Bias and Public Values in the North-West European Infrastructure Industry: an
empirical analysis’, Strategy Academy, August 2006
Van der Veen, Casper, Peer Ederer and Alexandra Rotileanu (2005), ‘In the Eyes of the Beholder: Strategy
Perspectives and Public Values in the North-Western European Infrastructure Industry’, paper presented at
th
the 25 Annual Strategic Management Society Conference, Orlanda, Florida, USA, October 23-26, 2005
Public-private cross-culture collaboration in megaprojects
The provision of public services and the safeguarding of public values in public-private megaprojects have
become an important issue in public-private infrastructure megaprojects. Public and private partners have
different interests and understandings of public values and negotiate about public values all the time. This
research aimed to give an in-depth understanding of how, in the context of collaboration between public and
private partners in megaprojects, public values are embedded in cultural practices, and how representations of
public valus emerge in such collaborations. We focused on the specific perspective of ‘rituals’, which is
conspicuously absent in the abundant literature on the management of megaprojects, probably because the
concept of rituals clashes with the organizational drive for rationality, effectiveness, efficiency and the
accomplishment of specified goals. However, our research shows that transition rituals mark project phase
transitions and milestones throughout the construction process from the beginning to the end. More specifically,
transition rituals are enacted to demonstrate that projects — though unfinished — are heading towards
completion, phase by phase and step by step. This research was the first to conceptualize transition rituals as a
unique social practice in construction megaprojects. It furthermore contributed a theoretical model showing how
and for whom transition rituals are practiced and framed in megaprojects, based on an internal/external distinction
and including three main target groups: builders (e.g. contractors and employees), VIPs (e.g. state officials and
representatives), and civilians.
Selected output
Karen Smits (2013). Cross Culture Work: Practices of Collaboration in the Panama Canal Expansion Prorgam.
PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Smits, K.C.M. & Marrewijk, A.H. van (2012). Chaperoning: Practices of collaboration in the Panama Canal
Expansion Program. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(3), 440-465.
Boersma, F.K. and S. Clegg (2012). Strategies for Conceptualizing, Organizing and Managing Resilience in the
Globalizing City, Journal of Change Management, 12(3): 273-277.
Marrewijk, A.H. van & Veenswijk, M.B. (2014, in press). Changing Institutional Practices in the Dutch Construction
Industry. International Journal of Project Organisation and Management. 10.1080/09613218.2014.867619
Marrewijk, A.H. van, Veenswijk, M.B. & Clegg, S.R. (2014). Changing collaborative practices through cultural
interventions. Building Research and Information, 42(3), 330-342. 10.1080/09613218.2014.867619
Ende, A.L. van den & Marrewijk, A.H. van (2014, in press). Transformative Rituals in Construction Megaprojects.
International journal of project management.
Cross-national benchmarking of contracting practices
Besides the cross-cultural practices developed between public and private partners in specific construction
projects, the cultural dimension of infrastructure planning, design, construction and maintenance was addressed
on a cross-national level, in an extensive study conducted by the Finnish Road Administration and TU Delft in a
cross-national benchmarking study on innovative contracting practices and performance indicators (linking with
the Flexible Infrastructures subprogram). This study was performed in collaboration with the Flexible
Infrastructures subprorgam and is reported there (see par. 5.3.4).
147
Capacity management
As a result of deregulation, unbundling, privatization and decentralization, decisions on capacity management are
no longer made by one actor. Moreover, capacity is not only determined by physical infrastructure, rules for safety
and the environment, but also by choices (product concepts, transport concepts) of users, transport providers and
their clients. Different operators have different product concepts. These different product concepts cause different
demands on infrastructure capacity. Ideally the infrastructure would be flexible, multifunctional, easily movable
and quickly expandable at low costs. However, the reality in rail, air and road transport is different. Capacity is
scarce.
We learned that capacity management is not only about capacity, it is about making tradeoffs between different
(competing) values, such as economy, safety, emissions, sustainability, capacity. Capacity is what is being left /
created when tradeoffs have been made. One of the most striking conclusions of this work is that capacity
'management' (as if one could simply manage and optimize capacity from one perspective) is not an adequate
concept (anymore). Capacity is influenced by many factors and by many stakeholders. The idea of simple
'engineering' capacity from one perspective must be replaced by deeper analyses of stakes and stakeholders.
Influencing capacity is influencing the making of tradeoffs. We also learned that the relationship between the
strategic, tactical and operational level is crucial. Other conclusions from the work:

At the strategic, tactical and operational level different, largely disconnected processes take place, in
which trade offs are being made in different ways.

The operational level is relatively stable, changing plans at the strategic level do not automatically
change operational behaviour.

Drastic events (crises, incidents) can bring about change in trade offs, at the strategic, tactical as well as
the operational level.

The influence of the 'outside world' (other than sector-specific stakeholders, such as municipalities,
citizens) on the making of trade offs is growing.

Stakeholders responsible for capacity management have to learn to cope with the input from the 'outside
world'.
Selected output:
Jasper Daams (2010). Managing deadlocks in the Netherlands aviation sector. PhD thesis, Delft University of
Technology, the Netherlands
Miscellaneous research contributions
Marieke Fijnvandraat (2009). Shedding light on the black hole- The roll-out of broadband access networks by
private operators. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Fijnvandraat, M., & H. Bouwman (2010). Risk and Uncertainty in Broadband Roll-Out. Foresight. Vol. 12 Iss.:
6, pp.3 – 19.
Fijnvandraat, Marieke and Harry Bouwman (2006). Flexibility and Broadband evolution. Telecommunication
Policy, 30 (8,9), 424-444.
Bouwman, H., M. Fijnvandraat en L. van de Wijngaert (2006). White spots and black holes: Developing a
conceptual model for Broadband roll-out. INFO, 8 (1), 72-90.
De Bruijn, J.A.: Prestatiemeting in de publieke sector, pp. 151. [s.l.]: Lemma, 2006. ISBN-13:
9789051899399.
Correljé, A.F. and L.J. de Vries (2007), Hybrid electricity markets: the problem of explaining different patterns
of restructuring. In: F. Sioshansi (Ed.). Competitive Electricity Markets: Design, Implementation,
Performance. Forthcoming, Elsevier Press.
Bruijn, J A de, & Dicke, W M (2006). Strategies for safeguarding public values in liberalized utility sectors.
Public administration, (ISSN 0033-3298), 84(3), 717-737
Wijnand Veeneman, Willemijn Dicke, Mark De Bruijne (2009). From clouds to hailstorms: a policy and
administrative science perspective on safeguarding public values in networked infrastructures In: Special
148
Issue on Public Values in Infrastructures. Three Disciplinary Views, Guest Editors: Dr. Mark de Bruijne, Dr.
Willemijn Dicke and Dr. Wijnand Veeneman, International Journal of Public Policy 4(5)
149
5.3.3. Flexible Infrastructures
Classifying uncertainties and flexibility concepts – towards adaptive planning
Uncertainties with regard to the future characteristics of and demands on infrastructure systems abound, and
come in many different forms, places and degrees. For example, new technologies may develop offering
opportunities for functional and/or capacity improvements in the services provided. Demands for capacity may
change in both content and quantity. Institutional changes may require changes in management functions and
coordination. These and other uncertain developments may affect the performance of the infrastructure system at
various levels and in different ways. The subprogram ‘Flexible infrastructures’ aimed to develop principles,
methods, techniques and guidelines that contribute to greater flexibility of the infrastructure system and hence
better and more efficient system performance over time. The program constituted a variety of studies, each
focused on a specific aspect of uncertainties, a specific type of flexibility, and, often, a specific infrastructure. The
overall goal of this program was to develop and specify, at the generic infrastructure level, a classification of
uncertainties, a classification of flexibility concepts, and an initial assessment of what flexibility concepts and
principles would provide the best option for what type of uncertainty. In addition, due attention was given to the
peculiarities of specific infrastructure sectors. We focused on definint flexibility and related concepts, such as
adaptability, robustness and resilience.
The overall results of this conceptual analysis of flexibility have been laid down in a special issue in Futures,
Volume 43, Issue 9, Pages 921-1040 (November 2011), comprising of the following contributions:
de Haan J. Flexible infrastructures for uncertain futures
de Haan J., Kwakkel J.H., Walker W.E., Spirco J., Thissen W.A.H., Framing flexibility: theorizing and data mining
to develop a useful definition of flexibility and related concepts
Kwakkel J.H., van der Pas J.W.G.M. Evaluation of infrastructure planning approaches: an analogy with medicine
Egyedi, T., Spirco J. Standards in transitions: catalyzing infrastructure change
Herder, P.M., de Joode J, Ligtvoet A., Schenk S., Taneja P. Buying real options – valuing uncertainty in
infrastructure planning
de Haan, J., Vrancken J.L.M., Lukszo Z. Why is intelligent technology alone not an intelligent solution
de Reuver M., Bouwman H., Prieto G., Visser A.; Governance of flexible mobile service platforms
Another important contribution at the overall subprogram level is the extensive work done on how to deal with
challenges of deep uncertainty. Deep uncertainty is a higher level uncertainty, involving uncertainty with respect
to the adequate model representation of the system at hand, uncertainty about probability distributions in the
model, and uncertainty about the evaluation of modeling outcomes. Under deep uncertainty, decision making
becomes a difficult task for decision makers. Existing methods/techniques available for dealing with uncertainty
mostly focus on lower (more detailed) levels of uncertainty. So, there is a gap that should be filled in for dealing
with deep uncertainty in decision making.
System Dynamics and Agent Based Modelling are some of the modelling methods used in decision making under
deep uncertainty. However, the use of models in the literature is mostly predictive and single-model (a plausible
model is assumed to be the best representation). In the presence of deep uncertainty, there are many plausible
models about the same issue and predicting a single future is as good as impossible. Single-model single-future
prediction may, under deep uncertainty, lead to wrong conclusions and advice. Under deep uncertainty, exploring
an ensemble of models and an ensemble of plausible futures is much more useful.
Decision making under deep uncertainty has affected the planning literature. Under deep uncertainty, predictive
planning approaches are likely to result in plans that perform poorly. In response, an alternative planning
paradigm has emerged. This paradigm holds that, in light of the deep uncertainties, one needs to plan
dynamically and build in flexibility. The adaptive policymaking framework [1] is an approach that advocates that
plans should be adaptive: “devised not to be optimal for a best estimate future, but robust across a range of
plausible futures.” This requires considering all plausible policy options and designing adaptive policies. Thus, one
should combine actions that are non-regret and time-urgent with other actions that can contribute in the future for
persevering flexibility. The resulting plan is thus flexible and can be adapted to how the future unfolds. For
adaptive policymaking to become a useful planning approach, it will be necessary to specify in more depth how
the various steps can be carried out and which methods and techniques can be employed in each of the steps.
That is, adaptive policymaking needs to move from being a high level concept captured in a flowchart, to being a
detailed planning approach.
150
This line of research first concentrated on Exploratory Modeling and Analysis (EMA) as an approach to deal with
deep uncertainty in infrastructure planning and design, then focused on developing an innovative innovative
methodological approach combining an adaptive policy making framework with EMA, thus offering a
methodological tool (Adaptive Robust Design) for actually improving (decision support in) policy making for
dynamically complex issues under deep uncertainty. Key outputs of this work are:
Data Buyung Agusdinata (2008). Exploratory Modeling and Analysis: a promising method to deal with deep
uncertainty. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
Caner Hamarat (forthcoming in 2015). PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
The main aim of this thesis is to answer the research question of “How can support for policymaking be improved in order to
handle deep uncertainty better?” A new methodological approach is proposed to improve decision support for policymaking for
dynamically complex and deeply uncertain issues. The proposed approach is also combined with multi-objective robust
optimization in order to deal with multiple conflicting objectives. In the scope of this thesis, case studies about energy transitions
have been used for illustrative purposes.
Agusdinata, D.B, and D. DeLaurentis (2008). “Specification of system-of-systems for policymaking in the energy
sector” The Integrated Assessment Journal, 8 no. 2, pp. 1 – 24.
Kwakkel J H, Yücel G (2012) “An exploratory analysis of the Dutch electricity system in transition” Journal of the
Knowledge Economy doi: 10.1007/s13132-012-0128-1
Kwakkel J H, Pruyt E, 2013, "Exploratory Modeling and Analysis, an approach for model-based foresight under
deep uncertainty" Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80 419-431 doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.005.
Hamarat C, Kwakkel J H, Pruyt E, 2013, "Adaptive Robust Design under Deep Uncertainty" Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 80 408-418 doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.004.
Kwakkel, J H, Auping W L, Pruyt E 2013, “Dynamic scenario discovery under deep uncertainty: the future of
copper” Technological Forecasting and Social Change doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.09.012
Hamarat, C, Kwakkel J H, Pruyt E, Loonen E T 2014. “An exploratory approach for adaptive policymaking by
using multi-objective robust optimization” Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 46 25-39
doi:10.1016/j.simpat.2014.02.008
Strategic Asset Management
Asset Management as an overarching concept has been explored and refined: the infrastructure is treated as a
set of assets that can be individually managed (by means of design, construction, management, maintenance,
replacement etc). This has consequences for the organisation of the actors concerned, for their cost models and
so forth. In addition, the effect of innovative contracting practices on the (opportunistic) behaviour of asset owners
and service providers and on the quality of the resulting infrastructure has been explored.
Real Options Analysis is a very promising concept; it treats future uncertainty as an opportunity in stead of a
(downside) risk. Application of ROA allows more flexible design of infrastructure systems so that they are able to
respond and/or adapt to future change. Here, a link has been made to the Public Values subprogram.
Our research in the vein of strategic asset management focused on
1.
incorporating flexibility and related performance metrics in the conceptual design of infrastructures and other
large-scale processing networks (e.g. in industry)
2.
analyzing contracting practices across a variety of infrastructure sectors to assess their adequacy in dealing
with uncertainties and developing methods and tools to (better) cater for flexibility in contracting practices.
Ad 1. Flexibility by design
151
The result of the first line of research activity is a method to incorporate flexibility, reliability, availability,
maintainability and economics (FRAME) performance metrics in the conceptual design of infrastructures and
large-scale process systems. This work introduced the concept of infrastructure systems flexibility by design.
Relating uncertainty to flexibility, an integrated uncertainty taxonomy was introduced that considers not only the
technical uncertainty (usually traditional engineers' primary focus and attention) but also the social and
institutional uncertainties. A generic framework is proposed for integrating flexibility, which also introduces the
concept of system-wide flexibility index as an extension of the process-level flexibility index (which hitherto
accounts mainly for the technical operational uncertainties). Central in this framework is a proposed "uncertainty
mapping" concept where the integrated form of uncertainties identified are associated with the flexibility types to
handle them. The utility and effectiveness of the framework is demonstrated using the waste water treatment
infrastructure system.
A new mathematical formulation is presented for optimally embedding and analyzing Reliability, Availability,
Maintainability and Economic (RAME) performance metrics into infrastructure systems conceptual design. A
Multi-State, Multi-Performance Markov (MSMPM) model has been formulated to more realistically capture the
dynamic transition of infrastructure systems states and hence their dynamic availability and performance. The
generic (MSMPM) formulation has been modeled using the universal generating function. A novel mathematical
formulation of maintainability aimed at aiding designers to optimally select and design more maintainable
infrastructure systems is also presented. A quantitative RAM-based economic model for supplying early and
realistic information on the envisaged lifespan economic performance of infrastructure systems during their
conceptual designs has been formulated. Mathematical correlations have been established, deeper than is
common in the domain for estimating the decommissioning costs as well as social costs of infrastructure systems.
The models have been tested by means of an infrastructure systems case study.
A joint inherent reliability-maintainability model, termed dependability was also formulated and posed as one of
the objective functions to be simultaneously optimized with the economics metric at the design stage. The
applicability of the models is demonstrated in a district heating infrastructure system design case study.
In the course of the research, it has been identfied that one of the barriers in the integration and analysis of the
FRAME performance indicators early in the design process is the unavailability of complete data. Hence, an
adaptive model has been formulated to assist the designer in using any prior data available at any point in the
design process and later update such data when they become available or more transparent. The effectiveness of
this updating procedure is demonstrated in a simple natural gas transmission example.
Ad 2. Innovative contracting
This research started with an evaluation of international practices and methods that are used by many
progressive road authorities in an attempt to explain which practices might be more effective and meet the
demands of the road infrastructure. The study was conducted in two parts: one focusing on the project delivery
methods used for “Capital Investments” and the other part on those that are used for “Maintenance Practices”.
The study encompassed Australia (states of Victoria & Western Australia), Canada (the provinces of Alberta,
British Columbia & Ontario), England, Estonia, Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands, and
certain Departments of Transportation (DOT) in the USA (FDOT, MNDOT, NCDOT, VDOT, Maryland State
Highway Administration, and DDOT - maintenance only).
At the time of this study, most countries still continued to use traditional methods (Design-Bid-Build) to procure
capital investment projects, except for England (UK) which already used alternative methods extensively.
Especially the PPP model, which incorporates private finance, was found to be gaining momentum. The main new
methods uncovered during the study were the “Alliance model” and Early Contractor Involvement” (ECI). These
alternative methods seem to provide better results and are more aligned to reduced time of construction,
improved cost control, equal or better quality, and overall client satisfaction. However, many impediments and
difficulties were observed in the utilizaiton of innovative Design-Build and alternative models.These new models
take time to develop, implement, and understand all the “tricks of the trade”. Also, it is difficult to transform all the
know-how to all of those involved in the road authority all the way throughout the organization and throughout all
road region personnel. The use of these new and innovative practices can be limited due to issues as
relinquishing control from the methods based or traditional practices, limiting the design development to less than
30% (some even recommend 15-20%), having a majority of performance specifications fully developed, not using
low-bid, lack of a real teaming concept, transparent information & communications, understanding risk allocation
and responsibility, and having the private industry understanding these practices.
As for road maintenance, a majority of the countries in this study had no internal workforce and required
outsourcing of the maintenance activities. During the earlier years of procurement of maintenance activities and
152
during the first transition to outsourcing, the services were purchased yearly or via multi-year agreements, using
separate contracts for each activity, and usually with a labor rate or unit price. Next, performance-based routine
maintenance contracts began with 3 year contracts with service levels for quality standards and were typically unit
price or hybrid contracts. The next progression was to longer and more lump type contracts. Subsequently, there
were more integrated contracts (periodic and routine maintenance), for a longer duration, basically lump sum
contracts, using performance criteria or Levels of Service (LOS), and using more of a partnering concept. The
most innovative model found at the time of study was the E-MAC model in England which includes the “Alliance
Model” as a potential replacement of the Performance Specified Maintenance Contracts (PSMC) or Performance
Based Maintenance Contracts (PBMC). It was observed, however, that the results from the PSMC type model did
not live up to the expectations.
Expanding on this work was Monica Altamirano’s PhD thesis research on innovative contracting practices in the
road sector. This project was linked with both the Public Values subprogram and the Understanding Complex
Networks subprogram. Countries around the world are experimenting with innovative contractual arrangements
for the procurement of construction, maintenance and operation of roads. This has meant a shift away from the
traditional setting where many of the works were still done in-house, to the present mix of innovative practices that
grant contractors more design freedom. Altamirano investigated the effect of this new freedom granted to
contractors for the achievement of public values taking into account that these practices seem to increase the
room for opportunistic behavior. To reveal such behavior, a role play/social simulation called ‘Road Roles’ was
developed. On the basis of a large number of international case studies, this research identified a variety of new
contracting practices with a new distribution of roles between the public and private sector and, through numerous
‘Road Roles’ sessions (in Finland, Spain, the Netherlands), it identified patterns of strategic behavior in publicprivate partnerships for road infrastructure projects. The thesis concludes with policy recommendations to remedy
opportunistic behavior in innovative contracting practices.
Extensive research dealt with the needs for flexibility in DBFM (Design-Build-Finance-Maintain) contracts.
Through interviews and a large number of international case studies (Netherlands, France, Germany, UK, Austria
and Ireland) a rich picture was obtained of unforeseen events occurring in long-term transport infrastructure
contracts, especially in the exploitation phase of the infrastructure. Both the literature and interviews with
practitioners confirm that principals and contractors alike struggle with unforeseen events. However, whereas the
literature suggests that PPP’s, as a long-term contractual relationship between the client and contractors, usually
have a rigid contractual structure, it turns out that most of the contracts were capable of handling change. Main
concerns are the lead time of implementing such change, and the financial repercussions. Both clients and
contractor complain that “the throughput time of changes is ridiculously long”, which is due to scope issues. The
allocation of risk between principal and contractor is evidently another major issue. Identifying the party
responsible for non-delivery of the service due to an unforeseen event is a critical step in any DBFM contract
partnership.
Furthermore, specific research was done into transport infrastructure development and governance in China.
Another project on dynamic contracting set out to actually improve asset management practices, and in particular
with regards to the processes between the asset owner/manager and the service provider(s), in order to minimise
cost overruns, avoid delays, and increase societal benefits. This project sought to answer the core questions:
 What are the effects of the relational context (e.g. power, dependency and trust between partners) on the
design and emergence of inter-organizational practices in Infrastructure?
 What kind of methodology can be successfully applied in planning and coordinating maintenance
processes?
This project developed a network based method for the planning of infrastructural maintenance. It studied under
which conditions the idea of a second-price auction can be extended to a setting where service providers offer
many different services. It furthermore produced a planning procedure that deals with the interests of the network
users in the form of charging social costs to the service providers. These social costs are computed over the
entire network and subsequently distributed over all the participating service providers in relation to their impact
on the network. This creates a dependency between service providers that offers additional opportunity for
improvement of collaboration in asset management. Through interviews and a questionnaire we found that
implementing such a framework agreement should be possible to connect the service providers and asset
manager on a network level for regular maintenance activities. Furthermore we reviewed the literature in order to
understand which challenges (focused on the relation context) arise when asset owners/managers deal with
networks during the delivery of infrastructure maintenance services. We find four critical challenges - I.e. about
the operational context, members, bonding and process - that require intervention to increase delivery
effectiveness.
153
The first direction of activities has been the (theoretical) study Into mechanism design and stochastic planning to
develop a model/framework for the multi-agent maintenance planning we face in dynamic contracting, combining
existing literature with domain knowledge from practitioners (e.g. Rijkswaterstaat and others). The second major
research line has been the development of a serious game in which players take on the role of service providers,
striving to plan all their maintenance operations in an optimal fashion in an uncertain and multi-agent
environment. This game was used to study the behaviour of service providers in situations where social costs are
charged when inefficient solutions are chosen. After applying the framework in five serious gaming sessions, we
found that planning and coordinating maintenance processes evolve gradually, with incremental learning. Serious
gaming appears to facilitate such learning.
Output
A serious game ‘Road Roles’. Designed to study the behavior of actors in innovative contractual arrangements
for the procurement of construction, maintenance and operation of roads. The insights into the patterns of
behavior observed during the game simulation are relevant to how the management of road infrastructure assets
is to be organized in the future.
A serious game for maintenance planning. Initially designed to create awareness amongst practitioners about
a new dynamic, network-based contracting procedure. Eventually this tool might be part of future maintenance
contracts.
The welcome screen of the game, illustrating the player's portfolio on the game map. The portfolio for each
player has a different colour, in this figure the player is responsible for the projects in the red portfolio. As the
projects are all within the same region, concurrent maintenance will have a more severe impact and thus this
needs to be coordinated. On the other hands, players are individual companies and therefore they might choose
to maximise their profits.
PhD theses
Austine Ajah (2009). On the Conceptual Design of Large-scale Process & Energy Infrastructure Systems,
Integrating Flexibility, Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Economics (FRAME) Performance Metrics. PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Monica Altamirano (2010). Innovative contracting practices in the road sector: Cross-national lessons in dealing
with opportunistic behaviour. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Rob Schoenmaker (2011). De ingeslagen weg. Een dynamisch onderzoek naar de dynamiek van de uitbesteding
van onderhoud in de civiele infrastructuur. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Andreas Ligtvoet (2013). Images of cooperation: a methodological exploration in energy networks. PhD thesis,
Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Poonam Taneja (2013). The flexible port. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Rui Mu (2013). Transit-oriented development in China: how can it be planned in complex urban systems? PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Selected publications
154
Pekka A. Pakkala, W. Martin de Jong and Juha Äijö, International overview of innovative contracting practices for
roads, report, February 19, 2007
Groenewegen, John and Martin De Jong (2008): Assessing New Institutional Economics’ Potential to Explain
Institutional Change; the Case of Road Management Liberalization in the Nordic Countries, in Journal of
Institutional Economics, 4 (1), pages 51-71.
Rui Mu, Martin de Jong and Ernst ten Heuvelhof (2010). A typology of Strategic Behaviour in PPPs for
Expressways: Lessons from China and Implications for Europe, European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure
Research (ISSN 1567-7141), special issue, vol. 10(1), pp. 42-62
Mu Rui, Martin de Jong and Joop Koppenjan (2011): The rise and fall of public-private partnership in China: a
path-dependent approach, in: Journal of Transport Geography, 19, pages 794-806.
Jong, Martin de, Mu Rui, Dominic Stead, Ma Yongchi and Xi Bao (2010): Introducing public-private partnerships
for subways in China; What’s the evidence?, in Journal of Transport Geography (18), pages 301-313.
Frey, D. D, Herder, P. M., Ype, W., Subrahmanian, E, Konstantinos, K., Neufville, R., Oye, K, Clausing, D.P,
(2010), ‘Research in engineering design: the role of Mathematical Theory and Empirical Evidence’, Research in
Engineering Design, Issue 21, February, pp. 139-145
Bruijn, J.A. de, P.M. Herder, System and Actor Perspectives on Sociotechnical Systems, IEEE Transactions On
Systems Man And Cybernetics Part A-Systems And Humans, Vol 39, Issue 5, 2009, pp. 981-992.
Bauer, J., P.M. Herder, Designing Socio-Technical Systems, in: Dov Gabbay, Paul Thagard, and John Woods
(Eds), Handbookof thePhilosophy of Science: Handbook Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences,
Elsevier Publishers, pp 601-632, 2009.
Thissen, W.A.H. and P.M. Herder: System of Systems Perspectives on Infrastructures, pp. 257-274. In: M.
Jamshidi (Ed) System of Systems Engineering, Wiley Publishers, ISBN: 978-0-470-19590-1 - Wiley Series in
Systems Engineering and Management (Volume 001), 2008.
Herder, P.M., I. Bouwmans, G.P.J. Dijkema, R.M. Stikkelman, M.P.C. Weijnen, Designing Infrastructures from a
Complex Systems Perspective, Journal of Design Research, Vol. 7, Issue 1, pp. 17-34, 2008.Volker, Scharpff, De
Weerdt, Herder (2012). Designing a dynamic network basedapproach for asset management activities. In
Proceedings of tfie 28th Assocladon of Researchers in Construction Management Conference (ARCOM 2012).
Scharpff, Spaan, Volker, and De Weerdt (2013). Planning under Uncertainty for Coordinating Infrastructural
Maintenance. In Proceedings of the International Conferenceon Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS
2013).
De Weerdt, Harrenstein, and Conitzer (2014). Strategy-Proof Contract Auctions and the Role of Ties. Games and
Economic Behavior.
Roijers, Scharpff, Spaan, Oliehoek, De Weerdt, and Whiteson (2014). Bounded Approximations for Linear I^ultiObjective Planning under Uncertainty. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and
Scheduling (ICAPS 2014).
Schraven, Scharpff, Volker, Spaan, De Weerdt (in preparation). From Blackbox to Toolbox: A review of
Interventions to Manage Networks. Intended for Public Management Review. (forthcoming)
Standardization
It proves to be difficult to adapt large infrastructure systems (e.g. information, transport, energy infrastructures) to
changing circumstances and demands. Over the years, as the number of interdependencies between technical,
institutional and other system components multiply exponentially, such systems become increasingly complex.
They crystallize and materialize in a process of entrenchment. Sunk costs augment. However, in the face of new
demands there is a need to adapt or replace them.
155
In this part of the program we looked at the possibilities to adapt them and avoid the heavy switching costs
involved in more radical system change. It centres on system design. How to design a flexible infrastructure, one
that can respond to uncertainties, incorporate change and survive in a dynamic environment? More specifically,
we wanted to explore in what manner compatibility standards (i.e. widely supported technical agreements)
contribute to such flexible infrastructures. At first sight this may seem paradoxical for, intuitively, standards fix the
parameters of technology development. However, a number of studies imply that standards can also be a
precondition for system flexibility. In this research we pursued the latter strain of thought, and examined in what
manner standards may contribute to infrastructure flexibility. We explored more systematically 1) in what manner
technical compatibility standards contribute to flexible infrastructures (esp. infrastructure transitions), 2) if certain
standards do so better that others, and how these can be characterized? and 3) under which conditions do these
standards render flexibility?
Standards can create system flexibility by loosening up the interdependencies in a system and creating
subsystems and/or components of a complementary or substitutive kind. This facilitates change through recombining evolved, replaced and new subsystems to a degree that warrants using the term ‘infrastructure
transition’. Our case study on the Wobbe standard illustrates this most unexpectedly. It shows that an entrenched
but also highly grid-based infrastructure can in principle and to a large extent support the shift from a natural gas
to a hydrogen-based economy. Regarding the flexibility-enhancing features of standards, it was concluded, first,
that flexibility results not from a standard but from an implemented standard. This is not a trivial observation
(Egyedi, 2008). It helps to understand why simple standards (unambiguous, less options, easier to fully
implement, better product interoperability, more flexibility) rather than more comprehensive standards are likely to
be effective as catalysts for change. Standards implementation is an important intermediate variable. Second,
standards that specify the targeted performance (performance standards) rather than product characteristics
(product standards) increase infrastructure flexibility. An example is the ISO freight container, for which only the
size was standardized and e.g. not the material it is made of. Finally, extrapolating from the case studies, we
concluded that standards are more likely to catalyze change in stable or expanding markets. In such situations
standards are particularly interesting as a policy angle for change.
Output
Egyedi, T.M. & Z. Verwater-Lukszo (2005). 'Which standards' characteristics increase system flexibility?
Comparing ICT and Batch Processing Infrastructures' Technology in Society, 27/3, pp. 347-362.
Zachariah-Wolff, J.L; T.M. Egyedi and K. Hemmes (2007). From natural gas to hydrogen via the Wobbe index:
The role of standardized gateways in sustainable infrastructure transitions. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy 32 pp. 1235-1245.
Egyedi, T., Spirco J. (2011) Standards in transitions: catalyzing infrastructure change. Futures, Volume 43, issue
9 (Special Issue on Flexible infrastructures for uncertain futures).
Miscellaneous contributions
Many research projects in the Flexible Infrastructures subprogram focused on a specific infrastructure (e.g. power
grids, road networks, water supply infrastructure, port infrastructure) and therewith provided rich case study
material for the more methodologically oriented projects in the veins of adaptive planning and strategic asset
management, including dynamic contracting practices. Besides the PhD theses already mentioned, a selection of
relevant publications is given below:
Taneja, P, W.E. Walker, H. Ligteringen, M. van Schuylenburg, R. van der Plas (2010), Implications of an
uncertain future for port planning. Maritime policy and management, 37(3), 221-245.
Herder, P.M., J. de Joode, A. Ligtevoet, S. Schenk, P. Taneja (2010). Buying real options: valuing uncertainty in
infrastructure planning. Futures, Vol. 43(9), pp. 961-969.
Taneja, P., H. Ligteringen, W.E. Walker (2012). Flexibility in port planning and design. European Journal of
Transport and Infrastructure Research, Issue 12(1), December 2011, pp. 65-86.
Q. Zhuang, P. H. F. Morshuis, X. Chen, J. J. Smit, and Z. Xu (2012). Life prediction of a fullscale transformer
winding insulation through statistical analysis of AC voltage endurance test data. Dielectrics and Electrical
Insulation, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 19, pp. 460-471
Wen Cao, Qikai Zhuang, Kai Wu, Dhiradj Djairam, Johan J. Smit (2011). The Influence of diagnosis quality on the
economic feasibility of maintenance strategies for HV components. Proceedings of ISH2011, 17th International
Symposium on High Voltage Engineering
156
5.3.4. Reliable critical infrastructures
Networked reliability
Deregulation in air traffic, electricity and telecommunications has led to the unbundling of utilities and breakup of
other organizations operating the system. Increasing environmental requirements in water and hydropower
systems brought new organizations and mandates into the management of these large technical systems.
Technological innovations have enabled increasing participation of third-party service providers, the outsourcing
of critical infrastructure components, and the rapid deployment of new services. Terrorist threats have brought to
light unexpected links between different critical infrastructures and pose new vulnerabilities.
These and other developments have a common denominator: highly reliable services are more and more the
product of networks of organizations, rather than individual organizations. These networks pose new challenges
for reliability. Organizations operating and regulating critical infrastructures have to find new ways to ensure the
high reliability of these services. The core question we attacked in our research was: How can networks of
organizations, many with competing goals and interests, provide highly reliable services in the absence of
conventional forms of command and control and in the presence of rapidly changing circumstances, technologies
and demand?
Based upon the findings from various projects undertaken within the Critical Infrastructures subprogram, the
project has found that a shift takes place and that the reliable management of infrastructure industries shifts from
anticipation towards resilience. Several projects within the subprogram have studied how infrastructure operators
and service providers deal with the increasing complexity and rate of change of their networks. The conclusion is
that these organizations are, sometimes unknowingly, increasingly reliant on real-time operations for their
reliability. They are shifting resources from long-term planning to real-time operations, from design to
improvisation, from analysis to experience and from risk-avoidance to reliability-seeking.
Our research revealed that in different sectors different reliability regimes have evolved which function in the
current institutionally fragmented environment. The findings led to a refocus and redefinition of the Critical
Infrastructures subprogram to expressly include institutions within its analytical and design domain. The new
focus shifts attention to how – given our knowledge of the reliability regimes and how technological and
organizational aspects in these regimes affect reliability performance – reliability of service provision can be
maintained or increased in our next generation infrastructures. These ‘second-order’ research questions were
designed to generate new and interdisciplinary knowledge; especially about how reliability is guaranteed in more
resilient ways.
In our research we found that reliability research and knowledge are fragmented per sector and even within
sectors, and that scientific knowledge on how to maintain highly reliable services has not kept up with the
developments in critical infrastructures, which emphasizes the scientific relevance of our work. System outages,
legal battles and regulatory disarray in sectors like rail traffic, electricity provision and telecommunications
demonstrate only too often that networked reliability in critical infrastructures is not a given.
Selected outputs
Bruijne, M.L.C. de (2006). Networked reliability. Institutional fragmentation and the reliability of service provision in
critical infrastructures. PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Roe, EM, Schulman, P, Eeten, MJG van, & Bruijne, M.L.C. de (2005). High-reliability bandwidth management in
large technical systems: Findings and implications of two case studies. Journal of public administration research
and theory, (ISSN 1053-1858), 15(2), 263-280
Bruijne, M.L.C. de, Eeten, MJG van, Roe, EM, & Schulman, P (2006). Assuring high reliability of service provision
in critical infrastructures. Journal of critical infrastructures, (ISSN 1475-3219), 2(2/3), 231-246.
Eeten, MJG van, Bruijn, JA de, Kars, M, Voort, HG van der, & Till, J (2006). The governance of cybersecurity: a
framework for policy. Journal of critical infrastructures, (ISSN 1475-3219), 2(4), 357-378.
Bruijne, M.L.C. de, Eeten, MJG van, (2007). Systems that Should Have Failed: Critical Infrastructure Protection in
an Institutionally Fragmented Environment. Journal of contingencies & crisis management (ISSN 0966-0879)
15(1), 18-29
Bruijn, JA de, Bruijne, M.L.C. de & Steenhuisen, BM (2008). Managing Infrastructure Performance. Competition
and regulation in network industries (ISSN 1783-5917), 9(1/March 2008), 75-91.
157
Information security and privacy
Internet governance
In view of the topical concerns about cybersecurity, both with respect to information security and privacy, and its
relevance not only information and telecommunication infrastructures as such but also for traditional infrastructure
that are rendered ‘intelligent’ through intricate intertwining wit IT and telecoms infrastructure (the so-called smart
grids), various research projects focused on this specific subject area.
In this line of research, NGINFRA benefited immensely from the work of Milton Mueller, renowned expert in the
area of the governance of internet security, who joined TU Delft for a year as a visiting professor (funded by
XS4All), with two PhD projects funded by NGINFRA. These projects addressed the challenges posed by the
emergence of complex, distributed cyber-security problems and whether new organizational forms are required to
address these problems. From a scientific perspective, this research tested the applicability and validity of
theories about peer production or open source production when applied to internet security. The underlying
question we attempted to answer is whether modes of peer production can be observed in hitemet security
incident response activities. In addition, the role of secrecy is addressed as a possible hindrance in applying pure
forms of peer production to incident response.
The results show that elements of peer production are present in intemet security production, but the need for
secrecy often does prevent or modify its use. Given the lack of global institutions and truly global operational
organizations, the research shows that networks of technical experts address Intemet security problems. In the
cases analyzed in the research, the organizational pattem applied by these communities makes use of elements
of peer production. They respond to outsider threats of cybercriminals and dubious peer security professionals by
applying layers of secrecy to information sharing. At the same time, these self-governing security communities
use organizational stmctures that still allow the influx of extemal innovative knowledge in ways that take
advantage of some of the benefits of peer production. So far, open source/peer production models have only
encompassed ideal cases, whereas this research analyzed marginal cases with hybrid govemance models.
In this research we explored the responses to large-scale Intemet security incidents. Applying desk-based
research and qualitative interviews, we were able to outline the activities of different technical communities to
cope with an ongoing threat. Some thirty experts from a wide range of countries were interviewed, including the
U.S., Finland, Sweden, Estonia, Australia, Austria, the Netherlands, Germany, the UK, and Slovakia. Our
research has been the first to study the activities of Intemet security communities with academic rigor.
Output selection

Mueller, M., Schmidt, A., and Kuerbis, B. Intemet Security and Networked Govemance in Intemational
Relations. International Studies Review Vol. 15, No. 1. (March 2013).

Schmidt, A. The Estonian Cyberattacks. (2013a, forthcoming). In J. Healey (ed). The Fierce Domain Conflicts in Cyberspace 1986-2012, with a foreword by the President of Estonia, Toomas Hendrik lives.
Washington, D.C.: Atlantic Council.

Schmidt, A. (2013b, forthcoming). Hierarchies in networks. Emerging hybrids of networks and hierarchies
for producing Intemet security. In J. Kremer & B. Miiller (Eds.), Cyber space and international relations:
Theoiy, prospects and challenges (working title). Springer

Schmidt, A. (2012). At the boundaries of peer production: The organization of intemet security production
in the cases of Estonia 2007 and Conficker. Telecommunications Policy, 36(6), 451-461.
doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2012.02.00

Andreas Schmidt (2014). Secrecy vs. Openness: Reaping advantages of peer production in Intemet
security govemance. PhD thesis
Another research topic that Milton Mueller engaged in was the deployment and governance of Deep Packet
Inspection (DPI), a technology that network operators can use to monitor and control Intemet communications.
With the dual potential to improve the operation and govemance of the Internet and to restrict or regulate it in
repressive ways, DPI use is being actively contested politically. This project investigated the political interactions
around the use and deployment of DPI in various applications to explore the co-production of technology and
society. It breaks down the deployment of DPI into five distinct applications or use cases in an attempt to discover
whether the govemance regime that emerges varies across institutional settings and types of use. Each use case
provides the basis for two or three detailed case studies covering more than one country. The method of
executing the case studies leverages complementarities between actor network theory in Science, Technology
and Society studies and actor-centered institutionalism in political science. To better understand the deployment
158
pattems, the research also compiled and made usable network perfomiance data collected by the Measurement
Lab (MLab). This research revealed that DPI has in fact disrupted Intemet govemance, leading to major conflicts
over regulation in bandwidth management, governmental surveillance, copyright protection, online behavioural
advertising, and (within US govemment agencies) network security policies.
We furthermore discovered a major difference between pluralistic, democratic countries and authoritarian
governments where Intemet service providers are subject to direct hierarchical control by the state. In the former
case, public activism and regulatory intervention often constrains DPI use to conform with pre-existing intemet
norms regarding neutrality and privacy. In the latter case, however, we see DPI used for surveillance and control
in ways that violate those norms.
Selected outputs

A theoretical paper containing the conceptual model of the study was published in the joumal New Media
and Society (Vol 13, No. 7, November 2011). Refereed. An earlier version of the New Media and Society
paper was presented at the American Political Science Association (APSA) in September 2010; after
being posted to SSRN it became one of the top ten downloaded papers in the conference and ranked
high in certain categories of SSRN downloads throughout 2011 and 2012.' Refereed conference.

The conceptual framework with some updated empirical results was presented at the Annual Conference
of Information Schools at the University of Washington (Seattle, USA) in February 2011. (Refereed
conference) In February 2012, some members of the project team organized a workshop on "Network
surveillance" at the 2012 Annual Conference of Information Schools in Toronto, Canada, which featured
the research.

On May 6, 2011 Hadi Asghari and Milton Mueller presented the initial empirical results of the Glasnost
test at the Washington, DC workshop of the Global Intemet Govemance Academic Network (GigaNet).
The paper was entitled "Deep Packet Inspection in the Wild." GigaNet is a competitive conference of
international scholars in Internet govemance. In March 2011, Milton Mueller submitted an abstract
describing the case study on bandwidth management to the Telecommunication Policy Research
Conference (TPRC), one of the best conferences in the field of communication technology policy. The
paper was accepted and was presented September 25, 2011. (Refereed conference) In July it was
submitted to the journal Telecommunications Policy for peer review. It was accepted and published in
Vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 462-475 (July 2012) (Refereed)

In October, 2011 a project web site was launched and the results of the quantitative Glasnost data was
displayed in an interactive table that allows members of the public to check the results for their own ISP
(http://deeppacket.info). The website received coverage by online news media such as Ars Technica and
the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The website has been visited by over 500,000 unique visitors.
The second tranche of updated data was uploaded and displayed on the site in May 2012, generating
additional news coverage.

In October 2012, a new paper utilizing the MLab data and correlating DPI use with other social variables
such as levels of censorship or cormption in society was developed. A preliminary version of the paper
was submitted, accepted and presented at the Baku GigaNet conference. This paper involved Hadi
Asghari as lead author, with Michel van Eeten of TBM and Milton Mueller. Publication outlets for this
work are being explored.
Yet another contribution to the governance of internet security focused on the mitigation of cyber attacks through
the incentive structures for the actors involved. Cybercrime has become an increasingly important issue for states
to deal with. Cyber attacks now being carried out on large number of infected machines called botnets cause
major economic damage and at times are intertwined with political issues. Sophisticated attacks on large scales
are a challenge to detect and to mitigate. The key to providing effective solutions is understanding the cyber
security problems. In 2001 pioneers of Information Economics’ endeavours to reach a better understanding of
security failures shed light on how and why these problems occur. They used economic terms to depict cyber
security failures. It is now well established that cybersecurity failures are a result of bad decisions rather than a
bad design. Cybersecurity is the outcome of many decisions made by a set of heterogeneous actors. Thus
understanding the incentive structure of the actors involved is crucial step for mitigation of cyber attacks.
159
Many solutions for deterring cyberattacks (more specifically mitigation of malware) have targeted the end-user.
This is because end-users are the initial nodes of infection and at a large scale can provide a platform for more
effective attacks. These solutions have proven to be ineffective since they are difficult to implement on an
individual level. The immediate links from the end-users are the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) who connect
the individuals to the internet. ISPs are important actors for several reasons and have been referred to as control
points by several scholars. Essentially they are well positioned actors in the network and are capable of exerting
necessary power on the end-users. In addition attributing policy implications to ISPs is relatively easier than to
individuals both technically and practically. Therefore the research focused on ISPs and their incentive structure
aiming at analyzing the mechanisms through which this incentive structure works.
Besides the ISPs, states are important actors in the cybersecurity ecosystem. Several states are actively
collaborating with the private sector for mitigation of botnets. In Australia the state has set up an infrastructure for
detection of botnets. In Germany and Japan the states collaborate with the internet service providers for setting
up such infrastructure. In Korea the state has funded the calling service for botnet disinfection which is highly
costly for the ISPs to do, while in Finland the state has taken a more direct role with regulations implemented
towards mitigation of botnets through ISPs.
Besides the market factors that influence the ISPs, their regulatory environment can also have an impact on the
decisions they make regarding the cyber security of their end-users. ISPs operate in different countries where
different regulations apply. These regulations have undergone changes since the introduction of the internet. In
the ever evolving landscape of regulations, there is debate on the impact of these regulations and through which
mechanisms are these influencing the cybersecurity. Both private and public parties have shown concern about
the possible negative impact of these regulations. For example data protection regulation is changing around the
world and is inconsistent across the globe. Strict data protection on the one hand may raise awareness and
create liability for the ISPs to act and on the other hand it may hinder their actions in order to escape liability.
Therefore the main focus ofthis research is on the interplay between cybersecurity regulation and the
performance of ISPs.
The core questions this research sought to answer are: What are the drivers of action for Internet Service
Providers regarding cybersecurity? Do state regulation influence cybersecurity performance of Internet Service
Providers? What are the policy implications that can be driven for governance of cybersecurity?
The study, conducted both at the OECD level and at the level of the Dutch market, delivered the folowing results:

We examined the extent to which networks of ISPs have infected machines. The 200 ISPs that hold the lion’s
share of the access markets in a wider OECD of all infected machines worldwide registered by the spam
trap. For the Netherlands around 80 percent of all infected machines in the Netherlands are located in ISP
networks.

Not only do the legitimate ISPs harbour a large share of all infected machines, they also vary widely in their
performance, which suggests that some have adopted more effective practices than others, even when
operating under similar market and regulatory conditions. While the strategies of the attackers are dynamic,
the security performance of ISPs turns out to be quite stable.

For the first time, the patterns in infected machines were connected to other data, such as the size of the
ISPs and the country in which they are located. Using bivariate and multivariate statistical approaches, the
analysis found that several variables are significant factors, such as: the size of the ISP matters, as do the
level of software piracy in a country and the activity of the regulator (as measured, for example, by
participation in the London Action Plan).

Membership of the London Action Plan (LAP) is associated with lower number of infected machines and this
is interesting since membership of the Convention on Cybercrime (CC) did not show a similar impact. LAP is
an informal transgovernmental network while CC has a formal structure where rules are binding among the
members. The implications are twofold. First, the effectiveness of TGNs should not be underestimated.
Second, formal TGNs do not appear to be more effective than informal ones.

Relations between data protection and privacy regulations on the one hand and a country’s cyber security
(proxied by number of botnets) on the other hand have been analyzed for the EU countries. In countries
where the data protection regime is oriented towards privacy, ISPs are relatively less incentivized to take
action towards their end-user security. While strict privacy regulations seem to be associated with lower enduser security in the EU countries, strict access to data retention is associated with better end-user security.
This can be explained by the impact of each set of regulations at the operational level where the ISPs
function. Privacy regulations seem to restrict and disincentivize ISPs while strict retention regulation provides
stimulating environment rather than limiting the ISPs. Importance of the effect of regulation at the operational
160
level is very important and two different components of data protection regime can have opposite impact on
end-user security of a country. More detailed findings in this regard are:
o
Countries with strict privacy regulations have a lower level of end-user security. This shows that the
restrictions in privacy regimes hinder improvements that result in higher end-user security. An
evident mechanism through which this may occur is hesitance of the ISPs for action under such
strict circumstances. Fear of being held liable disincentivizes the ISPs to get involved.
o
Strict surveillance is also associated with a lower level of security.
o
In contrast with privacy regime, strict regulations on Accessing retained data consistently was
associated with higher end-user security. Retaining data in single disconnected storages and
implementing strict procedures for accessing the retained data is shown to be attributed with higher
end-user security. ISPs functioning in this regulatory environment are more likely to be stimulated to
take action than the ones within a lax regulatory framework.
o
Also facilitation is associated with higher end-user security. Countries where the state has provided
facilities regarding data retention tend to do better in terms of end-user security. Such facilitations
may include cost reimbursement, administrative arrangements (Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands,
and Poland) or exemption of small ISPs from retaining data (UK, Finland).
Output
Besides reports for the Dutch regulator OPTA and the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, the most important
output of this work is a report for the OECD:
van Eeten, M. et al. (2010), “The Role of Internet Service Providers in Botnet Mitigation: An Empirical Analysis
Based on Spam Data”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2010/05, OECD Publishing.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5km4k7m9n3vj-en
Selected papers:

A paper was presented at WEIS 2010, The Workshop on the Economics of Information Security (WEIS) is
the leading forum for interdisciplinary scholarship on information security. The paper is entitled “The Role of
Internet Service Providers in Botnet Mitigation: An Empirical Analysis Based on Spam Data”.
http://weis2010.econinfosec.org/papers/session4/weis2010_vaneeten.pdf

Shirin Tabatabaie, Michel van Eeten, Johannes Bauer and Hadi Asghari (2012). “Transgovernmental
networks in cybersecurity: a quantitative analysis of London action Plan against spam”. Presented at the
International Studies Association (ISA) annual convention held in San Diego on 1-4 April 2012

Shirin Tabatabaie, Michel van Eeten, Johannes Bauer and Hadi Asghari (2012). “Has the securitization of the
cyberspace been effective? Study of the interplay between data protection and security”. Presented at the
European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR ), Regulation and Governance conference held in Exeter,
UK, 27-29 June 2012.
ICT dependencies of critical infrastructures
A cross-sectoral analysis
Modern societies are critically dependent upon a number of infrastructures, e.g. telecommunications, energy, and
water management. These critical infrastructures (CI) are becoming increasingly interdependent, especially
because of the increased use of information and communication technology (ICT). ICT pervades rapidly into all
areas of society, industry, and government. ICT acts as a vital cross-sector dependency linkage between CI.
Therefore, the consequences of disturbances in ICT may cause serious effects to the economy and society
especially as cascading disruption effects may occur in other CI.
In order to increase the resilience against this risk, it is necessary to gain more insight into the ICT-dependencies
and interdependencies of large-scale CI. The increasing use of ICT accelerates the rate at which infrastructures
are becoming interlinked and (inter)dependent, thus increasing the complexity and risk of cascading effects. This
acceleration of risk, causes the topics of Critical (Information) Infrastructure Protection (C(I)IP) and the
(inter)dependencies of large complex CI to appear predominantly on national and international research agendas.
However, not much empirical study has been done into the seriousness of these dependencies and the cascading
risk, and on the relative importance of the identified CI-dependencies.
This research set out to identify the main CI dependencies with a focus on ICT related dependencies:
161

It studied the development of the use of ICT within the context of CI, and showed the increased use of ICT as
a cross-cutting element in CI;

The project identified SCADA/ Process Control Systems as an important and potentially vulnerable element
within CI;

Based on empirical evidence, the extent to which (inter)dependencies are actually leading to incidents in CI
was analysed. This led to the conclusion that a focus of dependency mitigation measures on a limited
number of CI was justified, i.e. electricity and ICT;

A study was performed to investigate the aspects that influence the way CI are dependent on each other.
This study can be used as a checklist for dependency modelling. Another result of the study was the
conclusion that there are four states in which CI can operate and that for each of the states the dependencies
can be different.
Initially, the focus of this work was largely on the vulnerabilities posed by SCADA systems. In the second phase,
emphasis shifted towards the analysis and modelling of dependencies and cascading effects across
infrastructures. As a basis for this research a database of incidents was used, which contains data on large scale
incidents in CI, outage consequences and dependency effects. This analysis showed that not many multicascading incidents are found within the incidents studied. Rather, a small number of focused, unidirectional
pathways around two CI: energy and telecommunications, can be identified. These findings challenge general
assumptions on domino-effects which are central in a number of CIP policies.
Selected outputs
Luiijf, H.A.M., Klaver, M.H.A., The Current State of Threat, e-Security in Europe: Today’s Status and The Next
Step, 27-28/10/2004, Amsterdam.
Luiijf, H.A.M., SCADA threats and SCADA / process control as part of C(I)IP R&D, NISCC, London, 20 June
2005.
Luiijf, E, Nieuwenhuijs, A., Klaver, M., Eeten, M. van., Cruz, E. Empirical Findings on Critical Infrastructure
Dependencies. In: R. Setola, S. Geretshuber (eds), Critical Information Infrastructure Security, Lecture Notes in
Computer Science (LNCS) 5508, Springer, 2009. pp. 302-310.
Luiijf, H.A.M., Nieuwenhuijs, A.H., Klaver, M.H.A., van Eeten, M.J.G. and Cruz, E. (2010) ‘Empirical findings on
European critical infrastructure dependencies’, Int. J. System of Systems Engineering, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.3–18.
Eeten, M.J.G., Nieuwenhuijs, A.H., Luiijf, H.A.M., Klaver, M.H.A., Cruz, E., The State and the Threat of Cascading
Failure across Critical Infrastructures: The Implications of Empirical Evidence from Media Incident Reports, Public
Administration. Vol. 89, No. 2, pp. 381-400, June 2011
Survivable information security
Besides the work on internet governance, a set of protocols was developed to ensure the survivability of critical
networked information system that support the functioning of ‘traditional’ physical infrastructures. Large scale
networked information systems are referred to as critical information infrastructures (CII) when they provide
critical services to the critical physical infrastructures (CPI). Given the dependence upon these critical information
systems and the aim to restore control of the critical infrastructure as quickly as possible after a high-impact
disturbance, an important property that these systems must have is survivability. That is a system's capability to
fulfill its mission (in a timely manner) in the presence of attacks, failures, or accidents. Information security
services like authentication, confidentiality and integrity between the nodes should be resilient to such failures or
the whole CII, and consecutively the CPI, would be jeopardized. In a dependable information network, however,
especially the security distribution centers form single points of failure. They expose a high vulnerability, since
they are the source from which all the security services originate. Traditional redundancy approaches have their
limitations and cannot protect against consecutive failures/attacks. For these reasons the Medusa protocol was
developed,as a biologically inspired security system (BIISec). Critical information infrastructures are considered
as biological systems and ideas about security are derived from human immunology. Medusa is a set of protocols
that provides complementary services to enhance survivability of security centers. Those security centers then
become resilient to failures that are, for example, caused by Denial of Service attacks. However promising,
Medusa is not ready yet to contribute to society. To get to that point, its functionalities should be extended, e.g.
towards preventing or healing failures, besides recovery from failure.
162
Selected output
S. Daskapan, W.G. Vree & R.W. Wagenaar (2006), Emergent information security in critical infrastructures,
International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 2, no. 2/3, pp. 247-260 3.
Semir Daskapan, Indira Nurtanti, Jan van den Berg, Trust Algorithms in P2P File Sharing Networks, Int. J. of
Internet Technology and Secured Transactions (IJITST), expected 2009.
Semir Daskapan, Ana Cristina Costa (2008). “Reengineering Trust in Global Information Systems”, in Trust and
New Technologies: Marketing and Management on the Internet and Mobile Media. Cheltenham, UK and Lyme,
US: Edward Elgar, Edited by Kautonen, T. and H. Karjaluoto (Eds), ISBN, 9781847205681. pp.244-267.
Eldin, A.A., Daskapan, S., and Van den Berg, J. “Incorporating Trustworthy Context-aware Privacy in serviceoriented architectures”, in Context-Aware Mobile and Ubiquitous Computing for Enhanced Usability: Adaptive
Technologies and Applications, Edited by Dragan Stojanovic (Ed.), IGI Global (Idea Group Inc), 2009.5.
Sector specific contributions
In the vein of Critical Infrastructures, many research contributions were made on specific infrastructures, including
electricity, road and rail networks. Many of these contributions were made in close collaboration with the
Intelligent Infrastructures subprogram (e.g. the work on power system security) and/or linked with the
Understanding Complex Networks subprogram (such as the topological work on the road infrastructure).
Selected output
Bompard, E., Napoli, R., and Xue, F (2009). Assessment of information impacts in power system security against
malicious attacks in a general framework, Reliability Engineering & System Safety Vol. 94 (6) pp. 1087-1094.
Bompard, E, Napoli, R and Xue, F (2008). Vulnerability of interconnected power systems to malicious attacks
under limited information. European Transactions on Electrical Power, vol. 8 (8) pp. 820-834
Ettore Bompard, Roberto Napoli and Fei Xue (2009). Analysis ofnstructural vulnerability in power transmission
grids. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Vol. 2 (1-2) pp 5-12
I.Nai Fovino, Masera M, Decian A (2011). Integrating cyber attacks with fault trees. Reliability Engineering and
System Safety Vol 94 (9) pp 1394-1402
A. D’Ariano and M. Pranzo (2009), An advanced real-time train dispatching system for minimizing the propagation
of delays in a dispatching area under severe disturbances, Networks and Spatial Economics, 9(1) 63–84.
A. D’Ariano, F. Corman, D. Pacciarelli and M. Pranzo (2008), Reordering and local rerouting strategies to manage
train traffic in real-time, Transportation Science, 42(4) 405–419.
Snelder, M., Wagelmans, A., Schrijver, J., Immers, L. H. & Van Zuylen, H. J. (2008) Optimal Redesign of the
Dutch Road Network. Transportation Research Records, issue 2029
Knoop, V. L., Snelder, M. & Van Zuylen, H. J. (submitted) Comparison Of Link-Level Vulnerability Indicators For
Real-World Networks Computer-Aided Civil & Infrastructure Engineering.
Van den Top, J. and B.M. Steenhuisen: Understanding ambiguously structured rail traffic control practices, pp.
148-161. In: International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, Vol. 9, No. 2 (2009).
Hoogendoorn, S.P., Knoop, V.L. and Van Zuylen, H.J. (2008) Robust Control of Traffic Networks under Uncertain
Conditions. Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 357-377.
Knoop, V.L., Hoogendoorn, S.P. and Van Zuylen, H.J. (2008) The Influence of Spillback Modelling when
Assessing Consequences of Blockings in a Road Network European Journal of Transportation and Infrastructure
Research, Vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 287-300.
PhD theses
Andrea D'Ariano (2008). Improving real-time train dispatching: models, algorithms and applications. PhD thesis,
Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Sharam Tahmasseby (2009). Reliability in Urban Public Transport Network Assessment and Design. PhD thesis,
Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Victor Knoop (2009) Road Incidents and network dynamics: Effects on driving behavior and traffic congestion.
PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
163
Jaap van den Top (2010). Modelling Risk Control Measures in Railways, Analysing how designers and operators
organise safe rail traffic, NGInfra PhD Thesis Series on Infrastructures nr. 35. Delft: Delft University of
Technology.
Maaike Snelder (2010). Designing Robust Road Networks, A general design method applied to the Netherlands,
NGInfra PhD Thesis Series on Infrastructures nr. 41. Delft: Delft University of Technology.
Fei XUE (2009): Comprehensive models for security analysis of critical infrastructure as complex systems
Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy
Martijn Jonker (2010). Modernization of electricity networks: Exploring the interrelations between institutions and
technology, Thesis, 2010, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands. Promotor: Prof.dr. J.P.M.
Groenewegen.
Pei-Hui Lin (2011). Safety Management and Risk Modelling in Aviation: the challenge of quantifying management
influences. Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
164
5.3.5. Intelligent Infrastructures
This subprogram focused on intelligent infrastructures from different perspectives:

The intertwining of traditional (energy, road, railway etc.) infrastructures with IT and
telecommunications infrastructure, creating new risks and vulnerabilities.

The trend towards distributed and decentralized control structures in infrastructure networks, creating
the need to develop innovative approaches to deal with the multi-level, multi-actor and multi-objective
nature of infrastructure systems

The trend towards active use of flexibility as a valuable resource in to maintain stability in
infrastructure network operations
Agent based modeling framework and ABM aplications
The Intelligent Infrastructures subprogram was a major contributor to the development of a generic Agent-Based
Modelling framework, in collaboration with the Understanding Complex Networks subprogram. This framework
was developed to capture the socio-technical complexity of infrastructure systems and industrial networks. The
framework comprises (1) interface definitions between components, between models, between modellers, and
between modellers and problem owners; (2) a library of source code, and (3) procedures prescribing the use of
the library and interface definitions in model development. For a specific case of supply chain management, the
ABM approach was benchmarked against traditional modelling approaches.
This comprehensive effort, which cuts across the program as a whole, was reported in a book published by
Springer (see under Cross-cutting scientific outputs, par. 5.3).
The applicability of the ABM framework in support of decision makers was demonstrated in a number of case
studies, incl. an oil refinery supply chain (dealing with disturbances in the supply of crude) and an intermodal
freight hub (supporting the choice of an optimal location). Since then, the ontology for ABM has been dramatically
expanded, so that it now covers a wide range of process industries, transportation and energy infrastructure
systems.
ABM simulations of a multi-plant enterprise were performed to study how potential conflicts between distributed
decision makers (and decision makers at different hierarchical system levels) can be resolved to improve “wholesystem performance”, especially with a view to the resilience of the overall network in recovering from
disturbances. Solution strategies include information exchange procedures between social agents (human
decision makers) as well as physical agents (control systems).
Besides the Agent-Based Modelling book published by Springer (see under Cross-cutting Scientific Output, par.
5.2), this line of research produced more scientific output.
PhD theses (partly mentioned under Understanding Complex Networks):
Koen H. van Dam (2009), Capturing socio-technical systems with agent-based modeling. PhD Thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands
Emile Chappin (2011). Simulations of Energy Transitions. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, the
Netherlands
Behzad Behdani (2013). Handling disruptions in supply chains: an integrated framework and an agent-based
model. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Other selected ouput
Koen H. van Dam and Zofia Lukszo (2010), Book chapter: Model factory for socio-technical infrastructure
systems, in R.R. Negenborn, Z. Lukszo and H. Hellendoorn (Eds.) Intelligent Infrastructures, Series on Intelligent
Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering, ISCA42, Springer, pp 25-52, ISBN 978-90-4813597-4. Ander boekdeelNikolic, I., Dijkema, G. P. J., and van Dam, K. H. (2009) Understanding and shaping the evolution of sustainable
large-scale socio-technical systems towards a framework for action oriented industrial ecology. In M. Ruth and B.
Davidsdottir (Eds.) The Dynamics of Regions and Networks in Industrial Ecosystems, Edward Elgar. pp 156-178,
May 2009, ISBN 978 1 84720 742 5
165
Zofia Lukszo and Gerard P.J. Dijkema, Int. J. Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2009, Guest Editors Special
Issue Agent-based modelling and decision making, ISSN (Print): 1475-3219, ISSN (Online): 1741-8038
Gerard P.J. Dijkema and Zofia Lukszo, Int. J. Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2010, Guest Editors Special
Issue Modelling and controlling transition and evolution of critical infrastructures, ISSN (Print): 1475-3219, ISSN
(Online): 1741-8038
Zofia Lukszo and Gerard P.J. Dijkema, The operation and evolution of infrastructures: the role of agent-based
modelling and decision making, Int. J. Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2009, ISSN (Print): 1475-3219, ISSN
(Online): 1741-8038Koen H. van Dam, Zofia Lukszo and Rajagopalan Srinivasan, Agent-based decision support for failure-prone
networked infrastructures, Int. J. Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2009., ISSN (Print): 1475-3219, ISSN
(Online): 1741-8038Zofia Lukszo, Margot P.C. Weijnen, Rudy R. Negenborn and Bart De Schutter, Tackling challenges in
infrastructure operation and control: cross-sectoral learning for process and infrastructure engineers, Int. J.
Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2009, ISSN (Print): 1475-3219, ISSN (Online): 1741-8038Behdani, B.; Z. Lukszo; A. Adhitya and R. Srinivasan: Agent-based modelling to support operations management
in a multi-plant enterprise, pp. 2873-2884. In: International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and
Control Vol. 6, No. 7 (2010).[s.l.]: ISIC INternational, 2010. ISSN 1349-4198
Risks and vulnerabilities
Various research initiatives contributed to more insight in the vulnerability of infrastructure systems, and especially
electricity infrastructure, to malicious attacks and “normal” disturbances. Further research targeted intelligent
infrastructures in a wider sense, not only smart electricity grids, but also e.g. smart road networks and smart water
networks, with a view to the ICT-related components of the systems and associated aspects of information
security and integrity.
Core output

Zofia Lukszo, Geert Deconinck, Margot P.C. Weijnen (Eds.) (2010). Securing Electricity Supply in the
Cyber Age. Exploring the Risks of Information and Communication Technology in Tomorrow's Electricity
Infrastructure, Series: Topics in Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality, Vol. 15, 2010, 196 p., ISBN: 978-90481-3593-6.
The infrastructures for electric power and information
and telecommunication services are critical enablers for
all economic activity. Both of these infrastructure
systems evolved over time as networks-of-networks in
an institutionally fragmented landscape. In
understanding and steering the emergent behaviour of
these infrastructure systems both their physical network
complexity and their social network complexity pose a
formidable challenge. On top of the socio-technical
complexity of the electricity infrastructure and the
information and telecommunication infrastructure as
such, the two infrastructure systems show
unprecedented mutual interdependency. Unravelling this
multi-level interdependency and identifying strategies to
curb the new risks and vulnerabilities it implies for the
reliability of electric power services is the goal of this
book. It clearly shows that technical solutions alone will
not suffice to ensure the future reliability and security of
electricity infrastructure operations.
166

Rudy Negenborn, Zofia Lukszo, Hans Hellendoorn (Eds.) (2010). Intelligent Infrastructures, Series:
Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering, Vol. 42, 2010, XXXII, 530 p.,
ISBN: 978-90-481-3597-4
Society heavily depends on infrastructure systems, such
as road-traffic networks, water networks, electricity
networks, etc. Infrastructure systems are hereby
considered to be large-scale, networked systems, that
almost everybody uses on a daily basis, and that are so
vital that their incapacity or destruction would have a
debilitating impact on the defense or economic security
and functioning of society. The operation and control of
existing infrastructures such as road-traffic networks,
water networks, electricity networks, etc. are failing: too
often we are confronted with capacity problems, unsafety,
unreliability and inefficiency. This book concentrates on a
wide range of problems concerning the way infrastructures
are functioning today and discuss novel advanced,
intelligent, methods and tools for the operation and control
of existing and future infrastructures.
Other work
Sensor networks play an important part in making infrastructure systems more intelligent. Often, wireless sensor
networks are used to monitor infrastructure networks extending over large geographical areas. Consistent energy
availability is a constraint in such sensor networks. For this reason, the research field of renewable energy
harvesting is growing rapidly as a result of advances in low-power electronics along with the low duty cycles of
wireless sensor nodes which have reduced power requirements into the range of hundreds of microwatts, making
it feasible to use energy harvested from the environment as a power supply for wireless sensor networks.
Harvesting energy from the ambient environment has received increasing attention in recent research due to the
fact that it can significantly prolong the lifetime of the sensor nodes. However, power management is still a critical
issue because the power generation rate is variable and unpredictable. Since the communication between the
sensor and gateway, or sink, is the main energy consumer, data compression algorithms are an important tool in
reducing the amount of data transmitted irom the sensor and therefore reducing the amount of energy
consumption. However, there are many tradeoffs and constraints in designing data compression algorithms, such
as the trade of between data quality and power saved during the communication phase. For example, certain
events in infrastructure networks, such as hydraulic pressure gradients in water distribution networks, are of major
importance and need to be transmitted with high accuracy.
We investigated adaptive data compression algorithms based on lossy and lossless techniques with an artificially
intelligent controller with the lowest computational processing power necessary to improve the data compression
algorithm and manage the tradeoffs by making decisions in real time according to the availability of power and the
significance of events in progress. The framework of adaptive compression techniques we proposed can reduce
the distortion o f the gathered and compressed data and prolong the life of the wireless sensor networks.
The performance of the proposed framework was evaluated in a case study of water infrastructure in terms of
both the lifetime of the sensor network as a whole and the accuracy of the data gathered. The problem of
optimizing the desired tradeoffs between data quality and energy saving is subject to power availability and event
criticality is formulated and solved via a Markov Decision Process (MDP). The optimal and suboptimal policies
that minimize the average distortion of data compression in the long run have also been investigated.
Selected output
Wu, Wenyan and Jinliang Gao: Enhancing the Reliability and Security of Urban Water Infrastructures through
Intelligent Monitoring, Assessment, and Optimization, pp. 485-515. In: Intelligent Infrastructures, (Eds.) R.R.
Negenborn; Z. Lukszo and H. Hellendoorn. Series: Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and
Engineering, Vol. 42, 2010, 529 p., ISBN: 978-90-481-3597-4.
167
Mohamed, M.L; Wenyan Wu and M. Moniri (2013). Adaptive Data Compression for Energy Harvesting Wireless
Sensor Nodes. Presented at ICNSC 13, IEEE Intemational Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control, 1012 April 2013 Paris-Evry University, France.
8. Mohamed, M.L; Wenyan Wu and M. Moniri, Energy Harvesting Warless Smart Sensors in Continuous
Monitoring Water Distribution System (2013). Presented at ICEAM 2013, Intemational Conferences in Economics
and Asset Management, Asset management for enhancing energy efficiency in water and wastewater systems,
24-26 April 2013, Marbella, Spain
Distributed and decentralized control structures
Currently most control methods for infrastructure networks (such as electricity networks, railway networks, road
traffic networks, water distribution networks, etc.) used in practice are still largely based on heuristics and/or adhoc methods. For large-scale infrastructure networks a centralized control approach is often not feasible due to
complexity, scalability, bandwidth, and robustness issues. This leads us to adopting a distributed control
approach. More specifically, we use a hierarchical multi-level multi-agent control approach with local controllers
(control agents) at the lowest level of the control hierarchy, each managing a part of the network, and one or more
higher-level supervisory controllers. The local control agents cooperate to attain the common goal(s), and they
coordinate their actions to prevent any negative impacts of control actions of one agent in the region managed by
another agent. The supervisors resolve conflicts in case the local agents cannot reach a mutual agreement.
In most infrastructure networks we have a combination of both continuous dynamics (mainly at the subsystem
level) and discrete dynamics (switching, e.g., between operating regimes). This results in a hybrid system. One of
the main scientific challenges we embraced in the Intelligent Infrastructures subprogram is to integrate the Model
Predictive Control methods that have recently been developed for the control of small-scale hybrid systems into a
distributed, hierarchical multi-agent setting. A big challenge associated with this is the computational efficiency of
the control and coordination methods so that they can be used for on-line, real-time coordination and control of
real-life large-scale infrastructure networks.
Electricity networks
Accommodating renewables
In electricity distribution networks a large increase is foreseen in penetration of dispersed electricity resources
(DER), both in generation (photovoltaics, wind, combined heat/power) and in storage (supercaps, fuel cells,
flywheels). A massive penetration of DER poses serious control problems for classical (power) grid management,
because of their small inertia and fast power electronics. Decentralised control – implying an ICT infrastructure
closely coupled to the electric power infrastructure – allows more DER and new electricity services such as
improved monitoring, better power quality, more efficient grid management, integration of smart loads and
appropriate reactions in case of failures. The research question was how a multi-agent system needs to be
designed in order to provide services for monitoring and control in an electric power infrastructure with high DER
penetration at distribution (low voltage) level, with an underlying ICT infrastructure based on standardised
components. Specific emphasis was given to the tradeoffs between improved efficiency (due to the distributed
control) and the increased vulnerability (due to the interdependencies between the ICT and power infrastructure).
However, due to the architectural complexity and intensive interactions of the different stakeholders of smart
grids, including generation, transmission, distribution, operation, markets, customer and services, a systematic
synthesis and coordinated methodology needs to be the core of designing and deploying any smart grid
paradigm. Moreover, how to ensure the stability and integrity of the proposed critical infrastructure, while
facilitating its penetration through the existing utilities with financial incentives is becoming another key question
during the process of evolvement to the next generation electric power infrastructure. Both of these issues are
commonly recognized as prioritized problems to be solved in smart grid development. Our research took
advantage of multi-agent systems as the basic solution for modeling the structure and behaviors of various smart
grid components, and proposed corresponding agent models. Furthermore, an innovative mechanism based on
the foreseen real-time spot market of electric energy was also devised, which promotes the substantiation of the
economic and social benefits of smart grids.
There are three general actions by which a customer response can be achieved. Each of these actions involves
cost and measures taken by the customer. First, customers can reduce their electricity usage during critical peak
periods when prices are high. Secondly, customers may respond to high electricity prices by shifting some of their
168
peak demand operations to off-peak periods. The third type is using on site generation. Customers who generate
their own power may experience no or very little change in their electricity usage pattern, but demand will appear
to be smaller from the utility’s prospective.
Generally speaking, the main purpose of demand response (DR) is to make consumers adjust their schedule of
electricity usage according to varying prices during different periods, rather than changing the total amount of
consumption of customers. In the short-term, consumers with appropriate enabling technologies are likely to
reduce consumption when electricity price increases. While in the long-run, customers need to weigh between the
potential savings from adjusting usage schedule and the cost of incontinence resulted from doing so. Since the
value of power supply for consumers differs from period to period, the basic principle for customers to implement
DR is whether the marginal benefit exceeds the marginal cost.
However, it is not possible to determine the exact value of electricity to each customer during different periods.
For this reason, the overall social welfare is typically used as an indicator for DR benefits, which equals the
difference between the gross surplus of all consumers and the total cost for system operation. Moreover, the
variation of average market-clearing price over periods with or without DR within the scope of scheduling can also
reflect the effectiveness of DR. Further, if the market-clearing price for each period is weighted according to the
actual demand of consumers during that period, the variation of average market-clearing price over periods with
or without DR can reflect the effectiveness of DR even more obviously. In this case, the market-clearing price is
consisting of the marginal generation cost and the side-payment of no-load cost and start-up cost. It is used as
the index for a multi-period optimization to obtain the optimal schedule of electricity usage in the day-ahead
market. Such a market-clearing mechanism also targets at maximizing the overall social welfare, in which DR
customers bid their inelastic demand with quantity and time, as well as elastic demand with quantity, time and
affordability.
Actual peak demand reduction is used as an indication of how successful a DR program is and to compare DR
programs in similar situations. To normalize this indicator, the percentage of peak demand reduction is used.
Percentage and actual peak demand reduction are used to evaluate IBP. In addition, the performance of dynamic
pricing programs is measured using demand price elasticity which represents the sensitivity of demand to the
price of electricity. This can be found by calculating the ratio of change in demand to the change in price.
The elasticity of a substitution measures the rate at which the customer substitutes peak consumption for off-peak
usage in response to a change in the ratio of peak to off-peak prices. This kind of elasticity is important in ToU
(time-of-use) and CPP (critical peak pricing) pricing programs. Moreover, elasticity can be divided into selfelasticity and cross-elasticity. Self-elasticity measures the demand reduction in a certain interval, while cross
elasticity measures the effect of the price of a certain interval on electricity consumption during another interval.
As such, overall strategy for evaluating demand response programs includes estimating the following effects:
payments to participants for verified load reduction or use of on-site generation at locational marginal price (LMP);
estimated changes in real-time prices resulted from load reduction during emergencies; estimated collateral
transfer of payments from generators to wholesalers (change in LMP due to load reductions multiplied by the
difference between the load served in real-time and that served in day-ahead market); estimated reduction in the
cost of hedging load (reduction in average LMP for the peak hours due to the reduction in load); effect of load
reduction on system reliability, which is calculated by multiplying the reduction of Loss-of-Load Probability LOLP
resulting from curtailments by the estimated Value of Lost Load (VOLL) of the loads at risk.
Intra-grid control of smart grids
As previously explained, the present day electricity grid was not planned to accommodate a high penetration of
distributed generation (DG) based on intermittent renewable energy resources. This penetration brings new
challenges on power quality, protection etc. The core question is whether grid reconfiguration can help solve the
power quality issue that arises as a result of increased DG penetration, and whether reconfiguration of the
distribution grid will help to increase the efficiency of the network.
This research resulted in the development of a generalized method for smart intra-grid control. The method
involves the application of multi-objective optimisation to pro-active distribution grid reconfiguration based on
robust model predictive control. Ths method for grid reconfiguration provides a robust optimal configuration even
in the presence of uncertainty associated with distributed energy resources (DERs) present in the distribution
network. The research result shows that grid reconfiguration can help in adding more distributed generation into
the grid without affecting power quality. The fact that the power quality is not affected is helpful for the DSOs
(distribution system operators) so that they can meet the regulatory standards. The fact that more distributed
generation can be accommodated is also of interest to the electricity customers, since they can avail of more and
169
more green energy. Moreover, we found that the losses in the system can be minimized through reconfiguration
which again is of interest to the DSOs since the efficiency of the system increases, and it is of interest to the
consumers since the portion of the cost that they have to bear for the losses is reduced.
In general, applying multi-objective optimisation techniques on the selected ICT-based intra-grid control
applications (such as reconfiguration), with stochastic data, will allow us to quantify such benefits and to indicate
where investments in the grids will be most effective to help reaching Europe’s ambitions towards a CO2-neutral
society by 2050.
Selected output
G. Deconinck, “Metering, intelligent enough for smart grids?,” Chapter 8 (16 p.) from Z. Lukszo, G. Deconinck,
M.P.C. Weijnen (Editors), “Securing electricity supply in the cyber age: Exploring the risks of information and
communication technology in tomorrow's electricity infrastructure,” Series: Topics in Safety, Risk, Reliability and
Quality, Vol. 15, Springer, 2010, 431 pages, ISBN 978-90-481-3593-6.R. Duan, G. Deconinck, “Multi-agent Coordination for Market Environments,” Chapter 7 from R. Negenborn, Z.
Lukszo, H. Hellendoorn (Editors), “Intelligent Infrastructures Part 2,” Series: Intelligent Systems, Control and
Automation: Science and Engineering, Vol. 42, Springer, 2010, 529 pages, ISBN 978-90-481-3597-4, pp. 151177.
R. Duan, G. Deconinck, “Future Electricity Market Interoperability of a Multi-agent Model of the Smart Grid,” Proc.
2010 IEEE Int. Conf. on Networking, Sensing, and Control (ICNSC),11-13 Apr. 2010, Chicago, USA, pp. 625-630.
R. Duan, G. Deconinck, “Multi-agent Model and Interoperability of a market mechanism of the Smart Grid,” Proc.
2010 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symp. Workshops (NOMS Wksps), 19-23 Apr. 2010,
Osaka, Japan, pp. 312-315.
Chittur Ramaswamy P. Reconfiguration of electricity distribution gridss with distributed energy resources. PhD
thesis, December 2014, KU Leuven, Belgium
Chittur Ramaswamy P., Deconinck G. 2013. "Impact of varying photovoltaic penetration on minimum loss
reconfiguration". In IEEE Industrial Electronics Conference. Vienna, Austria, 11-13 Nov 2013 , pp. 1-6
Chittur Ramaswamy P., Pillai J.R., Deconinck G. 2013. "Scenario analysis to account for photovoltaic generation
uncertainty in distribution grid reconfiguration". In IEEE Industrial Electronics Conference. Vienna, Austria, 11-13
Nov 2013 , pp. 1-6
Chittur Ramaswamy P., Vingerhoets P., Deconinck G. 2013. “Reconfiguring distribution grids for more integration
of distributed generation”. In CIRED Int. Conf. on Electricity Distribution, Sweden, 10-13 June 2013 , pp. 1-4
Rudy Negenborn (2007). Multi-agent model predictive control with applications to power networks. PhD Thesis,
Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
R.R. Negenborn, S. Leirens, B. De Schutter, and J. Hellendoorn, "Supervisory nonlinear MPC for emergency
voltage control using pattern search," Control Engineering Practice, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 841-848, July 2009
Transportation infrastructure
Intelligent Co-operative Transportation Management
In this research project we set out to develop an on-line traffic management system for the transportation systems
of the future that use integration and cooperation between the (intelligent) vehicles and the infrastructure via invehicle navigation, telecommunication, and information systems in order to provide a balanced transportation
system that takes into account various sustainability objectives and constraints (such as emissions of CO2, NOx,
and particulate matters, fuel consumption, noise, safety, air quality, fairness, livability, etc.). The resulting
sustainable Intelligent Cooperative Transportation Management (ICTM) system is designed to go one step
beyond mere information providing, and actively employ various traffic control measures including vehicle-based
measures (such as intelligent speed adaptation, cooperative adaptive cruise control, and route guidance), as well
as infrastructure-based measures (such as traffic signals, ramp metering, variable speed limits, tidal flow, and
variable road marking), and combined vehicle-infrastructure measures (such as in-car traffic signal assistance,
pricing, etc.) so as to obtain significant reductions in the emissions of exhaust gases and particulate matter, noise,
fuel consumption, etc.
170
In addition to the recurrent day-to-day situations, there are many other cases in which the ICTM system will be
particularly vital to guarantee an efficient and sustainable operation of the traffic network such as: traffic works
and maintenance, incidents and adverse weather conditions, big events, and emergency evacuations (e.g., in the
case of floods). It is important to note that this project focused on operational real-time traffic management and as
such it is complementary to other solutions that aim at sustainable mobility in future transportation systems such
as new strategies for spatial planning, new multi-modal transportation and logistic systems, advanced traveler
information services, etc.
When developing an ICTM system, several issues have to be addressed. In this project we focused on the
modeling and control aspects of ICTM systems. Current traffic models are not suited at all to model and capture
all the aspects that play a role in cooperative vehicle-infrastructure systems. Moreover, current traffic
management and control methods are mainly reactive and only loosely coordinated, and they do not offer a
sufficiently high degree of anticipation and network-wide coordination required to address the growing traffic
problems in cities and other densely populated areas as well as important transit regions all around the world. As
such they are not really suited for use in ICTM systems. Hence, both new models and new control methods
needed to be developed for ICTM systems.
We aimed at developing multi-level model-based control approaches for large scale ICTM systems based on
prediction, coordination, and subsidiarity. In addition, we wanted to explicitly include human behavior and driver
reactions to traffic control measures in the traffic control approach. In this context most prominent research
questions addressed in this project are: How to determine and to coordinate various control measures in a
network-wide manner for large-scale traffic networks? And: How to model and deal with the interactions between
the human drivers and the ICTM system, in particular for route guidance? In anwering these research questions
we developed:
1. Multi-scale traffic flow models for ICTM systems, and
2. Multi-level model-based traffic control for ICTM systems.
Multi-scale traffic flow models for ICTM systems
Traffic simulation tools are used in traffic control, in order to optimize the traffic control measures.
However, low-level traffic simulation of an entire network has three main disadvantages: 1) There are
many variables which need to be calibrated 2) There are variations due to heterogeneity in traffic, not
represented in simulation programs, and 3) The required computation time may become very large. In
this research we developed a method to overcome these problems. The main idea is that traffic
dynamics are described at a higher level, not describing individual vehicles or links, but describing the
2
states of areas (having typically an area of 10 km or more) instead. Some steps were made to further
develop such a model based on the so-called macroscopic fundamental diagram (MFD), and to develop
traffic control approaches on this level. At the lower level we explored how the link transmission model
can be extended to include variable speed limits, and how the dispersion of traffic emissions (like NOx,
CO, CO2, etc.) can be modeled in an efficient way.
Multi-level model-based traffic control for ICTM systems
One of the main issues in on-line model-based traffic control for large-scale traffic networks is to reduce
the computational burden of the optimization that is required to determine the optimal traffic control
signals. At the highest level of the control hierarchy we used the macroscopic fundamental diagram
(MFD) as prediction model. At the lower level of the control hierarchy, we explored the use of simplified
traffic flow models, in particular the cell transmission model, the link transmission model, and the
Metanet model. Our efforts concentrated on recasting the model and the corresponding optimization
problem into a mixed-integer linear programming problem, for which efficient solvers are available. As
regards the performance measures we did not only consider travel time and throughput but also CO,
CO2, and NOx emissions, as well as the fuel consumption.
In order to obtain a good trade-off between computation speed and control performance, it is important to finetune the balance between the complexity and the accuracy of the prediction models used in the model-based
control (MPC) approach. In this context we have explored ways to approximate existing nonlinear traffic flow
models, viz. the METANET model and the Link Transmission Model (LTM), by piecewise-affine (PWA) models,
since for PWA models the MPC optimization problem can be recast as a mixed-integer linear programming
(MILP) problem, for which effective solvers are available.
171
We furthermore developed some approaches for hierarchical control of urban traffic networks based on the
principle of MPC, where local controllers control the traffic flows in a relatively larger area, while higher-level
supervisory controllers provide set-points for the local controllers. In this context we have in particular focused on
efficient MPC methods for the local controllers. We have shown that using a simplified urban traffic model the
MPC problem can also be recast as an MILP problem. In addition we have further developed and refined the socalled Macroscopic Fundamental Diagram model and used it in a multi-level control framework for large-scale
urban traffic networks. Along the same lines we have also developed an MPC-based control approach for the
regional controllers in the control hierarchy for intelligent vehicle-highway systems.
We have also investigated multi-objective model predictive traffic control aimed at the balanced reduction of total
time spent, emissions, and fuel consumption. Distributed identification and calibration of the cell transmission
model using real data was also done as a side project.
Intelligent Micro-Transportation Units
This work focused on the use of advanced model-based control methods for the operational management of nextgeneration transportation systems consisting of so-called intelligent micro-transportation units (MTUs). In general,
the type of systems we consider are characterized by the presence of a relatively large number (typically, in the
range of 50-200) of small autonomous vehicles with on-board sensors, micro-processors, and communication
units, that have to transport people or goods in a timely and efficient way. To this aim we developed a
management system that will determine routes for the autonomous transport units and balance their presence
throughout the system so that the overall transportation system operates in an optimal way (where optimal is
defined in terms of throughput, cost-efficiency, reliability, environment-friendly operation, etc., or a (weighted)
combination of several of these objectives). In this research we in particular considered so called micro-ferry
systems with small-sized autonomous vessels that are able to transport 4 to 6 persons at the time. The idea is
that in the near future such autonomous micro-ferries will start to operate in the harbor areas of Rotterdam to
transport passengers, thus replacing the regular ferries that are currently used by a more flexible and sustainable
means of water transport. In this project, we focused on the higher-level control problems of routing the MTUs,
where we assumed that there are low-level controllers present that efficiently solve the low-level control problems
related to speed control, collision avoidance, local routing, etc. Hence, we considered optimal routing of the MTUs
that are transporting people or commodities through the system in such a way that the performance of the system
is maximized (where the performance can include many different aspects such as timely delivery, minimization of
energy consumption, minimization of wear, minimization of operator costs, etc.). This also involves the charging of
the batteries of micro-ferries, which can only be done at a limited number of locations and will take some time. We
also considered the line balancing problem, i.e., the optimal assignment of loading stations for empty MTUs such
that a balanced service is offered for all customers (people or commodities), and the empty MTU management
problem, i.e., the optimal routing of empty MTUs from the unloading stations towards the loading stations without
interfering too much with the stream of loaded MTUs.
We aimed at the development of new intelligent predictive on-line control methods for routing of MTUs as well as
line balancing and empty MTU management, so as to be able to offer levels of efficiency, reliability, robustness,
and environment-friendly operation of microtransportation systems that cannot be achieved using current control
methods. In this context the three main research questions we addressed are: What are the most efficient routing
strategies for the MTUs, taking a good trade-off between optimality and computational efficiency into account?
How should the limited set of MTUs be allocated to the various pick-up points (loading and unloading stations) so
that waiting times for passengers can be minimized? • How to route empty MTUs through the system in such a
way that on the one hand the impact on the loaded MTUs (and also other (non-MTU) vessels) is minimal and
such that the empty MTUs reach their assigned loading station in time or with minimal delay?
The micro-transportation scheduling problem was defined as an optimization problem where several micro-ferries
can be scheduled to pick-up and deliver multiple customers that want to travel from one station to another, with a
desired time window for picking up each customer. The novelty in the problem at hand is the inclusion of the
energy level of the micro-ferries; for each job (that is, each act of picking up and delivering a customer) the microferry uses a certain amount of energy, which is dependent on the speed of the micro-ferry. By taking the speed
per job as an optimization variable, we can reduce the energy consumption, while still providing a good service to
the customers. Scheduling is done such that the micro-ferries do not run out of energy during operation.
Both time-based and event-based scheduling were considered as a foundation for modeling the micro-ferry
scheduling problem. The latter approach has been chosen, as it gives the opportunity to consider each job (each
transportation of customers) as a separate event, and assign optimization variables to it. Time is taken into
account by using the pickup time (the time at which a customer can enter the micro-ferry) as one of the
172
optimization variables. The scheduling problem we obtained can be seen as an extension of the Traveling
Salesman Problem. The current model gives us the opportunity to: schedule pick-ups of customers within a
preferred time-window, to take into account the energy consumption of the micro-ferries, and ensure they do
not run out of energy during a job, and to find an optimum between minimizing energy consumption and
minimizing pick-ups outside the preferred time-windows, by choosing appropriate speeds.
We also developed new mixed-integer linear programming formulations for the microscheduling problem that
require less integer variables than previous formulations and that can thus be solved faster. These results have
also been extended to Traveling Salesman Problems with multiple salesmen and multiple depots.
Selected output
V.L. Knoop, ].W.C. van Lint, and S.P. Hoogendoorn (2013). The macroscopic fundamental diagram used for
control using subnetwork accumulation. Accepted for Transportation Research Record, 2013.
LD. Baskar, B. De Schutter, J. Hellendoorn, and Z. Papp, Traffic control and intelligent vehicle highway systems:
A survey. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 38-52, Mar. 2011.
S. Lin, B. De Schutter, Y. Xi, and H. Hellendoorn, Fast model predictive control for urban road networks via MILP.
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 846-856, Sept. 2011.
S.K. Zegeye, B. De Schutter, J. Hellendoorn, E.A. Breunesse, and A. Hegyi, A predictive traffic controller for
sustainable mobility using parameterized control policies. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation
Systems, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 1420-1429, Sept. 2012.
L.D. Baskar, B. De Schutter, and H. Hellendoorn, Optimal routing for automated highway systems. Accepted for
Transportation Research Part C, 2013.
R.R. Negenborn and H. Hellendoorn, Intelligence in Transportation Infrastructures via Model-Based Predictive
Control. In: R.R. Negenborn, Z. Lukszo, and H. Hellendoorn, eds. Intelligent Infrastructures, Springer, 2010, pp. 324
B. De Schutter, H. Hellendoorn, A. Hegyi, M. van den Berg, and S.K. Zegeye, Model-based control of intelligent
traffic networks, in: Intelligent Infrastructures (R.R. Negenborn, Z. Lukszo, and H. Hellendoorn, eds.), vol. 42 of
Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering, ch. 11, pp. 277-310, Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer, 2010.
J.L.M. Vrancken, M. dos Santos Soares: Intelligent Road Network Control, chapter 12 in R.R. Negenborn, Z.
Lukszo, and H. Hellendoorn (eds.), vol. 42 of Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and
Engineering, ch. 12, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 2010.
J.L.M. Vrancken, M. dos Santos Soares, F. Ottenhof, A real-life test bed for multi-agent monitoring of network
performance, International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, Vol. 4, N. 5, pp. 357-367, 2009
R.R. Negenborn, B. De Schutter, and J. Hellendoorn, "Multi-agent model predictive control for transportation
networks: Serial versus parallel schemes," Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 21, no. 3, pp.
353-366, Apr. 2008
Water infrastructure
In the near future the importance of an efficient and reliable flood and water management system will keep on
increasing, among others due to the effects of global warming (such as higher sea levels, more heavy rain during
the spring season, but possibly also drier summers). Especially in the Netherlands the water management
authority is distributed among several local bodies. Local control actions then include activation of pumps or locks,
filling or draining of water reservoirs, or opening emergency water storage areas. To each of these actions a
certain cost is associated, and the same holds in case of too high water levels (flooding) or too low water levels
(for agriculture and irrigation). Although the local water management bodies usually only manage the water levels
in a relatively small region, the evolution of the water levels is Influenced by what happens over a much larger
region, often extending far beyond the given region (e.g., due to water arriving via rivers or via subsurface flows).
So, by coordinating the local water management actions, and by taking into account predictions or forecasts of
future rain fall and droughts and of the future arrival of increased water flow via rivers (using various weather and
hydrological sensors and prediction models), a more efficient flood and water management can be obtained with
less risks and less costs. In this research work we developed intelligent control methods for flood and water
management that address these requirements.
173
We aimed at developing and assessing new control methods that will guarantee the basic requirements and
"service levels" to perform adequate flood and water management. The generic research questions addressed
are all related to the development of Intelligent model-based predictive control approaches for flood and water
management. In particular, the following issues have been investigated:

development of hybrid models for water and flood management systems that are suited for model-based
control purposes,

development of centralized, distributed, and hierarchical control methods for water infrastructure
systems.

improving the computational efficiency of the methods, and

assessment and comparison via case studies and benchmarks.
The research questions listed above have been addressed through three main research directions, involving
different types of water systems, viz. coordination of local controllers in the Dutch water system, coordinated
distributed control of irrigation canals, and distributed control of urban water supply networks. In addition, we have
also benchmarked several distributed predictive control techniques.
Coordination of local controllers in the Dutch water system: The Dutch water system consists of numerous
interconnected rivers, canals, reservoirs, and lakes. Centralized control for such a system is not feasible, due to
computational limitations, and unwanted, due to the existing regional structure of organizations, such as the water
boards. We therefore addressed the application of model predictive control (MPC) for both individual regional
control and coordinated national control. We proposed a framework in which the Dutch river system is divided into
several control regions. For each region a controller is assigned and using coordination the controllers of the
various regions determine those actions that yield the best overall performance. This results in a distributed MPC
approach for the Dutch river system. Next, we focused on control of one of the subsystems, viz. the water system
around the city of Rotterdam. We investigated the benefits of coordinating the control of the actuators in the
Rhine-Meuse delta at a more regional instead of local level. For this we developed an intelligent MPC system,
based on a hybrid model that is characterized by continuous variables, such as water levels and flows, and
discrete actions, in this case, opening or closing the Maeslant barrier.
Coordinated distributed control of irrigation canals: A particular type of subsystem in large-scale water systems
consists of irrigation canals used to deliver water to farmers at the right time in the right amount. The control of
irrigation canals Is usually done manually, with a human operator traveling along the irrigation canal to adjust the
settings of the various gates and pumps in order to obtain a desired water level. As a solution to the complex
control problem of this type of water systems, we proposed a distributed MPC scheme, and we illustrated the
performance of those schemes in simulation studies on a nonlinear simulation model of the canal. For the
simulation scenarios considered the performance was consistently within 10% of the performance obtained with a
centralized overall MPC controller.
Distnbuted control of urban water supply networks: Another crucial type of subsystem found in large-scale water
systems are urban water supply networks, which transport potable water over vast geographical areas to millions
of consumers in cities. Currently, the pumps, valves, and gates available in these systems are controlled in an
entirely decentralized way using local controllers that only use local information from the network and that do not
take the presence of other controllers into account. To control these water supply networks more adequately, we
developed a distributed MPC scheme for coordinating the actions of the local controllers. The scheme is based on
local MPC strategies and a parallel coordination scheme that implements cooperation among the local MPC
controllers. A simulation study based on the urban trunk water supply network of Bogota, the capital of Colombia,
illustrated the potential of this new approach.
Benchmarking distributed predictive control techniques: In cooperation with European research groups we
designed and implemented several state-of-the-art distributed MPC algorithms developed for a common real-life
benchmark: a quadruple water tank system equipped with industrial instrumentation and control systems. In order
to analyze and compare the various control systems, a number of performance indices have been defined and
experiments have been performed.
Selected output
R.R. Negenborn, P.-J. van Overloop, T. Keviczky, and B. De Schutter, "Distributed model predictive control of
irrigation canals," Networks and Heterogeneous Media, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 359-380, June 2009.-
174
P.-J. van Overloop, R.R, Negenborn, B. De Schutter, and N.C. van de Giesen, "Predictive control for national
water flow optimization in The Netherlands," Chapter 17 in Intelligent
Infrastructures (R.R. Negenborn, Z, Lukszo, and H. Hellendoorn, eds.), vol. 42 of Intelligent Systems, Control and
Automation: Science and Engineering, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, ISBN 978-90-481-3598-1, pp. 439461, 2010
The value of flexibility
Multi-actor dynamic road pricing
Road capacity is scarce at some periods of the day, leading to congestion and economics losses. However, it is
abundant at other periods, also leading to economic losses due to under-utilization. A more intelligent distribution
of transport demand over space and time in order to achieve a more balanced capacity utilization might be
achieved by adopting economic principles in resource distribution such as spatially distributed, dynamic pricing of
road use. The overall goal of this work was to develop practical tools based on sound theoretical foundations to
assist policy makers in their strategic decision-making about the best system design of a spatially distributed
dynamic pricing system for capacity allocation in larger urban and regional networks, called congestion pricing.
The research evolved around three themes: (1) dynamic road pricing, (2) capacity management considering travel
time reliability, and (3) traveller behaviour considering pricing and travel time reliability and its impact on network
performance. The first two themes were pursued from a theoretical perspective to gain insight into the main
characteristics of the topic and yielded network design models that were applied to small networks. The third
theme focused on empirical analysis of travel behaviour and analysis of pricing measures on realistic networks.
Pricing proves to be an effective way to reduce system travel times. However, given the inherent heterogeneity of
travellers special attention to the interaction of user classes is needed to determine the net effects. The main
effect is that travellers with a low value for schedule delays are willing to change departure or arrival time.
Different objectives for pricing schemes yield different results, although the analyses suggest that the differences
might be small.
Including reliability in the analysis clearly shows that departing early is more effective than departing later, as in
the latter case travel times have a higher variability due to congestion. Furthermore, for the design of a reliable
road network a dynamic capacity assignment method should be used. In that case, however, the result of
optimising for minimal total travel time leads to similar solutions as minimising for travel time plus standard
deviation. Again, ample attention for the network performance is essential as multiple optima might be possible
due to the interaction of user classes.
The empirical analysis showed that travellers are relatively sensitive for road pricing compared to other cost
components, however, on the long term this difference might become smaller. Commuters tend to be less
sensitive, due to the implicit assumption that the employer will compensate the extra costs. Furthermore, it was
confirmed that travellers in reaction to pricing measures primarily opt for other departure times, with a preference
for departing early due to the impact of acceptable arrival times. Both findings have implications for policy makers
when designing pricing strategies. The case studies clearly showed that realistic network assessments are
feasible and demonstrated the benefit of these new insights, for instance in determining the optimal participation
rate for a measure as ‘Spitsmijden’ (peak avoidance).
This research established game-theoretical frameworks for assessing the interactions between pricing objectives
and travel behaviour (i.e. route choice and departure time choice); a network design model for dynamic pricing
based on multi-user class dynamic assignment modelling; formulation of a comprehensive generalized travel cost
function including schedule delay and travel time reliability; a thoroughl analysis of the stochastic bottleneck
problem; a dynamic assignment procedure for stochastic networks, using the concept of the long term user
equilibrium; a reliability based dynamic discrete network design methodology under stochastic capacities; a
stimulus-response framework for identifying the relationship between a road pricing measure, the choice
behaviour and the traffic system effects; a unique dedicated empirical dataset on travellers’ responses to road
pricing strategies and travel time reliability; estimations of travel choice models, i.e. mode, route and departure
time choice, considering pricing and travel time reliability, and implementation in a multi-user class dynamic
network assessment model; and an assessment of network effects of pricing measures in realistic case studies.
PhD theses and selected outputs
Joksimovic, D. (2007) Dynamic bi-level optimal toll design approach for dynamic traffic networks. PhD thesis,
Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
175
Li, H. (2009). Reliability-based dynamic network design with stochastic networks. PhD thesis, Delft University of
Technology, the Netherlands
Van Amelsfort, D.H. (2009). Behavioural Responses and Network Effects of Timevarying Road Pricing, PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Bliemer, M.C.J. (2007) Dynamic queuing and spillback in an analytical multiclass dynamic network loading model.
Transportation Research Record 2029, pp. 14-21.
Bliemer, M.C.J. and van Amelsfort, D.H. (2010). Rewarding instead of charging road users: a model case study
investigating effects on traffic conditions. European Transport - Trasporti Europei, 44, 23-40.
Joksimovic, D., M.C.J. Bliemer and P.H.L. Bovy (2005) Optimal Toll Design Problem in Dynamic Traffic Networks
- with Joint Route and Departure Time Choice. Transportation Research Record 1923, pp. 61-72.
Li, H., Bliemer, M.C.J. and Bovy, P.H.L. (2008). Network reliability-based optimal toll design. Journal of Advanced
Transportation, 42(3), 311-332.
Li, H., Bliemer, M.C.J. and Bovy, P.H.L. (2009). Modeling departure time choice under stochastic networks
involved in network design. Transportation Research Record, 2091, 61-69.
Li, H., P.H.L. Bovy, and M.C.J. Bliemer (2008) Departure time distribution in the stochastic bottleneck model.
International Journal of ITS Research, Vol.6, No. 2,pp 79-86.
Steg, L., E. Verhoef, M. Bliemer, D. Joksimovic, G. Schuitema, T. Tillema, B. Ubbels, D. van Amelsfort, and B.
van Wee (2006) Een multi-disciplinair perspectief op prijsbeleid in verkeer en vervoer: MDPIT. Tijdschrift
Vervoerwetenschap, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 26-39.
Vehicle-to-grid technology – supporting renewable energy resources
The transition to a more sustainable energy system poses great challenges for both the transport and the
electricity sector. Electric vehicles have the potential to be an important building block of a greener transport
sector, but also of a green electricity system. The key to the potential of EVs in a greener power system is that, in
principle, charging of EVs can be scheduled based on a signal that reflects the availability of renewable energy
sources. In liberalized power sectors, however, the objectives of different stakeholders in the power sector wrt EV
charging differ and this can be expected to lead to sub-optimal situations where unnecessarily large costs are
eventually passed on to consumers, thus hampering the introduction of EVs. A concrete example of such a
conflict of interests are the extra costs due to network reinforcements that might be needed as a result of electric
vehicles charging based on a real-time electricity price. This led to the central research question: How can the
flexibility of EV charging best be utilized in multi-actor power systems with high shares of renewable energy
sources?
The research was structured along the lines of three subquestions:

How can the controlled charging of EVs reduce their impacts on the distribution grid?

How can controlled EV charging reduce generation costs in power systems with a high share of
renewable energy sources?

How can the costs of EV charging be minimized within distribution grid constraints?
The two important perspectives from which controlled EV charging can add significant value are (1) its ability to
be shifted in time according to fluctuating RES output on the one hand, and (2) to avoid peaks in network demand
to defer or postpone network investments on the other hand. With flat network tariffs and wholesale prices that will
be influenced strongly by fluctuating RES output, price responsive EV demand can lead to even higher demand
peaks than uncontrolled EV charging. The required network reinforcements are costly and unnecessary because
limiting the load to free network capacity through an efficient congestion management mechanism has negligible
additional energy costs. There are various congestion mechanisms possible to align the cost minimizing EVs with
network constraints, either based on shadow prices associated with the network constraints or an ex-ante
allocation of free network capacity, but in both approaches there exists a tradeoff between simplicity and
economic efficiency. All schemes, however, seem to have in common that the function of the DSO is extended
beyond its current role.
The answers to the three sub-questions can be summarized as follows:
176

A large-scale analysis of distribution grid impacts of EVs and its financial consequences for DSOs has
been made. Results show that when controlling the charging process the replacement costs are reduced
most markedly, costs for energy losses are much closer between controlled and uncontrolled scenarios
and an overall cost reduction in the order of 20% can be realized, the largest part of which is found at the
level of medium voltage cables.

An analysis was made of the combined potential of controlled EV charging and cross-border
transmission capacity for integration of variable RES. The main finding is that these technologies, which
are often seen as substitutes, can complement each other in high RES scenarios.

Possible congestion management mechanisms to efficiently align the potential of EVs for RES
integration and the distribution networks have been proposed and analysed. Results indicate that
applying an optimal congestion management scheme is economically efficient, but in the design a tradeoff exists between simplicity and efficiency that needs to be considered more closely.
We employed various optimization techniques to formulate and study a variety of EV charging strategies in
different scenarios and institutional settings. The optimization problems were embedded in simulations to explore
different institutional arrangements and to quantify the potential of controlled EV charging on various performance
criteria like network impacts, energy costs, transmission needs and C02 emissions. Various case studies have
been performed, in which a large number of aspects have been studied. Among these are distribution grid
impacts of electric vehicles, inter-relations between needs for cross-border transmission capacity and demand
response by electric vehicles, congestion management mechanisms on distribution network level, a comparative
study between centralized and decentralized optimization of EV charging, sensitivity analyses on various aspects
of EV charging and the potential of cold storage for demand response.
The state-of-the-art contributions of this work are:

An EV distribution grid analysis based on realistic driving patterns and a large number of distribution
grids using realistic and measured grid loads. In addition, a financial analysis of EV load induced
distribution asset replacements and energy losses.

Analysis of the interrelations between (often seen as alternative technologies of) smart EV management
and cross-border electricity transmission expansion.

Mathematical formulations and analysis of different congestion management schemes for aligning
demand response with distribution grid capacity in a high RES power system.
Selected output
Remco Verzijlbergh (2013). The power of electric vehicles: exploring the value of flexible electricity demand in a
multi-actor context. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
R. A. Verzijibergh, M. Grond, Z. Lukszo, J. Slootweg, and M. D. Ilic, "Network impacts and cost savings of
controlled ev charging," IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1203 -1212, Sept. 2012.
R. A. Verzijibergh, C. Brancucci Martimez-Anido, L. De Vries, and Z. Lukszo, "Does controlled electric vehicle
charging substitute cross-border transmission capacity?" Applied Energy, Accepted for publication, 2013.
R. A. Verzijibergh, L. De Vries, and Z. Lukszo, "Renewable energy and responsive demand: do we need
congestion management in the distribution grid?" IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Under review (revision
submitted), 2013.
E. Veldman and R. A. Verzijibergh, "Smart charging of electric vehicles: Opportunity or threat for distribution
grids?" IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Under review, 2013.
Utilizing the flexibility of micro-cogeneration
Specific potential for applying distributed generation (DG) at the domestic level lies in using heat and electricity
from micro combined heat and power systems (micro-CHP). The main problem with micro-CHP is the high upfront
investment costs in comparison with conventional gas-fired boilers. We explored the potential cost saving with
intelligent control of micro-CHP. Such control effectively utilizes micro-CHP’s inherent flexibility, thereby
increasing the economic feasibility of the technology. Intelligent control schemes were designed and through
model simulations we assessed the economic benefits of local intelligence in households as well as aggregate
intelligence in virtual power plants (VPPs). The outcomes offered valuable insights into the incentives for
investment in micro-CHP’s and in the intelligence to control them.
177
The main conclusions of this work can be summarized as follows:

Micro-CHP is currently economically infeasible. However, future systems look more attractive, especially
PEMFC’s, depending on their eventual investment costs when/if they enter the market.

Dmand response moderately increases the room for investment in micro-CHP.

Intelligent control of Stirling micro-CHP’s does not make them economically feasible

If investments in micro-CHP’s are made based on ‘fit and forget’ applications, aggregators have an
economic incentive to set up VPPs aimed at demand response.
Selected output
Michiel Houwing (2010) Smart heat and power: utilizing the flexibility of micro-cogeneration. PhD Thesis, Delft
University of Technology, the Netherlands
M. Houwing, R.R. Negenborn, and B. De Schutter (2011). "Demand response with micro-CHP systems,"
Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 200-213, Jan. 2011
T. Monasso, M. Houwing, and I. Bouwmans (2010). Key variables in cost-driven decisions on installing microCHP in households. International Journal of Distributed Energy Resources, 6(1) : 19-39.
K.H. van Dam, M. Houwing, Z. Lukszo, and I. Bouwmans (2008). Agent-based control of distributed electricity
generation with micro combined heat and power – cross-sectoral learning for process and infrastructure
engineers. Computers & Chemical Engieering, 32(1/2): 205-217.
Miscellaneous contributions
Z. Lukszo, M.P.C. Weijnen, R.R. Negenborn, and B. De Schutter, "Tackling challenges in infrastructure operation
and control: Cross-sectoral learning for process and infrastructure engineers," International Journal of Critical
Infrastructures, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 308-322, 2009
Michel dos Santos Soares (2010). Architecture-Driven Integration of Modeling Languages for the Design of
Software-Intensive Systems. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
A.N. Tarau, B. De Schutter, and J. Hellendoorn, "Centralized, decentralized, and distributed model predictive
control for route choice in automated baggage handling systems," Journal of Control Engineering and Applied
Informatics, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 24-31, 2009
A.N. Tarau, B. De Schutter, and J. Hellendoorn, "Model-based control for throughput optimization of automated
flats sorting machines," Control Engineering Practice, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 733-739, June 2009.
A.N. Tarau, B. De Schutter, and J. Hellendoorn, "Route choice control of automated baggage handling systems,"
Transportation Research Record, no. 2106, pp. 76-82, 2009
A.N. Tarau, B. De Schutter, and H. Hellendoorn, "Model-based control for route choice in automated baggage
handling systems," IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, vol.
40, no. 3, pp. 341-351, May 2010
178