Critical-infrastructure project appraisal often undervalues resilience investments because many disruption impacts are non-market in origin yet material for stakeholders. This study proposes the tiered tri?phase resilience valuation framework plus (TRVF+), which integrates three operational resilience dimensions – preparedness, continuity maintenance, and restoration – into a CBA-compatible decision metric. TRVF+ computes normalized indices (PPI, CMI, SRI/SRI_adj) and a composite social stability index (CSSI); monetizes avoided disruption impacts (ADIC) from complaints, trust/satisfaction proxies, and regulatory standing; and propagates parameter uncertainty via Monte Carlo simulation (10,000 runs per case) to estimate a resilience-adjusted benefit–cost ratio (RABCR) and the decision-robustness probability Pr(RABCR>1.0). The framework is demonstrated on four anonymized pilot cases representing increasing data maturity (Tier 1–3). Monetized intangible benefits account for ~15–30% of total benefits on average (up to ~40% within Tier?1 uncertainty bounds). Across cases, baseline BCR values of 0.88–1.15 increase to post?intervention RABCR values of 1.10–1.45, and decision robustness meets or exceeds a moderate acceptance rule (Pr(RABCR>1.0)?0.80; observed range 0.81–0.95). TRVF+ enables auditable valuation of resilience and supports communication of uncertainty in stakeholder consultations and public hearings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
CHERNENKO et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: