National Academies Press: OpenBook

Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints (2010)

Chapter: Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements

« Previous: Chapter 5 - Low-Cost, Quickly Implementable Improvements
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 6 - Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14439.
×
Page 75

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

68 6.1 Introduction A major output of this research is a computer-based method- ology that decision makers can use to identify, categorize, and evaluate quickly implementable, low-cost capital, operational, and regulatory or public policy actions designed to enhance freight mobility by addressing identified constraints. Hav- ing defined and characterized freight mobility constraints and developed the criteria for low-cost and quickly imple- mentable improvements, this chapter describes the frame- work of the methodology. The framework acknowledges that a proper methodology would be integrated into the stan- dard Project Development Process, which each state DOT and MPO is required to have if they were to use state or Fed- eral funds to implement such projects. The framework further acknowledges that: • Most candidate projects are developed from an approved state or MPO planning process. • The planning process includes some kind of freight stake- holder input process by which candidate projects are suggested. • Some kind of preliminary on-the-ground analysis has been conducted to ensure that the project can be implemented within the resources available and without more significant environmental complexities. The following sections describe the methodology followed by a discussion of how it could be integrated into the plan- ning process. 6.2 Framework of Methodology The purpose of the methodology is to assist public- and private-sector decision makers in identifying and evaluat- ing low-cost capital, operational, regulatory, or public policy actions to improve freight mobility. Conceptually, the method- ology is designed to be a simple application tool where decision makers make selections to define the constraint and receive feedback on possible actions to address it. The user then selects possible improvements that can address the specific constraint under consideration and also proceed to view examples where the actions had been implemented or proposed. The selections are designed as simple dropdown boxes that include options. The methodology is backed by a database of historical low- cost improvement projects. The value of the examples is intended to illustrate the applicability of improvements and to guide users in making suitable selections. The methodology is designed to be data driven where the database of implemented improvements can be updated and expanded as new project information becomes available. The overall framework of the methodology is depicted in Figure 22 and a concept of opera- tions is described below. The framework has three main components: (i) character- ization of constraint by identifying its mode, location, and type; (ii) identification of improvement options; and (iii) eval- uation of improvement options. 6.2.1 Characterization of Constraint The first step in the proposed methodology is for a user to select the freight transportation mode of interest, e.g., high- way, rail, or deepwater port and inland waterways. For the selected mode, the user next has the choice to iden- tify a subcategory of the selected mode and elements of that subcategory. For example, the subcategories of the highway mode include major functional classes (rural and urban). The user can further identify the location within the subcategory where the constraint occurs, e.g., mainline, interchange ramp, intersections, construction zone, weigh stations. Similarly for rail, the subcategories are Class I, regional, and short-line rail and the constraint location would be C H A P T E R 6 Methodology for Identifying and Evaluating Improvements

69 mainline, siding, terminal/yard, or IT/process improvement. For deepwater ports and inland waterways, the subcategories are deepwater ports and inland waterways, and the constraint locations are “on the terminal,” “outside the gate,” or “water- side” to designate physical zones of operation that require various partners and financial responsibility to implement actions that address constraints. The next step is to classify the constraint under considera- tion into one of the three types (i.e., physical, operational, or regulatory). Definitions of the different types of constraints are displayed to guide the user in selecting the appropriate type of constraint. Figure 23 illustrates one example of apply- ing the above steps. For the selected type of constraint, a list of constraints that could occur at the constraint location selected are displayed; from this list, the user can select the constraint that best fits the situation under consideration. Standard descriptions for the selected constraint are then displayed as pop-up boxes to confirm that the selection fits the situation under considera- tion. This step is shown in Figure 24 and illustrated with examples of physical constraints for the highway mode. Sim- ilar lists for the other constraint types and for each mode are included in the database. 6.2.2 Selection of Improvements This second component of the methodology guides the user to identify the potential low-cost improvement options to address the constraint identified in the previous compo- nent. The first screen in this component of the framework displays the definition of a low-cost, quickly implementable improvement specific to the selected mode. Once the constraint has been characterized, the user can then make a selection from a list of possible options that can be used to address that constraint. The improvement options displayed are determined by the type of constraint. The list of improvement options are developed from the results of the lit- erature review, interviews, and survey of public- and private- sector stakeholders. After selecting the improvement, the user can view exam- ples of projects implemented without going through the eval- uation process (see Figure 22). The user can also select multi- ple improvements and choose to compare the selected options based on their characteristics or view examples of each option. Note that the examples of improvements in the database per- tain to the public-sector actions only. Even though improve- ments are determined by the type of constraint, it is possible A. Characterize constraint • Mode • Constraint location • Constraint type • Listing of constraints C. Evaluate options • Compare projects illustrating selected options • Decide on option B. Identify improvement actions • Define low-cost, quickly implementable actions Resources Links to sources of detailed project information Figure 22. Framework of methodology. Mode • Highway • Rail • Deepwater ports & inland waterways Mode subcategory • Rural interstate • Rural principal arterial • Urban interstate • Urban principal arterial • Intermodal connector Constraint Location • Interchange/ramp • Intersection • Mainline • Construction zone Constraint type • Physical • Operational • Regulatory Figure 23. Characterization of constraint.

70 that some constraints may be addressed by different types of improvements. For example, the public sector might imple- ment a regulatory action to address an operational constraint. For this reason, the improvements are not grouped by type. Instead, for each selected constraint, improvements that have been successfully implemented elsewhere are displayed. Fig- ure 25 illustrates this step and shows the relationship between the first two components of the framework. It is important to distinguish between public-sector improvements and private-sector reactions to minimize the effects of the constraints. For the highway mode, public-sector improvement options are actions that are designed to remove or minimize the effects of the constraint. The private-sector options, on the other hand, are reactions to minimize or avoid the effects of the constraints, but do not remove the con- straint. For the rail mode, since ownership of the railroads is private, public-sector improvements are limited except for regulatory actions. Furthermore, based on information gath- ered, the constraints are more operational or regulatory and less physical in nature. Freight mobility constraints associated with deepwater ports and inland waterway modes are influenced to some extent, but not exclusively, by the highway and rail intermodal links to the ports. Consequently, some of the physical constraints are influenced by these intermodal connectors. Others, however, are totally within the jurisdiction of private- or public-sector Constraint Type • Physical • Operational • Regulatory Physical Constraints • Weaving • Turning radii • Steep grade • Inadequate capacity • Lane drop • No turning lane Improvements • a • b • c • etc. Definition of constraint Definition Definition Definition Figure 24. Selection of constraint. Physical Actions • Add turning lane • Widen lane • Ramp meter • Restriping • Etc. Identify improvement actions Definition of improvement action Definition of improvement action Physical Constraints • Weaving • Inadequate turning radii • Steep grade • Inadequate interchange/ ramp capacity • Lane drop • Etc. Mode • Highway • Rail • Deepwater ports & inland waterways Constraint Type • Physical • Operational • Regulatory Characterize constraint Improvement Type • Physical • Operational • Regulatory Definition of improvement type Definition of improvement type Figure 25. Low-cost improvements based on constraints.

terminal operators and occur within the boundaries under their control. Due to the competitive nature of freight-system operators and modes, it is the challenge of the freight trans- portation system to encourage the individual operations within the entire freight mobility transportation system to work together to coordinate their individual improvements. This works across all modes regardless of where their physi- cal operations are located. 6.2.3 Evaluation of Improvement Options This component of the framework enables the user to view details and compare implemented (or proposed) examples of the option(s) selected. For the selected options, a reference list of projects in the database where the options have either been implemented or are under consideration are displayed. The user can select from the list of projects and view details to compare and evaluate the options. The details include descrip- tions of the projects; location, date, and duration of imple- mentation; before and after values of performance measures; cost; and lessons learned. The projects are identified by proj- ect numbers that include the state’s name abbreviation to facilitate a decision on which examples to view in detail. Where multiple options are selected, the characteristics of these multiple options are displayed so that the user can com- pare different improvement options as illustrated in Figure 26. This process combines qualitative and quantitative factors. The user has the option to go back to the improvement selection page to select different alternatives. Similarly, the user can select different projects to view and/or compare. The tool also provides links to sources of detailed project information that users can access. These sources are project reports, documents describing the improvements, or web- sites where further related information can be found on the Characteristic Option 1 Option 2 Project name Mode Location of constraint Constraint Improvement Description of project Location of project Date of implementation Performance measure Pre-improvement value Post-improvement value Cost Benefits Selection criteria Implementation duration Lessons learned Examples FL-1 OH-5 UT-3 Examples TX-2 WA-1 NJ-11 Physical Actions • Add turning lane • Widen lane • Ramp meter • Restriping • Etc. Definition of improvement action Definition of improvement action Description of project Description of project Identify and evaluate improvement actions Figure 26. Comparison of improvement options. 71

72 implemented projects. For the project reports, the contact information of the publishers are also provided. 6.2.4 Query Database The framework is structured such that the user can directly query the database of implemented projects based on user- defined criteria without having to go through the constraint characterization and improvement selection process. The search criteria are constraint, improvement, or project name. In the query mode, once the user selects the search criterion, the list of projects satisfying that criterion is displayed. The user can then select a project for detailed review or the user can select multiple projects for comparison. The framework allows the user to start a new search or go through the wizard mode to evaluate the constraint and identify appropriate improvements. 6.3 Software Application The methodology described above is encapsulated in a soft- ware application tool. The prototype of this tool was developed as a standalone product using Microsoft® Windows applica- tions based on the .Net Framework 2.0 programming plat- form. This application has a wizard-like interface that guides users in making appropriate choices or selections. 6.4 Feedback and Continuous Update of Database To enhance the usefulness of the tool, it is desirable to include a mechanism to keep updating and adding new options to the database as additional information becomes available. There are two possible methods for doing this: (i) analysts could actively seek additional data for the database, or (ii) prac- titioners could have the option of sending success stories to a database manager, and the data would then be included as part of the tool. Regardless of the source of new data, exten- sive effort will be required to fully populate the database with good examples. Since no standard process exists to define, describe, or measure such freight mobility constraint allevia- tion projects, the process of collecting a substantial number of candidate examples will continue to be time consuming and expensive. The methodology as described in this project would be the beginning of a long, multi-year, multi-state, and multi-urbanized area effort to collect sample projects to pop- ulate and update the database. The database and methodol- ogy would need to become part of a collaborative effort by many jurisdictions to provide the data for the future analyses. Once such a collaborative data collection mechanism is established, it will be necessary to convert the tool to a web- based application that will include a feedback screen to capture strategies selected by policy/decision makers to resolve mobil- ity issues. This information will contribute to the database and add to the intelligence of the application. For example, as options and strategies are selected, the program will apply a factor to reflect its level of usage. This will allow other users to see the history of the options selected as they make decisions. Also, the tool will include a feature that allows users to provide feedback on the level of success or failure of the strategy they selected. This information can be used to enhance the value of the strategy to mitigate similar problems. 6.5 Integration into Planning Process As noted in the introduction, the methodology described above is intended to integrate into the transportation planning process and the project development process. Each state DOT and each MPO is required to conduct a systematic and ongo- ing planning process, which, among other things, identifies transportation bottlenecks. Since the 1991 enactment of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, freight issues are required to be included in the planning process. These planning requirements have resulted in a variety of freight- planning activities at state DOTs and MPOs including: • Improved collection of freight data incorporating: – Freight origin and destination data – Freight volumes across the network and at selected links and nodes of the network – Forecasts of freight growth rates to enable prediction of future levels of congestion – Creation in some cases of freight models, which gener- ate freight demand predictions across the network or at specific links – Feedback through studies and surveys of businesses and industry to understand the impacts of freight systems on the operations of all modes (rail, road, sea, barge, or air) – Improved estimates of costs such as the value of time for shipments, the values of cargoes moved, and the estimated contribution of freight efficiency to overall economic competitiveness • Identification of freight stakeholders including: – The formation of freight stakeholder councils – Identification of major freight producers and consumers among local businesses and industries – Solicitation of input from modal operators about their unique issues such as the needs of motor carriers, rail- roads, port operators, and other transport sectors • Identification of freight bottlenecks including: – Correlating high truck volumes on freeways to known points of freeway congestion – Identification of intersections that serve high truck volumes

– Identification of economic impacts to shipping, freight, and trucking businesses due to winter weather road closures – Identification of physical roadway constraints into key freight nodes such as ports, manufacturing areas, inter- modal yards, airports, or other areas of freight genera- tion or transfer – Identification of rail constraints such as track slow orders indicating maintenance problems, low overhead clear- ances that restrict “double stacked” container train movements, at-grade crossings, narrow bridges restrict- ing track or siding expansion; load-limited rail bridge structures, and outdated and poorly located railroad yards and intermodal facilities. Planning traditionally occurs at two levels, the planning level and the project level. The planning level generally is a “macro-level” process that examines planning issues across an entire network, whether the network is an entire state, a metropolitan area, or a smaller area within the state or metro- politan area. Planning level analysis tends to be focused upon broad, more generalized issues such as: • Collaborative development of transportation policies • Establishment of public input and collaboration processes • Forecasted rates of growth in transportation volumes in all modes • Identification and prioritization of areas of congestion • Measurement of the effects of potential projects upon that congestion • Evaluation of transportation’s effect upon air quality • Integration of potential projects into the land use plans and policies of communities • Identification of specific projects to be pursued. 6.5.1 Transportation Planning Process Figure 27 illustrates how the planning process begins with broad regional goals and progresses methodically down to the identification of individual projects and strategies for operat- ing the system. The low-cost freight bottleneck evaluation methodology is intended to assist the larger planning process in the areas of developing the Transportation Plan, making trade-offs, identifying projects within the plan, and identify- ing operational strategies. The Transportation Plan development process identifies a variety of transportation policies, strategies, long-term needs, and generalized descriptions of projects that will address those needs. It usually includes the development of alterna- tive scenarios. Different scenarios can be based upon alterna- tive assumptions about growth rates or funding levels for the region. The low-cost freight constraint evaluation methodol- ogy can be used to identify the most likely types of improve- ments that could be considered to address freight mobility constraints, once the constraints have been identified through the transportation modeling process. Usually, MPOs utilize transportation planning models that are sophisticated enough to identify areas of congestion. Those known areas can be reviewed through the methodology to identify likely poten- tial solutions, which can be included in the long-term Trans- portation Plan. The ultimate product of planning is the identification of projects, strategies, and processes for addressing transportation needs. These projects and strategies are identified in greater detail after the Transportation Plan stage in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP is a metropolitan area’s collection of projects or strategies to be deployed, generally for the next 4- or 5-year period. The TIPs are specific collections of projects that can be funded with available state, local, and Federal funds, which have been evaluated for air-quality impacts, and which have been approved by their communities following a public-involvement process. The Transportation Plan generally has a 20-year horizon, which would include four to five TIPs. The methodology can be applied at the TIP level as well as at the Transportation Plan level. Generally, the Transporta- tion Plan development process produces a list of congestion Regional Vision and Goals Alternative Improvement Strategies Capital Operating Evaluation and Prioritization of Strategies Development of Transportation Plan Development of Transportation Improvement Programs (Short-term list of projects) Project Development Systems Operations Cr itic al F ac to rs a nd In pu ts Lo w -c os t I m pr ov em en t O pt io n Ev al ua tio n M et ho do lo gy Figure 27. Integration of methodology into transportation planning process. 73

chokepoints and promising freight strategies, which must be further prioritized into chronological periods. The potential freight bottleneck projects identified through the Transporta- tion Plan can be further evaluated and prioritized through the methodology for prioritization in the short-term TIP. Those projects that appear to have the greatest benefit in terms of freight volumes, sensitivity to the improvement strategy, or support by freight stakeholders can be adopted for the TIP. Many MPOs and state DOTs have developed Freight Advi- sory Councils. These tend to be collections of freight-system users and consumers, such as trucking firms, port operators, local shippers, local businesses, railroad operators, and water- borne freight operators in regions that have marine ports or inland waterways. These councils typically advise the MPO or DOT at both the plan development stage and the TIP devel- opment stage. The methodology would be an appropriate tool for the Freight Advisory Council members to use to help eval- uate the potential scope of projects at congested locations. 6.5.2 Project Development Process All projects constructed using Federal transportation funds must be derived from an approved Transportation Plan and TIP. However, those “planning level” approvals are not suffi- cient to lead to the actual construction of a project or deploy- ment of a strategy. An additional “project-level” evaluation process also is required, which includes analysis of engineering, environmental, social, and financial alternatives. This analysis begins with evaluation as to the needed number of lanes; proper horizontal and vertical curvature; sight distances; length of merging or weaving areas; and the type, size, and location of any structures. As those engineering details are refined, the project’s more precise scope, cost, footprint, and impacts are evaluated against their effect upon the environment, the neigh- borhood, their effect upon the cost of the project, and the pro- ject’s overall acceptability to the surrounding community. Many such details are not known at the earlier planning level. The methodology lends itself to incorporation into the project development process (Figure 28). Once a site has been identified for improvement in the TIP, a multidisciplinary team could field-review the location for consideration of its feasibility. Any obvious constraints to the project could be taken into consideration and used to determine if the most highly recommended bottleneck strategy appears possible after this initial, cursory investigation. Such initial screening also may be possible by relying on geographic information systems and other inventories if they exist. Reviews of aerial photographs, reviews of utility plans, right-of-way maps, and other information sources could provide insight into the fea- sibility of a proposed solution. The engineering details as to precise length of turning lanes, exact radii, elevation of structures, location of drainage facil- 74 ities, and other details will then clarify the impacts upon adja- cent property and utilities. If these more exact details then reveal impacts upon property or utilities that invalidate proj- ect costs or feasibility assumptions, then the rank-order list of strategies for that location can be revisited. If the leading option is not possible, the second most promising strategy from the methodology could be pursued. For instance, at an intersection if a turn lane or radius improvement is not pos- sible, then signal timing improvements could be the next-best option. Likewise, the element of time could be applied to the solution. If the turning lane or turning radius solution has to be deferred until it can be afforded, the signal-timing solution could be implemented in the short term. In these various ways, the methodology can be incorpo- rated into the long-range planning process, the shorter-term TIP development process, or the specific project development process. The goal is to encapsulate the methodology in a stand- alone software application that can be used at different stages of the transportation planning and project development Bottleneck Suggested Methodology Applied Site Review OK Yes No Public Involvement Environmental Review Confirm Feasibility Alternative Accepted Project Advances Yes No Figure 28. Integration into project- development process.

process as described above, as well by private-sector decision makers. 6.6 Evaluation of Beta Version of Tool The initial version of the prototype tool was subjected to beta testing by representatives of all modal stakeholders. Samples of beta testers were drawn from stakeholder repre- sentatives who were interviewed and/or responded to the sur- vey as part of the data collection tasks under this project. Even though the beta testers were randomly selected, the sample is not considered to be statistically representative of the popu- lations of the various segments of stakeholders. The objective of the beta test was to obtain feedback from potential users on the usefulness, user friendliness, and weaknesses of the tool and on aspects that needed improvement. The software tool, user guide, and evaluation form were delivered to potential beta testers by email. Beta testers were asked to install and run the software tool and provide feedback using the evaluation form. To avoid any biases, beta testers were not given any spe- cific guidance regarding the types of scenarios to run. A blank evaluation form is included in Appendix E of this report. The recommendations from the beta testing effort were imple- mented in revising the tool. The results of the beta testing indicated that the tool is easy to use with or without a user guide, and easy to navigate. The pro- gram is perceived to be easy, direct, and the sequence logical. It was also noted that the interface is clear and easy to understand. The User Guide for the tool is also noted to be clear, easy to fol- low, and straight to the point. However, installing the program from the email attachments or from CD is generally not very easy. This is not because of the program per se but because of firewalls and PC security restrictions within the organizations. The general consensus was that the tool provides a struc- tured handy format and configuration for accessing informa- tion on proven low-cost improvements to address freight mobility constraints. As standalone software, information con- tained in the database is static and cannot be easily updated. A web-based approach with the functionality for updates to the information is recommended to not only facilitate updates and render the database dynamic but also to overcome installation problems due to the cyber security firewalls implemented by the IT departments of some agencies that prohibit installation of unauthorized software. Above all, a web-based approach is believed to enhance the utility and usefulness of the tool. 75

Next: Chapter 7 - Catalog of Improvements »
Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) Report 7: Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints explores standardized descriptions of the dimensions of the freight transportation system, identifies freight mobility constraints in a multimodal context, highlights criteria for low-cost and quickly implementable improvements to address the constraints, and includes a software tool to help decision makers in evaluating constraints and selecting appropriate improvements.

The software tool is available for download in a .zip format. A user guide for the software is also available for download.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!