HLSS603Wk8
NAVAL
POSTGRADUATE
SCHOOL
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
THESIS
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
CLARIFYING RESILIENCE IN THE
CONTEXT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
by
Jerry T. Monier, Jr.
March 2013
Thesis Advisor: Christopher Bellavita
Second Reader: Philip J. Palin
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
i
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA
22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)
2. REPORT DATE March 2013
3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Master’s Thesis
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
CLARIFYING RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 5. FUNDING NUMBERS
6. AUTHOR(S) Jerry T. Monier, Jr.
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
Naval Postgraduate School
Monterey, CA 93943-5000
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER
9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
N/A 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER
11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy
or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. IRB Protocol number ____N/A____.
12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE A
13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words)
The term resilience is frequently used in the context of homeland security. The definition continues to emerge within
the evolving homeland security enterprise. The purpose of this thesis is to clarify the concept of resilience in the
context of homeland security. Existing homeland security polices of the federal government of the United States were
synthesized with resilience-based research obtained from various sciences. The synthesis of research and policy
concluded that resilience is a process of adaptability influenced by complexity, interaction, and experience. In the
homeland security context, resilience is a continual process of adaptation based upon a variety of man made, natural,
and economic adversities. Resilience is a vision of homeland security rather than a policy of the enterprise. The
homeland security practitioner’s understanding of resilience is influenced through the clarification, introduction, and
application of the concept. Developing a clear understanding of resilience is accomplished through the development
of a resilience narrative for the enterprise, the introduction of the concept into new and existing training programs of
the homeland security enterprise, and the application of the concept as an approach of the enterprise. The exploration
of the homeland security enterprise at the academic and practitioner level requires a directional heading. The concept
of resilience recommended by this thesis establishes a directional heading for the homeland security practitioner.
14. SUBJECT TERMS Resilience, Complexity, Homeland Security, Whole Community, Adaptation,
Emergency Management, Disaster Recovery, Grants, Training, Complex Adaptive Systems of
Systems, Psychological Resilience
15. NUMBER OF
PAGES 113
16. PRICE CODE
17. SECURITY
CLASSIFICATION OF
REPORT Unclassified
18. SECURITY
CLASSIFICATION OF THIS
PAGE
Unclassified
19. SECURITY
CLASSIFICATION OF
ABSTRACT
Unclassified
20. LIMITATION OF
ABSTRACT
UU
NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18
ii
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
iii
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
CLARIFYING RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Jerry T. Monier, Jr. Preparedness Section Chief, Louisiana-Governor’s Office of Homeland
Security and Emergency Preparedness, Baton Rouge, Louisiana B.S., University of Phoenix, 2010
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS IN SECURITY STUDIES (HOMELAND SECURITY AND DEFENSE)
from the
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL March 2013
Author: Jerry Monier
Approved by: Christopher Bellavita Thesis Advisor
Philip J. Palin Second Reader
Harold A. Trinkunas, PhD Chair, Department of National Security Affairs
iv
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
v
ABSTRACT
The term resilience is frequently used in the context of homeland security. The definition
continues to emerge within the evolving homeland security enterprise. The purpose of
this thesis is to clarify the concept of resilience in the context of homeland security.
Existing homeland security polices of the federal government of the United States were
synthesized with resilience-based research obtained from various sciences. The synthesis
of research and policy concluded that resilience is a process of adaptability influenced by
complexity, interaction, and experience. In the homeland security context, resilience is a
continual process of adaptation based upon a variety of man made, natural, and economic
adversities. Resilience is a vision of homeland security rather than a policy of the
enterprise. The homeland security practitioner’s understanding of resilience is influenced
through the clarification, introduction, and application of the concept. Developing a clear
understanding of resilience is accomplished through the development of a resilience
narrative for the enterprise, the introduction of the concept into new and existing training
programs of the homeland security enterprise, and the application of the concept as an
approach of the enterprise. The exploration of the homeland security enterprise at the
academic and practitioner level requires a directional heading. The concept of resilience
recommended by this thesis establishes a directional heading for the homeland security
practitioner.
vi
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PERSPECTIVES ON RESILIENCE .........................................................................1 A. A PROBLEM AREA OF RESILIENCE .......................................................2 B. RESILIENCE IS…? ........................................................................................2 C. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT RESILIENCE ................................2 D. METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................2
1. Determination of Appropriate Resources ..........................................4 2. Evaluation Criteria ..............................................................................5
E. THE RESEARCH JOURNEY........................................................................5
II. A MACRO PERSPECTIVE OF RESILIENCE .......................................................7 A. RESILIENCE EXISTS ....................................................................................7 B. THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT TOWARDS
RESILIENCE ...................................................................................................9 C. MULTIPLE APPROACHES TO RESILIENCE .......................................13 D. THOUGHTS ON MEASURING RESILIENCE ........................................14 E. RESILIENCE REQUIRES ADAPTABILITY ...........................................14 F. NAVIGATING THROUGH COMPLEXITY .............................................15 G. A COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE ON RESILIENCE..............................16 H. THE STRATEGIC VALUE OF RESILIENCE .........................................18 I. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS ON RESILIENCE .............................19
III. FEDERAL INITIATIVES AS THE ROUX OF POLICY .....................................21 A. ESTABLISHING A BASE ............................................................................21 B. STEP 1: THE NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY (NSS) ...................22 C. STEP 2: THE QUADRENNIAL HOMELAND SECURITY REVIEW
(QHSR)............................................................................................................25 1. The Vision for Homeland Security ...................................................25 2. Homeland Security Enterprise .........................................................25 3. The Value of the QHSR .....................................................................26 4. Mission Area 5: Ensuring Resilience to Disasters ...........................27
D. STEP 3: PRESIDENTIAL POLICY DIRECTIVE 8 (PPD-8) ..................30 E. STEP 4: THE NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS GOAL (NPG) .................31 F. STEP 5: THREAT HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION AND RISK
ASSESSMENTS (THIRA) ............................................................................34 G. STEP 6: MEASURING PREPAREDNESS AND RESILIENCE .............35
1. Measuring Resilience .........................................................................37 H. HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE-
COMMUNITY RESILIENCE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS ...............................................................................39
I. CHAPTER SUMMARY ................................................................................41
IV. INFLUENCES ON RESILIENCE ...........................................................................43 A. LOOKING THROUGH A LENS TO SEE THE FUTURE-FEMA’S
STRATEGIC FORESIGHT INITIATIVE .................................................44
viii
1. The Future Through the Dimensions of STEEP .............................45 2. A Link Between the SFI and the QHSR ..........................................47 3. Resilience Might Be Looking Through a Telescope and a
Microscope ..........................................................................................48 B. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMPLEXITY AND
RESILIENCE .................................................................................................48 C. RESILIENCE THROUGH THE LENS OF COMPLEX ADAPTIVE
SYSTEMS OF SYSTEMS .............................................................................49 D. RESILIENCE IS INFLUENCED BY ADAPTATION ..............................50
1. Resilience is a Process of Adaptation ...............................................51 2. Resilience Is Influenced by Interaction ............................................52
E. RESILIENCE IS INFLUENCED BY THE HISTORY AND “STEELING” OF THE UNITED STATES ................................................53
F. CHAPTER SUMMARY ................................................................................55
V. APPLYING RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HOMELAND SECURITY .................................................................................................................57 A. OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH .....................................................................57 B. WHAT IS RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY? ...................................................................................................59 1. Resilience Is a Process of Adaptability Based on a Synthesis of
Complexity, Interaction and Experience .........................................59 2. Resilience Is a Process of Adaptability.............................................59 3. Resilience Is a Complex Adaptive System of Systems (CASoS) ....60 4. Resilience Is Experienced and Demonstrated in Different Ways ..60 5. Resilience Is a Vision of the Homeland Security Enterprise..........61 6. Evaluating the Conclusion ................................................................61
C. OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ......................................63 D. THE SKETCH OF RESILIENCE ...............................................................64 E. INTRODUCING RESILIENCE THROUGH A TRANSFER OF
ACADEMIC RESEARCH TO PRACTITIONER KNOWLEDGE .........66 F. POTENTIAL MODELS OF RESILIENCE BASED COURSES FOR
THE PRACTITIONER .................................................................................69 1. Resilience 101-Online Introduction to Resilience ...........................70
a. Presidential Policy Directive 8 The National Security Strategy ....................................................................................71
b. Threats Hazards Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) ..................................................................................71
c. Core Capabilities .....................................................................71 d. The Resilience Narrative of the Homeland Security
Enterprise ................................................................................71 2. Incorporation of Resilience Training into Existing Courses .........72 3. Integrated Resilience Training Course ............................................73
G. CONNECTING THE DOTS .........................................................................75 H. APPLICATION TO THE HOMELAND SECURITY ENTERPRISE ....76
LIST OF REFERENCES ......................................................................................................79
ix
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................83
INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST .........................................................................................87
x
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
xi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Ball’s Pragmatic Evaluation Criteria .................................................................4 Table 2. Goals and Objectives of Mission Area 5 .........................................................28 Table 3. Key Strategic Outcomes of the QHSR.............................................................29 Table 4. Core Capabilities identified by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency .............................................................................................................33 Table 5. Relevant Recommendations from the CRTF ...................................................40 Table 6. Emergency Management Drivers Identified in the Strategic Foresight
Initiative ...........................................................................................................46 Table 7. Needs Identified by the Strategic Foresight Initiative .....................................47 Table 8. Academic to Practitioner Cross Walk ..............................................................68 Table 9. Sroufe’s Implications of Resilience .................................................................69
xii
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
xiii
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CDC United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CPG Comprehensive Preparedness Guide CRTF Community Resilience Task Force DHHS United States Department of Health and Human Services DHS United States Department of Homeland Security DOT United States Department of Transportation EMI Emergency Management Institute FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GAO Government Accountability Office GOHSEP Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness IAEM International Association of Emergency Managers ICS Incident Command System IRTC Integrated Resilience Training Course NPG National Preparedness Goal NSS National Security Strategy PPD-8 Presidential Policy Directive-8 QHSR Quadrennial Homeland Security Review SFI Strategic Foresight Initiative SPR State Preparedness Report THIRA Threat, Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment UASI Urban Area Security Initiative U.S. United States WPA Works Progress Administration
xiv
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
xv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RESILIENCE IS A PROCESS OF ADAPTABILITY BASED ON A SYNTHESIS OF COMPLEXITY, INTERACTION AND EXPERIENCE
Many outside of Louisiana would consider that gumbo is simply a roux-based
dish served with rice. However, when gumbo is discussed in the narrower context of a
specific region of Louisiana, gumbo is not just gumbo. In the narrower context, gumbo is
influenced by a synthesis of cultural identity, resources, and experiences. The process
used to create this synthesis varies from region to region and is influenced by the
experiences and interactions of the cook. Resilience in the context of homeland security
is similar to a gumbo.
Resilience exists and is viewed from the perspective of a dynamic and continual
process of adaptation rather than a specific and singular event.1 This determination is
based on the differences in which citizens respond to the influences of an adverse
condition. Those influences vary greatly and include known and unknown systems.
Although foresight is important to clarifying resilience in the context of the homeland
security enterprise, retrospection plays a critical role in understanding the interactions and
experiences of an individual, community, state, and nation.
During smaller disasters, single communities are impacted by catastrophic events.
While in larger events, such as Hurricane Katrina and the Mississippi River Flood of
1927, disasters impact a large geographic area encompassing multiple communities and
states.2 Regardless of the scope of the disaster, each event influences the resilience of
individuals, communities, and the nation. Collectively, these events have influenced
national resilience over the life span of the American enterprise.
1 Michael Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice (New York,
NY: Verlag: Springer, 2011), 463. 2 Stephen E. Flynn and Council on Foreign Relations, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient
Nation, 1st ed. (New York: Random House: in cooperation with the Council on Foreign Relations, 2007), 240.
xvi
CLARIFYING RESILIENCE IN THE HOMELAND SECURITY CONTEXT
Clarifying resilience requires an understanding of the concept in the context of the
homeland security enterprise. Presently, the application of resilience in the context of
homeland security is based upon a broad definition. Bridging the gap between the “what
is” and the “how to” of resilience requires a clear definition of the concept. Clarifying
resilience is necessary to develop recommendations to address the “how to” of resilience
in the homeland security enterprise. The introduction and application of the concept to
the practitioner is based on a specific definition. Based upon the findings of this research,
the following definition is offered as a means of clarifying the concept of resilience in the
context of homeland security.
Resilience is a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United States that is approached through a process of adaptability based on the complexities, interaction, and experiences of an individual, a community, and a nation.
RESILIENCE IS A VISION OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY ENTERPRISE
The concept of resilience establishes a vision for the homeland security enterprise
of the United States. Achieving this vision requires a homeland security approach to
strengthen the adaptive capacities of government and the public. Sustaining resilience
requires the development of programs and initiatives promoting the enhancement of
adaptive capacities. The enhancement of adaptive capacities of local and state
governments influences the resilience of individuals and communities. Accomplishing
this task requires the enterprise to recognize the importance of foresight, adaptation,
interaction, and experience. Introducing the concept of resilience as a vision of homeland
security is accomplished by applying the resilience narrative and the development of
training for the homeland security practitioner.
THE SKETCH OF RESILIENCE
A sketch is used to describe an object or issue. The sketch is either a drawing or
text and allows for future modifications. For purposes of this thesis, the sketch of
resilience is a narrative. The narrative clarifies the concept of resilience in the context of
homeland security, and offers a frame of reference for the development of future
xvii
homeland security policies. The narrative is not final; future research and the application
of the recommendations of this thesis will influence modifications to the product.
The Resilience Narrative
The history of the United States of America contains numerous examples of citizens and communities demonstrating resilience. Throughout the history of this nation, resilience has existed as a continual process of adaptation influenced by a variety of man made, natural, and economic adversities. These adversities have ranged from isolated events to global conflict. Resilience has and continues to exist in this nation.
Resilience is a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United States that consists of a process of adaptation based upon a synthesis of complexity and experience. The concept of adaptation based upon complexity and experience is not new and has been demonstrated from the first explorer to set foot upon the soils of America through the most recent newborn child born in this nation. Resilience is a foundational concept of the homeland security enterprise.
The concept of national resilience is a goal of the homeland security enterprise of the United States. Prior to the establishment of the homeland security enterprise, resilience described the purpose of traditional emergency management mitigation projects. In the early years of the homeland security enterprise, the term resilience was used in the context of critical infrastructure protection. Critical infrastructure systems were to be designed or enhanced to withstand significant pressures and rebound from stress. In this context, resilience was observed more from an engineering perspective rather than a social perspective. The need to analyze physical systems for vulnerabilities gave rise to studies in self- organized criticality and preparing for low probability-high consequence events commonly referred to as a Black Swan.3 The concept of resilience adds purpose to the evolving enterprise known as homeland security.
Understanding resilience requires a microscopic view of today, and a telescopic view of the future. Existing homeland security policies of the United States offer a high-level view of resilience. Local and state governments of the United States have the ability to influence resilience through strengthening their capabilities to adapt to adversity. Strengthening this ability depends on the interactions of government, the private sector, communities and the citizen. This perspective combined
3 Taleb, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, 366.
xviii
with a retrospective view of past adversities strengthens the foresight capability of the community. Resilience adds to the development of a vision of the homeland security enterprise.
A significant shift in homeland security policy has occurred since the issuance of the National Security Strategy and the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review. These two documents elevated the use of the term resilience to a goal of the homeland security enterprise. Thus, propelling the term into the evolving narrative of the enterprise. The emphasis placed on resilience within the enterprise shifted from a context of critical infrastructure to a broader context of resilience of the whole. The concept of resilience contributes to the evolution of the homeland security enterprise.
Resilience has become a “buzz word” of the enterprise. The frequency of the use of the term resilience continues to increase and has migrated from the vernacular of public policy to the vocabulary of the general populace. Resilience is not only used to describe the response and recovery of communities impacted by adversity, but is also used to describe sporting teams who come from behind to win a game. Resilience is about overcoming adversity.
Resilience is an approach to navigating through the complexities of the homeland security enterprise of the United States. Foresight, adaptability, interaction and experience will influence the practitioner’s ability to navigate through the enterprise. The practitioner should posses the ability to identify future threats and hazards to their jurisdiction. The practitioner should possess the ability to critically think through and adapt to emerging or active threats to their jurisdiction. The ability to operate in this environment will require the practitioner to consider the influences of their interactions within the jurisdiction and their prior experiences. Homeland security is no longer just about prevention and response. Homeland security has evolved into an approach to a resilient and secure nation influenced by adaptation, complexity, interaction, and experience.
INTRODUCING RESILIENCE IN THE HOMELAND SECURITY CONTEXT TO THE PRACTITIONER
Clarifying resilience from an academic perspective is only one part to developing
an understanding of resilience in the context of homeland security. Presently, the majority
of information regarding the application of resilience in the homeland security context
resides in the academic realm of the enterprise. Strengthening resilience requires that
homeland security practitioners and academics clearly understand the concept. The
Strategic Foresight Initiative (SFI) introduces the term foresight capability as a means of
xix
forecasting the future. Psychology-based research suggests that the adaptive capacity of
the individual influences resilience. This thesis concludes that resilience be viewed as a
complex adaptive system of systems. Therefore, adaptation provides a means to navigate
through the complexities of resilience and the homeland security enterprise. However, the
evolving homeland security narrative and existing training have yet to include these
terms.
POTENTIAL MODELS OF RESILIENCE BASED COURSES FOR THE PRACTITIONER
A review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Emergency
Management Institute’s Catalog of Training Programs determined that minimal resilience
based training exists for the homeland security practitioner. A possible reason is a lack of
clarity in understanding the role of resilience within the homeland security context.
Several options exist to increase the resilience knowledge base of the homeland security
practitioner. The first option is the development of an online course that introduces and
provides clarity to understanding resilience. The second option is the incorporation of a
resilience module into existing training programs sponsored by FEMA and training
partners, such as the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium. The third option is the
development of an on-site training program available to local jurisdictions. The
introduction of this module into existing courses aids in the development of a resilience
approach for the jurisdiction’s homeland security program. The proposed series of
resilience training is designed to expand the knowledge base of the practitioner.
Resilience 101 is proposed as an introductory course for the individual. The inclusion of
a resilience module into existing homeland security training programs broadens the
practitioner’s knowledge base from a basic level to a practitioner level. The multi-day
course of instruction expands the knowledge base from the practitioner level to a
community level.
xx
RESILIENCE IS A WAY TO CONNECT THE DOTS OF THE HOMELAND SECURITY ENTERPRISE
The homeland security enterprise of the United States is best described as a
“connect the dots” sheet of a child’s activity book. For purposes of this analogy, each
system of the enterprise is represented by a dot on the page. The following examples are
a representative sample of potential dots on the homeland security “activity page.” The
dots represent food defense, cyber security, biological terrorism, chemical terrorism,
radiological terrorism, natural disasters, PPD-8, the National Preparedness Goal, the
National Infrastructure Protection Plan, FEMA EMI, public health preparedness grants,
homeland security preparedness grants, emergency management preparedness grants,
Urban Area Security Initiatives, hazard mitigation grants, hazard mitigation planning,
disaster assistance, infrastructure protection, security clearances, agro terrorism,
recovery, THIRA, state government, local government, tribal authorities, agencies of the
federal government, the community, and the State Preparedness Report. Resilience is
mentioned in many of these activities. Current conversations on resilience in each of
these activities only relates to the specific topic. Connecting the dots of resilience
produces a drawn sketch bringing final focus to the concept of resilience in the context of
homeland security.
APPLYING THIS CONCEPT OF RESILIENCE TO THE HOMELAND SECURITY ENTERPRISE
Resilience is a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United States
approached through a process of adaptability based on a synthesis of complexity,
interaction, and experience. The approach involves all domains and stakeholders of the
enterprise. Clarifying resilience in this context provides the opportunity to focus the
homeland security enterprise of the United States.
This research concludes with a final thought on the concept of resilience in the
context of homeland security. Resilience is vision of the enterprise. The clarification,
introduction, and application of the proposed definition of resilience offer the homeland
security practitioner a way to navigate and explore the complexities of the homeland
security enterprise.
xxi
The need to explore has driven technological advancements in navigational aids
for centuries. These advancements have benefited the exploration of the New World by
European explorers, the exploration of the sea, and the exploration of space.
Improvements to navigational aids build upon the original concepts of the compass. The
exploration of the homeland security enterprise at the academic and practitioner level
requires a directional heading. The concept of resilience recommended by this thesis
establishes a directional heading for the homeland security practitioner.
xxii
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
xxiii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Let me first thank my wife Carrie. This journey could not have happened without
her support and wisdom. To my daughters, Mary-Katherine and Elizabeth, this journey
has been for you. Both of you have encouraged and strengthened my resolve over the past
years and opened my eyes to the value of simplicity. Finally, to my parents and in-laws,
thank you for your support over the past years. Every time Carrie and I thought we could
not juggle any more, you stretched out your hand and offered assistance. The completion
of this thesis could not have occurred without the support and love of my family.
I would also like to thank my thesis committee, Chris Bellavita and Phil Palin, for
sharing this journey with me. Your counsel and time have contributed greatly to the
completion of this research and my personal development.
To my work family at the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and
Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP), thank you. Your continued support and acceptance
of my random discussions on this topic have contributed to the success of this research. I
would also like to thank GOHSEP Deputy Director Pat Santos for his support and
encouragement over the past years.
Finally, I would like to thank the citizens of this country who self-organize and
provide assistance to their neighbors during times of crisis. This thesis is dedicated to the
hundreds of medical and non-medical volunteers who supported the Field Hospital
established at Louisiana State University during Hurricane Katrina. The actions taken by
a few during those dark days in Louisiana history have positively influenced not only my
personal resilience, but also the resilience of a community and a people. Thank You.
xxiv
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
1
I. PERSPECTIVES ON RESILIENCE
The intent of this thesis is to explore and clarify the concept of resilience in the
context of homeland security. The desired outcome of this research is the clarification of
resilience and the development of recommendations to enhance the knowledge base of
the homeland security practitioner. As indicated in a Congressional Research Service
report, the evolution of the term “homeland security” creates confusion.4 Although the
term resilience shares similar evolutionary issues with homeland security, differences
exist between the two terms. For decades, existing sciences defined resilience as an
ability to adapt to stress. The concept of resilience was originally introduced in the
engineering sciences. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the concept migrated into the
science of psychology. Since then, the term has migrated into areas of evolving research,
such as emergency management and homeland security.
In the engineering context, resilience is demonstrated by the following example.
The beam exhibits resilience with X amount of pressure placed upon the middle portion
of the beam. In terms common to the science of psychology, resilience is applied in the
following context. The individual demonstrated resilience from an addiction to alcohol.
Differences exist in the application of the term in each example. In the engineering
context, the resilience of the beam is based on an ability to bear the weight of other
structures. While in the psychology example, individuals demonstrate resilience through
their recovery and the development of strategies to prevent or mitigate a relapse.
As the concept of resilience has evolved in the science of psychology, so has the
amount of research available to better define or clarify the function of resilience. The
science of psychology offers insight into determining what resilience might look like in
the homeland security context.
4 U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, Defining Homeland Security: Analysis
and Congressional Considerations, by Shawn Reese, CRS Report R42462 (Washington, DC: Office of Congressional Information and Publishing, January 8, 2013).
2
A. A PROBLEM AREA OF RESILIENCE
The academic requirements of this thesis require the identification of a formal
problem statement, followed by a main research question, and then a series of sub-
questions designed to guide the research, researcher, and reader along a path that will
either validate or refute the original research question. The following information is
offered as a means to satisfy these requirements.
B. RESILIENCE IS…?
The introduction of the term resilience into the mainstream vocabulary of the
homeland security enterprise of the United States (U.S.) has created a desire to determine
what resilience might be within this specific context. This research seeks to clarify the
concept of resilience in the homeland security context through the following question.
What benefits or contributions to the homeland security enterprise will be obtained
through the clarification of resilience?
C. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT RESILIENCE
• How might a sketch of resilience be prepared in the context of the homeland security enterprise?
• What is resilience in a broad non-sector specific context?
• What is resilience in the context of homeland security policies of the United States?
• What might resilience look like or be in the context of the homeland security enterprise?
D. METHODOLOGY
The methodology for this thesis is a modified policy analysis. Ball suggests that
the evaluation of a policy argument through a pragmatic sense is an appropriate method
to analyze public policy proposals.5 The pragmatic approach to evaluating public policy
incorporates feasibility concerns while maintaining the ability to view existing public
policy critically. According to Ball, pragmatism is a middle ground between two forms of
5 William Ball, “A Pragmatic Framework for the Evaluation of Policy Arguments,” Policy Studies
Review 14, no. 1/2 (1995): 3–24.
3
evaluation. The first being an evaluation based on critique and reform. The second being
an evaluation based on a value of preserving existing practices and institutions.6 Research
conducted in support of this thesis reviews existing practices and critiques reforms to the
homeland security enterprise caused by an emerging concept of resilience. In Chapter II,
the methodology is used to learn more about the application of resilience in various
contexts. Chapter III reviews and critiques existing homeland security policies of the
United States and their emphasis on resilience. The exploration of existing resilience-
based practices occurs in Chapter IV.
Ball’s research into the pragmatic evaluation of policy arguments contributes to
this research. He suggests that the context used to build the policy argument is important.
For purposes of this research, the concept of resilience is specific to homeland security.
Ball recommends four broad evaluation criteria be used in examining public argument
and policy (Table 1).7 According to Ball, the policy argument is evaluated for its
contribution to a collaborative effort and the improvement of an existing enterprise.8
Chapter V identifies the contributions and benefits of clarifying the concept of resilience
in the homeland security context.
6 Ball, “A Pragmatic Framework for the Evaluation of Policy Arguments,” 8. 7 Ibid., 17–21. 8 Ibid., 8.
4
Table 1. Ball’s Pragmatic Evaluation Criteria
Criteria Descriptor
Completeness
Does the policy argument address all of the important values contributing or resulting from the policy? What has been excluded from the policy argument and why?
Relevance
Are the policies appropriate within the context of the discussion? Are there good reasons for the policy argument?
Consonance Are there disagreements to the claimed value of the argument?
Coherence Does the policy argument, when evaluated against the prior three criteria, make sense as a whole?
1. Determination of Appropriate Resources
As with any journey, it is essential to stop at various locations to take in the
sights, while other locations are by-passed along the way. In planning a journey,
assumptions and evaluation criteria are established to create a road map to guide the
journey. Determining the research map for this journey is based on the following
assumptions and evaluation criteria.
• Assumption 1: A significant amount of research exists regarding complex adaptive system of systems and the homeland security enterprise of the United States.
• Assumption 2: A significant amount of literature exists that describes resilience in the homeland security context; however, minimal research offers a basic approach to understanding resilience in this context.
• Assumption 3: A significant amount of literature exists regarding the concept of resilience within the domains of social and physical resilience. This existing research may assist in the identification of appropriate models applicable to the homeland security enterprise of the United States. Synthesizing these resources with existing government policies, and professional experiences will aid in the clarification of resilience within the context of homeland security.
5
Based on the prior assumptions, the following criteria were used to evaluate research
materials.
2. Evaluation Criteria
• Does the resource add clarity to understanding the concept of resilience?
• Can information obtained from the reference be synthesized with an existing understanding of emergency management and homeland security to frame the narrative of resilience within the homeland security context?
• Do the materials contribute to clarifying the role of resilience in the context of homeland security?
E. THE RESEARCH JOURNEY
The purpose of this research is to explore and identify what the concept of
resilience might be in the context of the homeland security enterprise of the U.S. The first
step in this process determines how resilience might be applied in a broad and non-sector
specific context. The second step explores what resilience might be in the context of
existing homeland security policies of the U.S. government. The third step identifies
factors that influence resilience in the context of homeland security.
The concept of resilience within the homeland security context continues to
evolve. Clarifying the concept of resilience focuses the practitioner’s understanding of
the topic. The development of a sketch of resilience adds clarity to the issue. The sketch
of resilience outlines the concept in terms of the homeland security enterprise and begins
to focus the practitioner’s vision of resilience. The sketch is not a final product. Rather,
the sketch serves as a foundation for future modifications.
The U.S. federal government is currently developing the sketch of resilience.
Through various means discussed in Chapter III of this thesis, the federal government has
introduced the concept of resilience to outline the vision of the homeland security
enterprise of the United States. Modifying the sketch of resilience in the homeland
security context is based on a variety of factors, needs, resources, and expectations.
Chapter IV explores factors that contribute to the clarification and enhancement of the
vision of resilience. Chapter V offers options to introduce and socialize the concept of
6
resilience to the homeland security practitioner. The introduction of the resilience sketch
into homeland security training allows the practitioner to understand and apply the
concept within their specific community or profession.
The first step to clarifying resilience in the context of homeland security is to
understand and learn from existing applications of the concept in other contexts. The
following chapter explores the concept of resilience in various contexts. Those contexts
include different agencies of the federal government of the U.S., existing research into
the concept of community resilience, psychology, and the concept of complexity within
the homeland security enterprise. The review of existing literature is the first step towards
adjusting the focus to create a clearer vision of resilience.
7
II. A MACRO PERSPECTIVE OF RESILIENCE
The use of the term resilience is not new. The term is defined in various sciences
and professions to describe a system’s ability to adapt and recover from adversity.
Understanding the concept of resilience is contextual and varies among disciplines.
Multiple approaches to resilience exist, and those depend on the ability of the individual
or community to adapt to adversity in a positive manner. In the broader context,
resilience is a process and not a trait of an individual or community. Measuring resilience
becomes a complicated process of subjectivity.
The concept of national resilience is an important goal of the homeland security
enterprise of the U.S. Prior to the establishment of the homeland security enterprise;
resilience described the outcome of traditional mitigation projects. In the early years of
the homeland security enterprise, resilience was used in the context of protecting
America’s infrastructure. Critical infrastructure systems were designed or enhanced to
withstand significant pressures and rebound from stress. Resilience was observed more
from an engineering perspective rather than a social perspective. The need to analyze
systems for vulnerabilities gave rise to studies in self-organized criticality and preparing
for low probability-high consequence events commonly referred to as a Black Swan.9
A. RESILIENCE EXISTS
The inconsistent use of terminology within the homeland security enterprise
creates challenges for the practitioner. Freed states that the inability to determine one
single definition of terrorism creates a problem of understanding the relationship between
homeland security and anti-terrorism efforts.10 Frequent and inconsistent use of the term
resilience creates a variety of dimensions and contexts that exists inside and out of the
homeland security enterprise. A New York Times article indicated that senior American
officials are beginning to use the adjective resilience as a means of describing continuing
9 Taleb, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, 366. 10 Judson M. Freed and Naval Postgraduate School, Department of National Security Affairs, No
Failure of Imagination (Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School, 2011), 109.
8
threats to American security.11 Officials interviewed for the article describe resilient as
the adversary’s ability to rebound from terrible personnel losses and the capability to
recruit again to execute more vicious attacks.12 The Homeland Security Institute’s
Community Resilience Profiles: Assessment and Evaluation indicates that resilience “has
become a central homeland security construct in recent years, receiving increased
attention from policy makers in a variety of contexts.”13 Rand suggests several areas for
future research to strengthen the evidence base for community resilience. According to
Rand’s research, existing literature provides insight into the factors necessary to build
community resilience.14 However, in Rand’s opinion, existing literature is conceptual or
theoretical in nature. Rand suggests that existing research is based on a retrospective
approach to resilience and does not allow for a comparative analysis of resilience within
the field of health security. An existing challenge posed by the Rand report is defining
resilience further and “prioritizing the critical subcomponents of resilience in the context
of health security.”15
Analysis are needed to identify and test activities that will help communities strengthen their resilience. Given the ongoing issue of limited resources crystallizing these priority activities is the next step to moving toward this National Health Security Strategy resilience goal.16
Rand describes the relationship between resilience and vulnerability as central
concepts to understanding the complex environments created by disasters. As Rand
indicates, existing research has focused on vulnerability. A lack of exploration into
11 Thom Shanker and Eric Schmitt, “How Resilient Is Post-9/11 America?” The New York Times
Sunday Review, sec. The Opinion Pages, September 8, 2012. 12 Ibid. 13 Homeland Security Studies and Affairs Institute, Community Resilience Profiles: Assessment and
Evaluation, 2011. 14 Anita Chandra, Building Community Resilience to Disasters a Way Forward to Enhance National
Health Security (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2011). 15 Ibid., 57. 16 Ibid., 59.
9
resilience has in their words, created a “plethora of definitions that is both a symptom of
confusion and a cause of confusion and ambiguity.”17
Within the context of psychology, Ungar indicates that the term resilience
appeared in the 1980s and was “a metaphor for the ability of individuals to recover from
exposure to chronic and acute stress.”18 During this decade, the use of the term became
more frequent. Clarifying the concept will allow homeland security practitioners and
researchers an opportunity to frame future discussions and research regarding the role of
resilience within the context of homeland security.
B. THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT TOWARD RESILIENCE
The existing context of the federal government’s concept of resilience is
influenced by several policies of the United States government. One policy is Presidential
Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8) that describes resilience as “the ability to adapt to changing
conditions and withstand and rapidly recover from disruption due to emergencies.”19 The
definition of resilience contained in PPD-8 is consistent with other definitions contained
in the National Preparedness Goal and the Whole Community concept released by the
U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). According to PPD 8, national
resilience is achieved by a national preparedness system designed to promote community
resilience.20 The Department of Homeland Security has identified resilience as “the
ability of systems, infrastructures, government, business and citizenry to resist, absorb,
and recover from or adapt to an adverse occurrence that may cause harm, destruction, or
loss of national significance.”21
17 Douglas Paton, Disaster Resilience: Building Capacity to Co-Exist with Natural Hazards and their
Consequences (Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Ltd., 2006), 88. 18 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 13. 19 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Presidential
Policy Directive 8,” March 30, 2011, http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/laws/gc_1215444247124.shtm. 20 Ibid. 21 Homeland Security Studies and Affairs Institute, Community Resilience Profiles: Assessment and
Evaluation, footnote 12.
10
Within the federal government of the U.S., various examples and definitions of
resilience exist. The existence of multiple variations creates a lack of clarity among
practitioners. Financial regulators of the U.S. government defined the resilience of the
U.S. financial system as the rapid recovery and resumption of the clearing and settlement
activities that support critical financial markets.22 The Interagency Climate Change
Adaptation Task Force defined resilience as “A capability to anticipate, prepare for,
respond to, and recover from significant multi-hazard threats with minimum damage to
social well-being, the economy, and the environment.”23 The United States Department
of Transportation (DOT) defines resilience in the context of recovery. The DOT suggests
that recovery include the rebuilding of networks to a “superior standard that is more
resilient against future disasters.”24 DOT offers a process for achieving resilience within
the transportation sector. Resilience should include methods to construct stronger
infrastructure, establish redundancies within the transportation network, and strengthen
links between transportation nodes and communities. The DOT document provides an
outcome or image of resilience. “Resiliency in the recovery phase should result in a
network that has a vibrant ability to absorb damage from a future disaster and thereby
bounce back rapidly following the incident.”25 Within the operational context of
homeland security, resilience is defined as a community that has the capabilities “to
maintain its functions and structures in the face of internal and external change and to
degrade gracefully when it must.”26
The Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR) provides goals to ensuring
resilience to disasters. Sub goals include the mitigation of hazards, enhancing
22 “SEC Issues Report on Efforts of Private Sector to Implement Interagency Paper on Sound Practices
to Strengthen Resilience of U.S. Financial System,” US Fed News Service, Including US State News, April 27, 2006.
23 United States, Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, Federal Actions for a Climate Resilient Nation (Washington, DC: Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, 2011), 25, C.
24 United States and Dept. of Transportation, Recovering from Disasters: The National Transportation Recovery Strategy (Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 2009), 3.
25 Ibid. 26 President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.), Community Resilience Task Force,
Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations (Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Advisory Council, 2011), 59.
11
preparedness, ensuring effective emergency response, and developing the ability to
recover rapidly.27 QHSR expands the view of emergency management and the homeland
security enterprise to include a balanced approach to response, recovery, mitigation, and
preparedness. Accomplishing this goal requires the establishment of priorities based on a
better understanding of risk and informed decision-making.28
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report on the
effectiveness of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) efforts to enhance
the resilience of America’s critical infrastructure. The GAO report states that since 2006,
organizations of the federal government identified resilience as important. The GAO
suggests that resilience influences an evolution in traditional emergency management
concepts, such as recovery, reconstitution, and continuity of operations.29 The GAO
report states that the DHS’s QHSR placed an emphasis on resilience by categorizing the
concept as one of three essential factors in a comprehensive approach to homeland
security.30 The QHSR defines resilience in the context of “fostering individual,
community, and system robustness, adaptability, and capacity for rapid recovery.”31
The QHSR suggests that the concept of building national resilience is not new and
that the civil defense era of the United States offers examples of actions spiriting debate
in the interest of national resilience.32 The concept of Whole Community is an initiative
being promoted by FEMA. Whole Community is based on the premise that government
has a significant role in disaster response; however, a government centric response will
not be enough to meet all of the needs of a community created by a disaster.33 The Whole
Community concept indicates that resilience is achieved by increasing individual
27 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review by David C.
Maurer, (GAO-11-153R), Washington, DC: GPO, 2010, 63. 28 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, 63. 29 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Critical Infrastructure Protection by Stephen L. Caldwell,
(GAO-10-772), Washington, DC: GPO, 2010, 33. 30 Ibid. 31 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, 63. 32 Ibid. 33 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Whole
Community,” (n.d.), http://www.fema.gov/about/wholecommunity.shtm.
12
preparedness and the use of communities as a force multiplier to plan, respond, and
recover from a disaster.34 The application of the Whole Community concept to the
homeland security practitioner requires a clear definition of resilience. The QHSR
describes the images of American resilience created in the aftermath of 9/11. According
to the QHSR, these images “portrayed a Nation determined to do whatever it might take
to recover from this disaster and to prevent such attacks from occurring again.”35
Although the QHSR offers an image of national resilience, there are differences in the
image and timing of resilience demonstrated by each community impacted by 9/11.
The QHSR suggests that the U.S. is a resilient nation.36 However, a murky
understanding of resilience’s role within the enterprise challenges the ability of the
homeland security practitioner to apply the concept. QHSR suggests that the urgency and
frequency of use of the term resilience within the homeland security enterprise is caused
by the “rapid evolution of national security threats and the arrival of the information
age.”37 The individual or community’s view of resilience is influenced through an
understanding of how residents of the United States have responded to the adversities of
disaster. Flynn identifies several significant disasters in the history of the United States,
such as the Chicago fire of 1871, the Boston Fire of 1872, the San Francisco earthquake
of 1906, and Mississippi River flood of 1927.38 The resilience of communities is
demonstrated in each instance by the ability of citizens and communities to absorb, adapt,
and recover from these adversities. Realizing the similarities of resilient communities
impacted by adversity clarifies the concept of resilience to the homeland security
practitioner. Although the prior examples offer models of resilience, their existence does
not alter the hypothesis that a resilient community must be challenged by adversity.
Understanding resilience in the broader context of policies of the U.S. is
important to clarifying the resilience vision of the practitioner. This section of the
34 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Whole Community.”
35 United States. Government Accountability Office, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, 1. 36 Ibid., 63. 37 Ibid., 16. 38 Flynn and Council on Foreign Relations, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation, 240.
13
literature review introduced a macro perspective of resilience in the context of existing
policies of the U.S. government. Chapter III analyzes specific homeland security related
policies and their influence upon the concept of resilience within the enterprise.
C. MULTIPLE APPROACHES TO RESILIENCE
Understanding resilience requires emergency management and homeland security
practitioners to explore the meaning of resilience within the homeland security enterprise.
Flynn proposes that national resilience requires risk and vulnerability reduction in
conjunction with increases to the nation’s capacity to bounce back swiftly from man
made or natural disasters.39 Flynn suggests that reductions to risk and vulnerability,
combined with the development of further capacity, cannot be achieved through a
singular approach to homeland security and emergency management. The development
of a multi-disciplinary view in these areas influences the resilience of the United States.
Palin suggests that resilience is the ability to absorb, buffer, self organize, and
adapt to change.40 Haimes, Crowther, and Horowitz explain resilience as a process
supported by a robust and redundant system.41 Coafee, Wood, and Rogers provide a
multi-disciplinary view to resilience.42 The view taken by Coafee et al. supports the
concept that resilience is not achieved through the efforts of a single system; rather
viewing the concept from multiple perspectives clarifies the concept of resilience.
Resilience exists in various contexts. Clarifying the contributions and benefits of
resilience to the homeland security enterprise focuses the homeland security
practitioner’s vision of the concept. Establishing a clearer focus of resilience requires a
synthesis of existing information and the development of a sketch. This synthesis begins
in Chapter IV.
39 Flynn and Council on Foreign Relations, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation, 240. 40 Philip J. Palin, “Resilience: The Grand Strategy,” Homeland Security Affairs 6, no. 1 (January
2010), http://www.hsaj.org/?article=6.1.2. 41 Yacov Y. Haimes, Kenneth Crowther, and Barry M. Horowitz, “Homeland Security Preparedness:
Balancing Protection with Resilience in Emergent Systems,” Systems Engineering 11, no. 4 (2008): 287– 308.
42 Jon Coafee, David Murakami Wood, and Peter Rogers, The Everyday Resilience of the City (United Kinkdom: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 1.
14
D. THOUGHTS ON MEASURING RESILIENCE
Ungar offers insight into the measurement of resilience by suggesting that in most
instances, metrics used to measure resilience in the field of psychology are developed
with minimal regard for the traditional and cultural coping strategies existing at the
individual and community level.43 The complexity of measuring resilience at different
levels within an environment or multiple environments is a challenge to the homeland
security practitioner. Ungar proposes that a broader understanding of multiple ecologies
assists in developing interpretive models to navigate through adverse environments.44
Existing research conducted within the realm of psychological and social sciences
indicates that resilience is a complex interactive process influenced by exposure to risk.
Rutter indicates that “resilience is a process and not a trait; moreover it operates through
out the lifespan before, during and after adverse conditions.”45
Lipsitt and Demik define resilience as a “constellation of risk exposure and the
manifestation of effective functioning in the face of risk.”46 The research was conducted
in the field of psychology and suggests that the exploration of resilience move away from
the concepts of understanding and defining risk. A shift from defining risk and
understanding the individual’s process to achieve a level of functional resilience would
be of greater benefit.47
E. RESILIENCE REQUIRES ADAPTABILITY
Luthar, Cicchetti, and Becker suggest that resilience is a dynamic process
encompassing positive adaption within the context of significant adversity. The
suggestion is based on two conditions. Those conditions require an exposure to a
significant threat or adversity, and the achievement of positive adaptation despite major
43 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 15. 44 Ibid. 45 Ibid., 40. 46 Ibid., 143. 47 Ibid., 140.
15
assaults on the developmental process.48 The authors provide an in-depth historical
analysis of resilience as it applies to the field of childhood development. The research
process used in the development of this historical narrative parallels similar questions
posed by the homeland security practitioner. These perspectives clarify the concept of
resilience within the context of homeland security.
Within the field of childhood development, Luthar et al. conducted significant
research into the function of resilience. The introduction and application of the term
resilience within the field of childhood development created similar problems faced today
within the homeland security enterprise. Luthar’s research offers insight into the ongoing
discussion regarding the function and role of resilience within the homeland security
enterprise. The concept of resilience within this area of research applies to the treatment
and recovery of children impacted by adversity. Luthar et al. believe that resilience is a
function of responding to an adverse condition and adapting to the event.49 Resilience
differs between individual patients. Patients will recover at their own pace. Recovery is
manipulated by the guidance and treatment provided by the clinician; however, achieving
a resilient state depends on the individual.50 This is a significant contribution to the on
going discussion of resilience in the context of homeland security. Within Luthar’s
research, several factors contribute to the resilient outcome of the individual.51 The
suggestions provided by Luthar et al. are based on actions and conditions in which the
individual may recover, and therefore, become resilient.52 Luthar et al. suggests that
resilience may actually be dependent upon multiple systems.
F. NAVIGATING THROUGH COMPLEXITY
Madia’s research into the role of flexibility within the complex environment of
the homeland security enterprise serves as a starting point to define the operational role of
48 Suniya S. Luthar, Dante Cicchetti, and Bronwyn Becker, “The Construct of Resilience: A Critical
Evaluation and Guidelines for Future Work,” Child Development 71, no. 3 (2000): 543–562. 49 Ibid. 50 Ibid. 51 Ibid. 52 Ibid.
16
resilience through a concept of adaptive capacity.53 The strategic value of Madia’s
research is the assertion that the homeland security enterprise is a complex adaptive
system of systems. Madia recommends ways to enhance the organic ability of the
homeland security organization.54 The ability to operationalize the concept of resilience
as a result of an adaptive capacity is influenced by several strategic factors recommended
as part of Madia’s initial research. The factors recommended by Madia include
flexibility, adaptability, and decentralized decision-making based on a series of
performance controls.55 Madia’s research into complex adaptive systems influences the
ongoing discussions regarding the complexities of resilience as a national preparedness
goal. The first contribution from Madia’s research is the establishment of doctrine to
create a foundation for operating in a complex environment.56 The second contribution is
the development of leaders who are agile, adaptable, flexible, and highly competent.57
The third contribution is that the training of lower level staffs will decentralize decision
making during complex events.58
G. A COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE ON RESILIENCE
Rather than define resilience, the Rand Corporation defined the term “community
resilience.”
Community resilience entails the ongoing and developing capacity of the community to account for its vulnerabilities and develop capabilities that aid communities in (1) preventing, withstanding, and mitigating the stress of a health incident; (2) recovering in a way that restores the community to a state of self sufficiency and at least the same level of health and social
53 James D. Madia, “Homeland Security Organizations: Design Contingencies in Complex
Environments” (master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, 2011), 105. 54 Ibid. 55 Ibid. 56 Ibid. 57 Ibid., 53. 58 Ibid., 54.
17
functioning after a health incident; and (3) using knowledge from a past response to strengthen the community’s ability to withstand the next health incident.59
Rand offered considerations for future research into the area of resilience.
Although the Rand report relates to resilience within the context of health preparedness,
the recommendations contained within the report identify a need to conduct further
research to clarify the concept of resilience.60 The Rand report identifies areas in which
the evidence base for community resilience may be strengthened by further defining and
prioritizing the critical subcomponents of resilience within the context of health security.
In defining community resilience, the definition of “community” varies. According to the
Rand report, community can be a geographic area or is bounded by membership of a
cultural group.61 An important aspect of this statement is the assertion that a disaster may
create a community of interest.
Community resilience is defined as a “sustained ability of a community to
withstand and recover from adversity.”62 The Rand report implies that “less clarity on the
building process of resilience”63 exists. The report recognizes the importance of
community resilience within the context of health security and suggests that the processes
of leveraging programs and resources to build resilience remain a significant challenge.64
The Rand report influences this thesis by recognizing the existing difficulties related to a
lack of synthesizing “the wealth of information from the current body of literature and
place it within the context of national health security.”65 This contribution of the Rand
report parallels the on going discussions of resilience within the homeland security
enterprise of the United States. Another issue identified by the Rand report is the lack of
clarity in measuring community resilience and the lack of progress towards achieving
59 Chandra, Building Community Resilience to Disasters a Way Forward to Enhance National Health Security, XV.
60 Ibid. 61 Ibid. 62 Ibid. 63 Ibid. 64 Ibid. 65 Ibid.
18
resilience.66 Rand identifies several areas for future research to strengthen the evidence
base of community resilience. According to Rand’s research, existing literature provides
insight into the factors necessary for building community resilience. Rand further
indicates that existing research is based on a retrospective approach to resilience and does
not allow for a comparative analysis of resilience within the field of health security.
H. THE STRATEGIC VALUE OF RESILIENCE
The concept of resilience is a strategic objective to strengthen the adaptive
capacities of a community. Although PPD-8 identifies a goal of national resilience,
existing federal documents do not define a national resilience strategy for the United
States. Research and essays, such as Phil Palin’s Resilience: The Grand Strategy and
Porter and Muckeleby’s, A National Strategic Narrative, identify approaches to
developing a strategy for national resilience. George Kennan’s, Long Telegram
influenced these works. The Long Telegram offered a strategy for containment during
World War II. Captain Wayne Porter and Colonel Mark “Puck” Muckleby suggest a
transition from a national strategy of containment to a more open strategy of
sustainment.67 Palin suggests that resilience provides a buffer to turbulence within a
community.68 A significant element of any strategy for resilience includes the
acknowledgement that adversity will occur and resilient communities will be prepared to
manage the aftermath of such events. Porter and Muckleby suggest that strengthening
community resilience requires a focus on sustaining security and prosperity.69
Numerous resources claim that the use of strategic investments in traditional
government programs, such as education, workforce development, and literacy,
contribute to the resilience of the United States.70 The federal government of the United
66 Chandra, Building Community Resilience to Disasters a Way Forward to Enhance National Health
Security, XV. 67 Wayne Porter and Mark Mukleby, A National Strategic Narrative (Washington, DC: Woodrow
Wilson Center for Scholars, 2011). 68 Palin, Resilience: The Grand Strategy, 20. 69 Ibid. 70 Ibid.
19
States contributes to the concept of national resilience. Both the Quadrennial Homeland
Security Review and Flynn use the example of the Truman and Eisenhower
administrations’ construction of the interstate highway system of the United States as an
example of public works projects designed to support the sustainment of a resilient
nation.71,72 The allocation of funds to construct the interstate system was based on a need
to facilitate the mass evacuation of urban populations, while at the same time maximizing
these routes for military transportation. In the decades following the construction of the
national interstate system, communities have grown around the system.
In response to the adversities of the Great Depression, President Franklin
Roosevelt created the Works Progress Administration (WPA). According to Freed, the
intent of the WPA was the “restoration of the economic strength of the nation, providing
immediate relief for the many displaced persons, and above all preserving the American
way of life.”73 The WPA is one of the first programs of the federal government of the
U.S. to provide direct funds to citizens as well as state and local governments.74 The
WPA example demonstrates a potential long-term degradation of national resilience
associated with the federal government’s role in sustainment activities. Although the
WPA stimulated the U.S. economy and created a strong workforce, Freed suggests that
the role of the federal government preempted state and local governments as the provider
of aid to individuals. The result was the creation of a dependence and reliance upon the
federal government to provide assistance.75
I. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS ON RESILIENCE
Following the release of the National Preparedness Goal and the Quadrennial
Homeland Security Review, resilience appears to be a vision of the homeland security
71 Flynn and Council on Foreign Relations, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation, 240. 72 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A
Strategic Framework for a Secure Homeland (Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2010). 73 Freed and Naval Postgraduate School, Department of National Security Affairs, No Failure of
Imagination, 53. 74 Ibid., 55. 75 Ibid.
20
enterprise. Although recent policies and requirements of the federal government
emphasize resilience, the image of resilience remains foggy and left to the interpretation
and perception of policy makers.
The sciences of engineering and psychology have used the term resilience for
many years. Although these sciences have applied the term, they continue to struggle
with defining the term within their specific context. A significant amount of literature
exists from both sciences. Research based in these fields of study identifies options to
clarifying resilience. Clarifying resilience requires an understanding of today and
tomorrow. Although FEMA’s Strategic Foresight Initiative (SFI) offers a futuristic view
of the emergency management community and resilience, minimal literature exists to
establish a micro view of resilience within the present context of homeland security.
Based on the information contained in this literature review, resilience is capable of being
sketched as a synthesis of the prior experiences of a population, government policies, and
the interaction of these components. Resilience is described as being complex. Finally,
resilience is a vision of the homeland security enterprise rather than a goal or policy. The
following chapters build upon these initial conclusions. In Chapter III, critiques and
analysis of existing homeland security policies begin to focus on a vision of resilience. In
Chapter IV, existing research is synthesized to clarify this concept of resilience in the
context of homeland security.
21
III. FEDERAL INITIATIVES AS THE ROUX OF POLICY
A. ESTABLISHING A BASE
A roux is a mixture of equal parts cooking oil, flour, and onion. As individual
items, these ingredients possess distinct physical appearances and scents. When
synthesized, the ingredients create a base for a traditional Louisiana gumbo. Risks exist
to overcooking or undercooking a roux. Once the roux is complete, the next step is a
layered introduction of additional ingredients into the pot.
In the prior chapter, the broader view of resilience provided an opportunity to
explore the application of the concept in various contexts. This chapter begins to narrow
the focus of the homeland security practitioner’s vision of resilience. A gumbo is a
synthesis of various ingredients. Similarly, understanding the role of resilience within the
context of homeland security requires a synthesis of information obtained from various
sources. This chapter establishes a base to clarifying resilience within the context of
homeland security in the United States.
The concept of resilience has become a significant public policy issue of the
United States. The emphasis placed on resilience has resulted in a number of resilience-
based policies and initiatives. Building the synthesis of resilience requires an
understanding of these policies and initiatives. This chapter reviews and critiques these
existing policies and initiatives. Criteria to evaluate the contributions of a resource to this
research was introduced in Chapter I. Based on these criteria, it was determined that the
following policies, initiatives, and documents contribute to clarifying the role of
resilience in the context of homeland security. Resilience based policies of the U.S.
federal government impact all levels of government, and are key components of program
requirements attached to federal assistance to enhance the preparedness of state and local
jurisdictions. The following homeland security documents relate to the enterprise as a
whole rather than a specific sector, such as cyber and critical infrastructure. The analysis
and critique of these documents narrows the contextual view of resilience. The review of
federal policies regarding resilience includes the following documents.
22
• The National Security Strategy (NSS)
• The Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR)
• Presidential Policy Directive-8 (PPD-8)
• Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 201 THIRA
B. STEP 1: THE NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY (NSS)
The White House issued the National Security Strategy (NSS) in May 2010.
President Barak Obama’s cover letter to the document begins with, “Time and again in
our Nation’s history, Americans have risen to meet and to shape moments of
transition.”76 Obama’s words demonstrate the existing resilience of the United States.
The NSS connects the issues of national security, national competitiveness, resilience,
and moral example.77 The NSS identifies the necessary steps to sustaining America’s
ability to lead a world in which the nation’s economic and individual opportunities are
more diffuse and link to securing a more resilient nation.78 The NSS implies that the
foundation of America’s strength lies in the welfare of the American people through
prosperity. Prosperity supports not only the welfare of the population, but the defense and
diplomacy functions of the U.S. government.79
According to Porter and Muckleby, a relationship exists between prosperity and
resilience.80 Future discussions regarding national security should include concepts to
sustain the prosperity of the American people. The concept of resilience in the homeland
security context offers a means to accomplish this goal. The national security importance
of resilience is based on the NSS. According to the NSS, the national security of the
United States “draws on the strengths and resilience of our citizens, communities, and
economy.”81
76 The White House, National Security Strategy (Washington, DC: The White House, 2010). 77 The White House, “Homeland Security,” (n.d.), http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/homeland-
security. 78 Ibid., 2. 79 Ibid., 9. 80 Porter and Mukleby, A National Strategic Narrative, 15. 81 The White House, “Homeland Security.”
23
The NSS outlines a Whole of Government approach to strengthening national
capacities to achieve a resilient nation. The outline describes the efforts of key
governmental functions related to capacity building. Those functions include defense,
diplomacy, economic development, homeland security, intelligence, strategic
communications, the American People, and the private sector. According to the NSS
homeland security is an approach to “ensure our national resilience in the face of the
threat and hazards.”82 The NSS mentions the terms resilience and resilient in the
categories of the American People and the Private Sector. The document emphasizes the
“resilience of our citizens” and “that our citizens are the heart of a resilient country.”83
Although the concept of resilience is mentioned several times in the NSS, a frame to
discuss the concept of resilience as an approach to public policy is absent from this
document.
The NSS defines resilience as “the ability to adapt to changing conditions and
prepare for, withstand, and rapidly recover from disruption.”84 Although the NSS
definition of resilience is consistent with other definitions contained in the literature
review of this thesis, the question of what resilience might look like in the context of
homeland security still remains.
The NSS outlines initiatives to promote resilience,85 those include enhancing
security at home through actions to secure borders of the United States, protect critical
infrastructure and key resources, and the security of cyber space. The NSS recognizes
that “we will not be able to deter or prevent every single threat.”86 The Whole
Community document and FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate emphasize that
government cannot do it alone. According to Steven Simon with the Council on Foreign
Relations, the NSS misses an opportunity to discuss the concept of resilience further in
82 The White House, “Homeland Security,” 15. 83 Ibid., 16. 84 Ibid. 85 Ibid. 86 Ibid., 18.
24
the face of adversity. According to Simon, then Deputy National Security Advisor John
Brennan indicated that when a significant event occurs, the resilience of the American
people would instill a calm and trust in the government.87
The acknowledgement that every threat will not be prevented or deterred is
consistent with existing research in the field of psychology. The prior statement relates to
the effects of acceptable risk on the resilience of an individual. Within the context of
psychology, the general premise is that once challenged by adversity, the patient may not
be able to recover to 100% of their pre-challenged state. Homeland security based
resilience strategies should recognize that (1) not all risks are capable of being mitigated,
(2) disasters will occur, and (3) that resilience may not be demonstrated by replicating
pre-disaster conditions.
The NSS serves as a cornerstone of federal government policy regarding
resilience. The importance of the NSS to the resilience discourse is based on a higher
emphasis placed on the concept as compared to prior national homeland security
strategies. The 2003 National Strategy for Homeland Security rarely mentioned the term
resilience. The 2007 version of the National Strategy for Homeland Security mentioned
resilience in the context of protecting America’s critical infrastructure. A distinction
between the 2010 NSS and prior National Strategies for Homeland Security is the shift
from resilience as a single aspect of physical resilience to a concept of resilience of the
whole. A recent report released by the Congressional Research Service indicated that the
existence of various definitions of homeland security is a significant public policy issue,
and impacts the setting of government priorities.88 The introduction of resilience into the
homeland security vocabulary contributes to the complexity of defining the homeland
security enterprise. The emphasis placed on resilience is recognized in both the NSS and
the QHSR. Although the emphasis on resilience suggests that the concept is a significant
homeland security policy, the question of what might resilience look like in the context of
homeland security still remains.
87 Stephen Biddle et al., “Obama’s NSS: Promises and Pitfalls,” Council on Foreign Relations, May 28, 2010, http://www.cfr.org/defensehomeland-security/obamas-nss-promise-pitfalls/p22240.
88 U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, Defining Homeland Security: Analysis and Congressional Considerations.
25
C. STEP 2: THE QUADRENNIAL HOMELAND SECURITY REVIEW (QHSR)
The preparation of roux is an act of synthesis. Ingredients are continually added to
the pot until a synthesis occurs. As a companion document to the 2010 National Security
Strategy, the QHSR begins to build upon the concept of resilience.89 The DHS issued
The Quadrennial Homeland Security Review: A Strategic Framework for a Secure
Homeland in February 2010. The QHSR provides a vision for homeland security, as well
as defines the homeland security enterprise of the United States.
1. The Vision for Homeland Security90
A homeland that is safe, secure, and resilient against terrorism and other hazards where American interests, aspirations, and way of life can thrive
2. Homeland Security Enterprise91
The homeland security “enterprise’ refers to the collective efforts and shared responsibilities of Federal, state, local, tribal, territorial, nongovernmental, and private sector partners-as well as individuals, families, and communities-to maintain critical homeland security capabilities. It connotes a broad-based community with a common interest in the safety and well-being of America and American society.
The QHSR identifies security, resilience, and customs/exchange as three key
concepts to achieving a comprehensive approach to homeland security. Within the
QHSR, resilience is defined as the ability to “Foster individual, community, and system
robustness, adaptability, and capacity for rapid recovery…”92 The QHSR states
“…homeland security activities must be built upon a foundation of ensuring security and
resilience.”93 Resilience is a foundational element of homeland security. According to
89 U.S. Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, Defining Homeland Security: Analysis
and Congressional Considerations. 90 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A
Strategic Framework for a Secure Homeland. 91 Ibid. 92 Ibid. 93 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review: Enhanced
Stakeholder Consultation and Use of Risk Information Could Strengthen Future Reviews, (GAO-11-873), Washington, DC: GPO, 2011.
26
Flynn and the Community Resilience Task Force, the American enterprise has
demonstrated an innate sense of resilience.94,95
The American narrative offers perspective into the concept of resilience as a
foundation of homeland security. The following narrative is based on Flynn’s historical
perspective, and a common understanding of U.S. history.96 A historical perspective
offers insight into the assertion that resilience is a foundation of the enterprise.
Early European explorers demonstrated resilience when settling the United States.
During the Revolutionary War, American revolutionaries exhibited resilience in fighting
for a new Nation. Recovering from the American Civil War created opportunities to
exhibit the resilience of America. The Dust Bowl and Great Depression of the late 1920s
through 1930s demonstrated the resilience of a nation in the face of environmental and
economic adversity.
3. The Value of the QHSR
According to the Congressional Research Service, the value of the QHSR as a
strategic homeland security document is under scrutiny, however, the QHSR is one of
several documents listed by DHS as a strategic document. The five homeland security
missions contained within the QHSR are as follows.97
• Mission 1: Preventing Terrorism and Enhancing Security
• Mission 2: Securing and Managing our Borders
• Mission 3: Enforcing and Administering Our Immigration Laws
• Mission 4: Safeguarding and Securing Cyberspace
• Mission 5: Ensuring Resilience to Disasters
94 Flynn and Council on Foreign Relations, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation, 240. 95 President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.), Community Resilience Task Force,
Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations. 96 Flynn and Council on Foreign Relations, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation, 240. 97 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A
Strategic Framework for a Secure Homeland.
27
4. Mission Area 5: Ensuring Resilience to Disasters
Mission Area 5 relates to the scope of research being conducted as part of this
thesis. The remaining analysis of the QHSR focuses on Mission Area 5: Ensuring
Resilience to Disasters. Mission Area 5 is based on the traditional emergency
management functions of the homeland security enterprise. Those traditional functions
include preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation. Mission Area 5 emphasizes the
creation of an approach that “ensures greater resilience in our communities and for our
Nation.”98 The QHSR suggests resilience is a result of “a rapid evolution of national
security threats and the arrival of the information age have increased the urgency of
building up—and emphasizing—our historically resilient posture”99
98 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review: Enhanced
Stakeholder Consultation and Use of Risk Information Could Strengthen Future Reviews, 63. 99 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A
Strategic Framework for a Secure Homeland.
28
Table 2. Goals and Objectives of Mission Area 5
Ensuring Resilience to Disasters Mission Goals and Objectives Goal 5.1: Mitigate Hazards: Strengthen capacity at all levels of society to withstand threats and hazards. Objectives
• Reduce the vulnerability of individuals and families: Improve individual and family capacity to reduce vulnerabilities and withstand disasters.
• Mitigate risks to communities: Improve community capacity to withstand disasters by mitigating known and anticipated hazards.
Goal 5.2: Enhance Preparedness: Engage all levels and segments of society in improving preparedness. Objectives
• Improve individual, family, and community preparedness: Ensure individual, family, and community planning, readiness, and capacity building for disasters.
• Strengthen capabilities: Enhance and sustain nationwide disaster preparedness capabilities, to include life safety, law enforcement, information sharing, mass evacuation and shelter-in-place, public health, mass care, and public works.
Goal 5.3: Ensure Effective Emergency Response: Strengthen response capacity nationwide. Objectives
• Provide timely and accurate information to the public: Establish and strengthen pathways for clear, reliable, and current emergency information, including effective use of new media.
• Conduct effective disaster response operations: Respond to disasters in an effective and unified manner.
• Provide timely and appropriate disaster assistance: Improve governmental, nongovernmental, and private sector delivery of disaster assistance.
Goal 5.4: Rapidly Recover: Improve the Nation’s ability to adapt and rapidly recover. Objectives
• Enhance recovery capabilities: Establish and maintain nationwide capabilities for recovery from major disasters.
• Ensure continuity of essential services and functions: Improve capabilities of families, communities, private-sector organizations, and all levels of government to sustain essential services and functions.
29
The QHSR challenges the existing thought processes of the homeland security
enterprise. A result of this challenge is the need to develop adaptive capacities to address
emerging and future threats. Although, the QHSR identifies technological advancements
as solutions to issues of the enterprise, the document also suggests that these
advancements alone will not influence the security and resilience of the country.100
Improving the enterprise requires a collective approach to increase the preparedness of
various systems including communities, families, and individuals. The enterprise must
make changes in the way it organizes. This includes organizational changes to the way
the enterprise trains, equips, and develops professional capabilities of the individual and
the organization. The prior suggestions are consistent with Madia’s recommendations
referenced in the literature review.
As depicted in Table 3, each mission area contains goals. However, the NSS and
subsequent federal documents fail to create an image of a desired outcome.
Table 3. Key Strategic Outcomes of the QHSR Key Strategic Outcomes
• A standard for general community hazard mitigation is collaboratively developed and adopted by all communities.
• Individuals and families understand their responsibilities in the event of a community-disrupting event and have a plan to fulfill these responsibilities.
• Preparedness standards for life safety, law enforcement, mass evacuation and shelter-in-place, public health, mass care, and public works capabilities, including capacity levels for catastrophic incidents, have been developed and are used by all jurisdictions.
• Jurisdictions have agreements in place to participate in local, regional, and interstate mutual aid.
• All organizations with incident management responsibilities utilize the National Incident Management System, including the Incident Command System, on a routine basis and for all federally declared disasters and emergencies.
100 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review: Enhanced
Stakeholder Consultation and Use of Risk Information Could Strengthen Future Reviews, 63.
30
Understanding the role or function of resilience within the homeland security
enterprise is important to building adaptive capabilities. The strategic objectives of the
QHSR (Table 2) establish a high-level view of resilience within the homeland security
enterprise. The strategic objectives identified in Table 2 offer minimal guidance to
determining what resilience might look like in the homeland security context. Although
the QHSR expands on the concept of resilience the document fails to answer the question
of what resilience might be in the context of homeland security.
D. STEP 3: PRESIDENTIAL POLICY DIRECTIVE 8 (PPD-8)
On March 30, 2011, the Obama Administration released PPD-8 that establishes
becoming a resilient nation as a national priority. Becoming a resilient nation is
accomplished through a series of national frameworks. The national frameworks are
consistent with the mission areas contained within the QHSR and include Protection,
Response, Recovery, Mitigation, and Prevention. PPD-8 considers resilience as the
“ability to adapt to changing conditions and withstand and rapidly recover from
disruption due to emergencies.”101 An April 25, 2012 blog posted to the website Digital
Sandbox suggests that the concept of resilience plays second chair to the traditional
mission areas requiring a national framework.102 The requirements to conduct Threat
Hazards Identification and Risk Assessments (THIRA) as well as a focus on capabilities
based planning and resourcing are established by PPD-8. The goal of the national
preparedness system is to build the capabilities necessary to sustain and protect the
security and resilience of the United States. As with many presidential policy directives,
implementation is relegated to an appropriate Cabinet level official. The official is
responsible for the development of processes and systems to implement the intent of the
directive. PPD-8 establishes a strategic homeland security policy of the Obama
Administration and tasks the Secretary of DHS with the responsibility to implement this
directive.
101 Barak Obama, Presidential Policy Directive 8 (Washington, DC: White House Office, 2011). 102 Digital Sandbox, “An Analysis of PDD-8,” The DSBlog, entry posted April 24, 2011,
http://www.dsbox.com/index.php/blog/archives/2011/04/.
31
E. STEP 4: THE NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS GOAL (NPG)
Additional seasonings add to the flavor and consistency of a roux. The NPG was
published in September 2011 and introduces a series of core capabilities deemed as
necessary to achieve a secure and resilient nation. Success is defined as “a secure and
resilient Nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent,
protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose
the greatest risk.”103 A review of the NPG’s description of core capabilities does not
describe the role of resilience. The NPG describes the traditional post-9/11 mission areas
of prevent, protect, mitigate, respond, and recovery.104 The NPG establishes core
capabilities for the homeland security enterprise. The core capabilities contained within
the NPG build upon the Target Capabilities developed during the Bush Administration
era of DHS. Within the core capabilities, three are identified as common capabilities that
touch each of the mission areas: planning, public information and operational
coordination. The remaining core capabilities are contained within specific mission areas.
Although the NPG is to maintain a secure and resilient nation, only two core
capabilities mention resilience. Those capabilities are identified as community resilience,
and risk and disaster resilience assessment. Community resilience is described as the
integration of efforts to comprehend and address risk through a planning process of
setting actions to mitigate and improve resilience.105 Risk and disaster resilience
assessment is described as the capability to conduct risk and disaster assessments as a
means of developing informed action of risk reduction and the enhancement of resilience
within the jurisdiction.106 These two specific capabilities have been assigned to the
mission area of mitigation.
Core capabilities are used in program guidance issued by FEMA. Grant guidance
requires state and Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) jurisdictions use core
103 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Preparedness Goal (Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2011), 1.
104 Ibid. 105 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Core
Capabilities,” (n.d.), http://www.fema.gov/core-capabilities. 106 Ibid.
32
capabilities as part of the jurisdiction’s THIRA.107 Although the NPG defines core
capabilities and offers minimal definitions, the document does not emphasize the role of
resilience throughout the enterprise. Core capabilities imply that resilience is a function
of the mitigation mission area. The lack of clarity and focus on resilience in the core
capabilities creates additional confusion in determining what resilience might be in the
context of homeland security.
The categorization of core capabilities into mission areas hampers the selection of
appropriate capabilities to a specific scenario or desired outcome. The negative influence
of the core capabilities was observed during the preparation of Louisiana’s 2012 THIRA.
Participants appeared to focus on the mission area rather than the core capability. Mission
areas created a default setting in which planning scenarios were linked to a mission area
rather than a core capability. Future versions of the core capabilities should consider the
removal of mission areas.
107 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
“Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201,” April 2012, https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=705408.
33
Table 4. Core Capabilities identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency108
Core Capability Mission Area Core Capability Mission Area
Planning All Threat and Hazard Identification
Mitigation
Public Information and Warning
All Critical Transportation
Response
Operational Coordination All Environmental
Response/Health and Safety
Response
Forensics and Attribution Prevention Fatality Management Services
Response
Intelligence and Information Sharing
Prevention, Protection
Infrastructure Systems
Response and Recovery
Interdiction and Disruption Prevention, Protection
Mass Care Services Response
Screening, Search, and Detection
Prevention, Protection
Mass Search and Rescue Operations
Response
Access Control and Identity Verification
Protection On-scene Security and Protection
Response
Cybersecurity Protection Operational Communications
Response
Physical Protective Measures
Protection Public and Private Services and Resources
Response
Risk Management for Protection Programs and Activities
Protection Public Health and Medical Services
Response
Physical Protective Measures
Protection Situational Assessment
Response
Supply Chain Integrity and Security
Protection Economic Recovery Recovery
Community Resilience Mitigation Health and Social Services
Recovery
Long-term Vulnerability Reduction
Mitigation Housing Recovery
Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment
Mitigation Natural and Cultural Resources
Recovery
108 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Core
Capabilities.”
34
F. STEP 5: THREAT HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENTS (THIRA)
Flour is a critical ingredient to making a roux. The amount of flour used in a roux
is equal to one third of the total ingredients and serves as a binding agent. Within the
context of resilience and homeland security, state and local governments serve as the
binding agent. Just as a roux cannot be made without flour, national resilience cannot be
achieved without the participation of an equal partner, such as state and local
governments. The THIRA process introduces state government and UASIs into this
process. PPD-8 establishes a requirement to conduct a national risk assessment process.
This requirement is assigned to the Secretary of DHS who through FEMA requires state
and UASI jurisdictions who accept federal financial assistance to conduct a THIRA.109
As of the 2012 reporting period, jurisdictional THIRA documents were required
to be submitted in conjunction with the State Preparedness Report (SPR). Data collected
through the THIRA and SPR process are then used to develop the National Preparedness
Report (NPR). The format used to conduct a THIRA is based on a combination of hazard
mitigation, emergency management, and prevent/protect mission areas.
The SPR focuses on the present capabilities of the jurisdiction. Several gaps in the
SPR tool were identified during the development of Louisiana’s 2012 SPR. One gap is a
lack in practitioner knowledge regarding the use of this information as a means of
influencing resilience. A second gap is the recognition that revisions to existing policies
and programs have not kept pace with concepts recently introduced by FEMA. Existing
federal preparedness and hazard mitigation funding requirements hinder the ability of
state and local jurisdictions to use adaptive or collaborative approaches to addressing
threats, hazards and gaps identified in the THIRA or SPR. As an example, many
mitigation or preparedness grant programs do not support new construction to address
mass care and sheltering deficiencies. These requirements inhibit the ability of
communities to construct facilities capable of supporting evacuees during major
109 Timothy Manning, Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Requirement: Grant
Programs Directorate Information Bulletin no. 385 (Washington, DC: United States Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2012).
35
disasters.110 Obtaining a NPG of a secure and resilient nation requires significant
revisions to existing laws and policies of FEMA regarding the use of federal funds.
Updating these requirements will enhance the adaptability and resilience of local
communities.
G. STEP 6: MEASURING PREPAREDNESS AND RESILIENCE
No established time frame exists to cooking a roux. The final product is observed
when a combination of colors and smells indicate the presence of a roux. The process of
cooking a roux requires patience and a process to monitor progress to achieving the goal.
The success of a roux depends on the techniques of the cook. Although the success of
roux requires the same metrics and techniques, the end result varies based upon the
technique of the cook. As indicated in the literature review, measuring the progress of
national preparedness has been the subject of numerous reports of GAO and the U.S.
Congress.
In January 2010, the U.S. Congress enacted the Redundancy Elimination and
Enhanced Performance for Preparedness Grants Act.111 HR 3980 required the FEMA
Administrator to develop performance metrics to measure national preparedness through
an evaluation of local and state governments receiving federal preparedness financial
assistance. Since the establishment of the U.S. DHS, 27 plus billion dollars have been
invested into the development of capabilities at the state and local levels of
government.112 The GAO has identified a significant failure of the U.S. government to
measure the effectiveness of this investment.113
110 President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.), Community Resilience Task Force,
Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations, 59. 111 United States, Congress, Senate, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,
Redundancy Elimination and Enhanced Performance for Preparedness Grants Act: Report of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, United States Senate to Accompany H.R. 3980, to Provide for Identifying and Eliminating Redundant Reporting Requirements and Developing Meaningful Performance Metrics for Homeland Security Preparedness Grants, and for Other Purposes (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2010).
112 Ibid. 113 Ibid.
36
In March 2011, GAO testified that FEMA and DHS have failed to develop a
process to measure preparedness.114 The failure to establish a formal process to measure
preparedness has haunted FEMA and DHS since 2002. GAO has consistently reported to
Congress since 2002 that FEMA has failed to develop a process to measure preparedness.
In reviewing a variety of GAO and Congressional resources related to measuring
preparedness, it was determined that opportunities, such as the Target Capabilities List,
Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101, PPD-8, and the Cost to Capabilities Initiative,
failed to produce an effective set of metrics to evaluate community preparedness.
Broughton’s research into the evaluation of federal preparedness programs supports the
actions taken by the U.S. Congress outlined within HR 3980 and the claims made by
GAO. The prior resources recognize the difficulty of state and local governments to apply
the NPG to preparedness investments made by these organizations.115 GAO and
Broughton confirm the absence of evaluation metrics to measure how equipment,
training, planning, and exercises supported by federal preparedness funds have improved
the capabilities of local and state organizations and reduced the risk to the people of the
United States. The concepts of preparedness and resilience are not a one size fits all
approach to emergency management or homeland security. Metrics might offer insight
into the capabilities of a jurisdiction; however, those capabilities cannot be accurately
displayed or measured in the absence of adversity.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) through the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) administer a series of public health
preparedness grants to local and state health departments. A review of legislation related
to FEMA and the CDC identifies differences in the management of federal preparedness
funds distributed by these two federal agencies. CDC is authorized to withhold funding to
local and state jurisdictions that fail to meet critical benchmarks.116 CDC’s ability to
114 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Measuring Disaster Preparedness: FEMA Has Made
Limited Progress in Assessing National Capabilities by William O. Jenkins Jr., (GAO-11-2607), (Washington, DC: GPO, 2011).
115 Pamela N. Broughton, “Measuring Preparedness: Accessing the Impact of the Homeland Security Grant Program” (master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, 2009).
116 Brian M. Stecher, Toward a Culture of Consequences: Performance-Based Accountability Systems for Public Services (Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 2010), 235.
37
withhold federal funds from state and local jurisdictions is established within the
Pandemic and All Hazards Preparedness Act of 2006.117 In contrast, similar authority
has not been given to FEMA.
In August 2011, the U.S. Council of the International Association of Emergency
Managers (IAEM) issued a report entitled Preparedness: A Principled Approach to
Return on Investment.118 The purpose of this report was to provide recommendations to
determining the return on investment related to the Emergency Management Performance
Grant. IAEM suggests that the recommendations included within this report should be
used as a baseline to develop performance metrics for other preparedness programs
sponsored by the U.S. federal government.
Consideration must be given to the integration of all federal preparedness grant
programs into one consolidated approach to sustaining resilient communities. This
approach will build capabilities through a Whole Dollar approach to federal
preparedness, disaster recovery and mitigation spending. The NPG defines success as “a
secure and resilient Nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to
prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards
that pose the greatest risk.”119 The inability of the federal government to develop
preparedness-based performance metrics suggests that the development of resilience-
based metrics will be problematic.
1. Measuring Resilience
The demand to measure preparedness and determine a return on investment is
influencing a desire to develop metrics to measure the resilience of communities. Rather
than attempt to develop processes to measure resilience, a viable option is strengthening
the process of measuring preparedness as directed by the Elimination and Enhanced
117 Stecher, Toward a Culture of Consequences: Performance-Based Accountability Systems for
Public Services, 235. 118 International Association of Emergency Managers, Preparedness: A Principled Approach to
Return on Investment (Falls Church, VA: International Association of Emergency Managers, 2011). 119 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National
Preparedness Goal.
38
Performance for Preparedness Grants Act and the Pandemic and All Hazards
Preparedness Act of 2006. An assumption determined from this analysis is that a
prepared jurisdiction is a resilient jurisdiction. Validating this assumption negates the
need to develop an additional set of metrics to determine the resilience of a jurisdiction.
A need exists to realize a return on the federal government’s investment into the
homeland security enterprise. The use of the term metrics implies a guarantee that a
jurisdiction has demonstrated a capability. An alternative is the use of the term indicator
rather than metric. In the absence of an adverse condition requiring the application of the
capability, the return on investment cannot be actualized by a set of metrics based on a
subjective review. Exercises, training, and reviews of emergency guidelines and plans
indicate that a jurisdiction has the capability; however, the metric of success is realized
once the system has applied the capability under adverse conditions.
Ungar suggests that the level of resilience achieved by an individual or
community is subjective and dependent upon a variety of factors.120 Presuming that
resilience is a process of adaptability rather than a continuum or cycle, no apparent
baseline for resilience exists other than the conditions that existed prior to the exposure to
adversity. Cutter suggests that metrics are established to identify the baseline indicators
of resilience.121 The difficulty of establishing formal processes to measure resilience is
based on the premise that resilience occurs at various levels of a community and is
influenced by any combination of complex issues occurring within the environment.
Resilience is based on the severity of the stressor and the cascading effects of the event.
Measuring resilience is a complex issue requiring a clear understanding of the role
and function of resilience within the homeland security enterprise. Ungar suggests that
within the context of psychology, resilience is often measured using a standard set of
outcomes relevant to those conducting the measurement.122 Failure to recognize the
cultural dynamics of the individual and the ecological system in which the individual
120 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 463. 121 Susan L. Cutter, Christopher Burton and Christopher Emrich, “Disaster Resilience Indicators for
Benchmarking Baseline Conditions,” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 7, no. 1 (2010): art. 51.
122 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 15.
39
operates influences the outcome of the measurement. It has been said that a person can
only measure what is known. Due to the complexities and variations of resilience that
occur in the homeland security enterprise, a single metric of resilience may not exist
within the enterprise.
Measuring resilience in any of the contexts described thus far in this thesis is
difficult. Prior research based on measuring the resilience of individuals obtained from
the field of psychology offer several considerations for the homeland security
practitioner. The first consideration maintains that a de-emphasis on the ecological effects
of resilience results in an ineffective measurement of resilience. Implementing this
consideration requires an approach that recognizes the complexities and inner
dependencies of resilience within the context of homeland security. If resilience is to be
demonstrated post-adversity, measuring resilience requires a system to experience a
significant stressor or adversity.123 The introduction of the stressor creates an
environment that would not have existed in the absence of the stressor.124 Based on this
premise, resilience in the context of psychology or government policy, such as homeland
security “cannot be viewed as a trait that is open to direct measurement.”125
H. HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE-COMMUNITY RESILIENCE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS
In the winter of 2010, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet
Napolitano, established the Community Resilience Task Force (CRTF) as a component of
the Homeland Security Advisory Committee. The CRTF was tasked with providing
recommendations to establish and implement resilience policies, programs, and practices
throughout the nation.126 The CRTF developed a conceptual framework for resilience
123 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 15. 124 Ibid. 125 Ibid., 34. 126 President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.), Community Resilience Task Force,
Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations, 59.
40
that illustrated the relationships between the functions of resilience, preparedness, and
risk reduction. The following recommendations of the CRTF apply to the clarification of
resilience.127
Table 5. Relevant Recommendations from the CRTF
Recommendation 1.1 Build a Shared Understanding of the Shared Responsibility
Recommends the development and sharing of resilience models to illustrate resilience within those environments
Recommendation 1.2: Build a Coherent and Synergistic Campaign to Strengthen and Sustain National Resilience
Recommends the alignment of resilience policies, programs, and investments as a way of achieving operational resilience
Recommendation 1.3: Organize for Effective Execution
Through the establishment of a National Resilience Office within the Department of Homeland Security, build a foundation for resilience based upon the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review
Recommendation 1.4 Build the Knowledge and Talent Base for Resilience
Through the development of a research program, build an intellectual base for the development of resilience based training and education programs
Recommendation 3.2: Align Federal Grant Programs to Promote and Enable Resilience Initiatives
Through the development of a Resilient Community Initiative (RCI), leverage federal assets to enable community resilience
The CRTF Report views resilience as a desired outcome or goal that persists
through each of the broad areas of homeland security. Sub-factors of resilience are
identified as the abilities to resist, absorb, recover, and adapt.128 According to the CRTF,
these sub-factors “contribute to the overall degree of resilience and provide useful targets
127 President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.), Community Resilience Task Force,
Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations, 59. 128 Ibid.
41
for measures implemented to enhance resilience.”129 The CRTF divides overall
preparedness activities into three phases: before, during, and after. The previously
discussed sub-factors of resilience are applied to one of three phases and describe the
desired outcomes for the phase. As an example, the CRTF report suggests, “Recovery
capabilities support a return to normalcy or adaptation to a new norm which may mitigate
future impacts.”130 As indicated in the document, “…PPD-8 describes resilience as ‘the
ability to adapt to changing conditions and withstand and rapidly recover from disruption
due to emergencies.’”131 The CRTF implied that resilience within the context of
homeland security is a foundational concept of the enterprise. The task force believes that
the previously described conceptual framework links a number of homeland security
strategies to resilience.
The work of the CRTF attempts to clarify the concept of resilience in the context
of homeland security. The outcomes of the task force provide a strategic level document
describing the linkages between the various nodes of the homeland security enterprise
and resilience. If implemented, the recommendations of the CRTF offer a broad base of
policy recommendations. The recommendations of the CRTF apply the concept of
resilience as an approach to homeland security. The applications of the recommendations
provided by the CRTF are discussed in further detail in Chapter V.
I. CHAPTER SUMMARY
This chapter narrowed the focus of resilience from the broader contexts described
in Chapter II. Narrowing the focus of resilience is accomplished through a review and
critique of existing policies directly impacting homeland security programs at the local,
state, and federal levels of the U.S. In the context of the policies reviewed in this chapter,
the U.S. federal government emphasizes the importance of resilience as a foundation of
the homeland security enterprise. The analysis conducted in this chapter concludes with
several observations. The first observation is that the NSS refers to resilience as a
129 Ibid., 9. 130 President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.), Community Resilience Task Force,
Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations, 9. 131 Ibid., 12.
42
foundation of the homeland security enterprise, while the QHSR recognizes that the
concept is influenced by the emergency management legacy of the enterprise. The second
observation is that the enterprise has and continues to struggle with the development of
metrics or indicators to determine a value of the return on investment. In an attempt to
address this issue, the enterprise has developed a series of core capabilities categorized
into specific mission areas. Although core capabilities are important to the enhancement
of the enterprise, the use of mission areas to categorize these capabilities hinders the full
application of the tool by the homeland security practitioner. The third observation
recognizes the value of the recommendations provided by the CRTF to clarify the
concept of resilience in the context of homeland security.
This thesis continues to clarify resilience by exploring the concept in various
contexts. Chapter II introduced this concept in a broad context. In Chapter III, the
magnification was increased to narrow the focus through the exploration of resilience in
the context of homeland security policies of the U.S. The system known as the homeland
security enterprise of the United States is complex. The validation of resilience as a
complex system and the identification of factors that influence the concept will further
clarify the issue for the homeland security practitioner.
43
IV. INFLUENCES ON RESILIENCE
In the previous chapter, the steps to preparing a roux are used as a guide to
explore the relationship between homeland security-based policies and resilience. Many
outside of Louisiana presume that the creation of a gumbo requires a consistent set of
ingredients and processes. To the contrary, the process of preparing a gumbo is
influenced by the culture of the area, available resources, expectations of the consumer,
and the time available to prepare the dish. A roux alone does not make a gumbo.
Preparing a gumbo is a continual process of synthesizing flavor, ingredients, experiences,
and interaction. Each ingredient influences the outcome and appearance of the gumbo.
The time to prepare a gumbo will differ from prior versions. The outcome is influenced
by the cook’s ability to learn from past experiences and the application of those lessons to
the preparation of the dish. The same can be said of resilience in the context of homeland
security. Resilience differs from individual to individual, community to community, and
disaster to disaster.
This chapter analyzes prior research conducted in the fields of systems
engineering and psychology. Based upon the assumptions and evaluation criteria
established in Chapter I, research for this chapter is limited to existing resources obtained
from the fields of systems engineering and psychology. The rationale for this decision is
based upon several reasons. First, the theories of complexity and complex adaptive
systems are based in the contexts of systems engineering and psychology. The theories of
complexity and complex adaptive system of systems are applicable to the physical
domain of the enterprise. Second, the psychological models examined as part of this
research are based on an approach to understanding the social complexities of resilience.
Thus, these models are applicable to the social domain of the enterprise. Third, these
areas of research recognize the relationship between complexity and resilience.
Navigating through the complexities of resilience requires an understanding of
adaptability and those factors that influence resilience.
44
FEMA’s Strategic Foresight Initiative (SFI) introduces the concept of foresight
capability as a means of forecasting and understanding the future. Complexity and the
role of adaptive capacity can be used to understand resilience. This chapter focuses on
identifying factors that contribute to the development of adaptive capacity.
The SFI and the QHSR indicate that the homeland security enterprise is
comprised of several domains. Those domains are physical, social, and cyber. This
chapter focuses on the first two domains and explores the relationship between these
domains and the concept of resilience in the context of homeland security.
The vision of resilience is influenced by a number of factors contributing to the
adaptability of the enterprise. The upcoming factors constantly change throughout the
lifespan of the enterprise. The development of adaptive capacity is influenced by the
interactions and experiences of the enterprise that occur over a lifespan.
A. LOOKING THROUGH A LENS TO SEE THE FUTURE-FEMA’S STRATEGIC FORESIGHT INITIATIVE
One recommendation to clarify what resilience might be within the context of
homeland security is to forecast the future. In January 2012, FEMA released a document
entitled, Crisis Response and Disaster Resilience 2030: Forging Strategic Action in an
Age of Uncertainty (SFI). The SFI projects a vision of emergency management in the
future and introduces the term foresight capability.132 Foresight capability is defined as
the ability to “consider a broad spectrum of plausible outcomes to help inform decision
making under certain circumstances.”133 The goal of the SFI is to establish and maintain
a foresight capability to shape the vision and needs of the emergency management
community in the year 2030.
The SFI identifies several factors to shaping the vision and future appearance of
the emergency management community. Those factors include hedging against
uncertainty, avoiding strategic surprises, promoting information sharing across
132 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Crisis Response and Disaster Resilience 2030: Forging Strategic Action in an Age of Uncertainty (Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2012).
133 Ibid.
45
disciplines and organizations, understanding what changes could affect emergency
management, and the preparation and planning to enhance capabilities to operate in
future environments effectively.134 Each of the prior factors has a direct relationship to
determining what resilience might be in the context of homeland security. The SFI is
described as “a lens through which to view our future landscape and the actions we as a
community need to take to be successful.”135 It is through this lens of the SFI that
resilience within homeland security begins to take shape.
The SFI infers that resilience is promoted by not only embracing a foresight
capability, but through the development of adaptive capabilities in the emergency
management community. The need to develop adaptive capabilities is based on
“increasing complexity and decreasing predictability in its operating environment.”136
Complexity continues to emerge as a significant issue within the homeland security
enterprise. Increasing frequencies of disasters, the emergence of complex threats, and
advances in technology influence the means of collecting data adding to the complexity
of the enterprise.137
The role and function of the emergency manager will continue to adapt to the
ever-changing environment of emergency management. The SFI focuses on the future of
the emergency management community. Minimal references within the SFI describe the
future integration of emergency management and the homeland security enterprise.138
1. The Future Through the Dimensions of STEEP
The approach taken to create the SFI included representatives from the emergency
management community at large, the development of scenarios, and the development of
15 strategic needs for the emergency management community. As the SFI indicates,
134 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Crisis
Response and Disaster Resilience 2030: Forging Strategic Action in an Age of Uncertainty. 135 Ibid., 2. 136 Ibid. 137 Ibid. 138 Douglas Paton and David Moore Johnston, Disaster Resilience: An Integrated Approach
(Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 2006), 321.
46
“These strategic needs identify what the emergency management community needs to be
successful in future environments-needs that should inform priorities, investments, and
decisions on the part of emergency managers.”139 From a strategic perspective, the SFI
identified five dimensions known as STEEP. Those dimensions include social,
technological, environmental, economic and political. These five dimensions were
redefined as drivers of the future emergency management community.
Table 6. Emergency Management Drivers Identified in the Strategic Foresight Initiative140
Social Emergency managers will have new capabilities in the future, and the people who rely on their services will have different needs and expectations, requiring new pathways for engaging these diverse communities and building greater ‘resilience’ to disasters throughout the nation. Technological Technological innovation and the public’s evolving expectations of government are fundamentally altering how individuals interact with society-leading to a redefinition of community Environmental Climate change will increase the magnitude and frequency of natural disasters, which will affect the resilience of local communities and the operational demands placed on emergency management systems. These issues will impact mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery operations; resiliency of critical infrastructure and various emergency assets; trigger indirect impacts such as population displacement, migration, and public health risks. Economic and Political Global interdependencies/globalization, government budgets, critical infrastructure, and the evolving terrorist threat will significantly impact the future of emergency management.
139 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Crisis
Response and Disaster Resilience 2030: Forging Strategic Action in an Age of Uncertainty. 140 Ibid., 7–10.
47
The drivers identified by the SFI were used to build a series of scenarios offering
an opportunity to experiment with each driver. The intent of these scenarios was to
determine the potential consequences of an individual driver. The outcome of the
scenario play is the identification of a combination of interactions between individual
drivers that resulted in the identification of strategic drivers. Upon completion of the
scenario play, the SFI team analyzed the results and identified three categories of need
(Table 6). These three categories of need factor into determining what resilience might be
in the future. The needs identified in the SFI offer a starting point to develop training and
education programs related to strengthening adaptive capacity. The previously discussed
dimensions and needs are consistent with several recommendations made by the CRTF.
Table 7. Needs Identified by the Strategic Foresight Initiative141
Essential Capabilities What capabilities will communities need to create or enhance based on these future challenges? Innovative Models and Tools What innovative models and tools will be needed to optimize resources, anticipate events, or deal with complex and/or unprecedented problems? Dynamic Partnerships What dynamic partnerships will be required to meet surge needs or absorb critical new skills and abilities?
2. A Link Between the SFI and the QHSR
The QHSR speaks to an area identified as “enhancing domain awareness.”
Enhancing domain awareness is described as the ability to “Ensure shared situational
awareness in the air, land, and maritime domains.”142 The topic of domain awareness is
capable of being expanded to include two domains of resilience. Those two domains are
the social and physical domains. Social resilience is based on a focus of resilience in
141 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Crisis Response and Disaster Resilience 2030: Forging Strategic Action in an Age of Uncertainty, 12.
142 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A Strategic Framework for a Secure Homeland, 68.
48
society that includes individual and community resilience. Physical resilience within the
context of homeland security is based on a focus of resilience rooted in critical
infrastructure. Understanding and building a concept of adaptive capacity requires that
homeland security practitioners establish processes to enhance domain awareness across
and between the domains of resilience. The dimensions of STEEP offer an opportunity to
step out of these pre-defined domains and into a clearer dimension of resilience.
3. Resilience Might Be Looking Through a Telescope and a Microscope
Strategic focus and foresight capability projects a view of the future. As a
critique, the SFI does not provide any value to the present need of clarifying resilience in
the context of homeland security. The SFI identifies the concept of “future thinking”
within the emergency management community as a means of producing tangible benefits.
Determining what resilience might be requires a telescopic view into the future through
the lenses of foresight capability. It also requires a microscopic view of the threats and
risks of today.
Describing the concept of resilience in the context of homeland security is a
difficult task for the homeland security practitioner. Minimal literature exists describing
this concept outside of academic research context. As demonstrated in Chapter II, the
concept of resilience is found in a variety of contexts. The lack of a practitioner level
description of resilience combined with the various contexts identified in prior chapters
of this thesis impacts the practitioner’s ability to develop a vision of resilience.
Developing a vision of resilience not only requires foresight, but also retrospection and
an appreciation for the present. The remainder of this chapter focuses on complexity and
the identification of factors that influence resilience.
B. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMPLEXITY AND RESILIENCE
Complexity exists in each of the theoretical domains of the homeland security
enterprise. The sciences of psychology and systems engineering contribute to clarifying
the concept of resilience in the context of homeland security. Contributions from systems
engineering enhance the understanding of resilience as a complex adaptive system of
systems, while the contributions obtained from the field of psychology identify factors
49
that influence resilience. The relationship between complexity and resilience is described
as a framework for organizing and understanding how communities and the nation might
“beat the odds” and develop their own capacities and competence.143
C. RESILIENCE THROUGH THE LENS OF COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS OF SYSTEMS
Research conducted by Sandia Laboratories on the concept of Complex Adaptive
System of Systems (CASoS) determined that complexity is a combination of physical-
socio-technical systems.144 Sandia’s determination is consistent with the domains of
resilience identified by the SFI and the QHSR. Classifying resilience as a CASoS is
based on the following qualities provided by Sandia Laboratories.145
• System: A set of entities, real or abstract comprising a whole in which each component interacts with or is related to at a minimum one other component.
• System of Systems: Some of the entities comprising the system are themselves systems.
• Complex: The system exhibits an emergent behavior that arises from inter- relationships between its elements. This behavior is of greater complexity than the sum of behavior of its parts and not due to system complications.
• Adaptive: The system is adaptive; the behavior of entities or sub-systems and their interaction change in time, possibly resulting in a change in the way the entire system relates to the environment.
The evaluation of the prior qualities determined that the concept of resilience in
the context of homeland security is a CASoS based upon the following points.
• Resilience qualifies as a system. Resilience can only exist as a system.
• Resilience qualifies as a system of systems. The existing domains of physical and social resilience, as well as the STEEP dimensions previously mentioned in this chapter provide evidence to support this determination.
143 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice. 144 Robert J. Glass et al., Sandia National Laboratories: A Roadmap for the Complex Adaptive
Systems of Systems CASoS) Engineering Initiative (Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories, 2008), 6.
145 Ibid., 9.
50
• Resilience qualifies as complex. This determination is based on the existence of an emergent behavior. Emergent behaviors are created by a disaster or terrorist event. As Madia indicated, responding to these types of events creates a complex environment.146
• Resilience qualifies as being adaptive. Resilience is based on the adaptability of systems to adversity. Meeting this qualifier requires that through behavior modifications and the interaction of systems or sub systems the system will change its relationship with the environment.
D. RESILIENCE IS INFLUENCED BY ADAPTATION
Adaptation to adversity is recognized in the contexts of systems engineering and
psychology as a means to navigate through complexity. Within the context of homeland
security, documents, such as the National Security Strategy, Presidential Policy
Directive-8, the National Preparedness Goal, and Whole Community, imply that
adaptation is a critical element of resilience.147,148 Lipsitt and Demick identify several
dimensions, such as context, exposure to adversity, significant adversity, the capacity of
individuals, and functioning normally.149 Each dimension is viewed as a system that
creates a capacity for resilience. Adversity is a necessary condition of resilience that is
either unfriendly or hostile. Significant adversity is described as a condition in which
most of the exposed systems would collapse or stop functioning. Resilience exists after a
community or nation has been exposed to adversity.
Resilience is a process of adaptive functioning. The ability to function adaptively
during adversity depends on the character of the system as well as the influences of
process and interaction with others of significance and the wider social context.150
146 Madia, “Homeland Security Organizations: Design Contingencies in Complex Environments,”
105. 147 The White House, National Security Strategy, 4. 148 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Whole
Community.” 149 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice. 150 Ibid., 143.
51
1. Resilience is a Process of Adaptation
Resilience is a process of improvement based on adaptation. No definable end
point to the process of resilience exists. Resilience is not a strategy or a policy of the
homeland security enterprise; it is a vision of the enterprise. Sanders, Munford, and
Liebenberg recommend that individual resilience policies be based on a concept of
complex adaptive systems.151 Policies should be less restrictive and encourage
communications between all parties including the community.152 Policy makers should
understand that the implementation of strict policies would hinder rather than promote
adaptive capacity. Resilience is influenced by environmental conditions. Variations in
environmental conditions change the vision and perception of resilience based upon the
individual, the community, and the adversity. Policy influences the sketch of resilience;
however, the final image of the portrait of resilience is best left to the determination and
control of those impacted by the adversity.
This previous viewpoint introduces a consideration to the discussion of resilience-
based policies of federal, state, and local governments. Resilience is a vision of homeland
security rather than a policy of the enterprise. The approach to obtaining this vision will
not occur by policy alone.
Resilience in the context of homeland security is a lifelong process influenced by
social and physical ecological systems or a process of immediate or short-term adaptation
to an adverse condition.153 Immediate or short-term adaptation returns the individual or
community to environmental conditions similar to those that existed prior to the
adversity. Resilience is based upon the individual or community’s ability to continually
adapt. In the long term, resilience is not hitting the reset button or CONTROL, ALT,
DELETE after a disaster. Resilience is a process of continually adapting to stressors
placed upon the system throughout the lifespan of the system.
151 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 241. 152 Ibid. 153 Ibid., 2.
52
2. Resilience Is Influenced by Interaction
Ungar emphasizes the relationship between the individual and the environment in
which the individual lives. Resilience is a result of the complex interactions of
environmental factors.154 The role of interaction is important to clarifying the concept of
resilience in the homeland security context. Interaction requires an understanding of how
relationships between systems will influence each other at different points in a
process.155
The process of interaction aids in understanding the relationships between
individuals, social groups, political, and economic systems. Existing homeland security
and emergency management training does not adequately address the building of a
capability to identify or work through these interactions and linkages. Potential reasons
for this lack of training include the age of the homeland security enterprise, and the non-
existence of an approach to developing a vision of resilience.
Within the homeland security context, resilience is a process that varies based
upon the experiences of the individual and the community.156 Key concepts to the
sustainment or enhancement of resilience include the capability to negotiate, manage, and
adapt to stress and/or trauma using assets and resources available within the individual
and environmental systems.157 The building of this capability is influenced by a synthesis
of prior experiences and interaction. The first gumbo prepared by the novice cook is
always the worst. Subsequent attempts to prepare a gumbo are improved by the prior
experiences and interactions of the novice cook.
The homeland security practitioner should understand the influence of psycho-
immunization on resilience.158 This concept of psycho-immunization is explained as
lessening the impact created by stressors based on a combination of past experiences
combined with social support. The outcome of this process is the creation of a coping
154 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 1. 155 Ibid., 237. 156 Ibid., 219. 157 Ibid. 158 Ibid.
53
capacity for the individual when faced with adversity.159 Ungar defines resilience as a set
of behaviors influenced by an interaction between the individual and the environment.160
This interaction creates opportunities for the steady growth of the individual to withstand
adversity. The result of psycho-immunization is the inoculation of individuals and
communities to future events based upon a prior exposure to a similar adversity.
The evolution of the homeland security enterprise is an example of a process of
interaction and psycho-immunization. The origins of the enterprise are based on a desire
to protect the homeland from terror threats. As discussed in Chapter III, recent homeland
security policies and initiatives expand the mission area from terrorism to an all hazards
approach. Existing policies emphasize this concept of resilience. Within the U.S. the
homeland security policies discussed in Chapter III influence the interaction between the
citizen and government. Past experiences that influence the concept of resilience are
based upon the historical narrative of the United States. When combined, the processes of
interaction and experience influence the planning and preparedness efforts of the
homeland security enterprise. Clarifying resilience requires an understanding of how past
experiences influence the interaction between government policy and homeland security.
E. RESILIENCE IS INFLUENCED BY THE HISTORY AND “STEELING” OF THE UNITED STATES
Repetitive exposure to adversity at any level creates a “steeling” effect upon the
individual and the community. This concept of “steeling” applies to not only the science
of psychology, but also to the homeland security enterprise. Exposure to adversity
produces coping strategies and redefines the negative experience. A “coping” strategy
does not imply a positive or negative response to adversity. The individual and the
community both develop strategies to cope with adversity. The following examples
demonstrate how government develops strategies to cope with adversity. These examples
are based on a retrospective approach rather than an approach based upon foresight or
adaptive capacity.
159 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 219. 160 Ibid., 14.
54
Adverse situations, such as the Mississippi River Flood of 1927, Three Mile
Island, the Oklahoma City Bombing, 9/11, the anthrax attacks of 2001, and Hurricane
Katrina, have created policies and practices to psycho-immunize citizens against similar
types of events. The intent of the previously mentioned retrospective policies is to
develop government-supported immunities to future stressors upon the community. The
prior examples have strengthened the resilience of America, while at the same time,
enhanced the complexity of existing adaptive systems through mandates and reforms.
Each of these historical milestones have left marks, and in some instances, blemishes on
American society. These disasters have created opportunities for an emergent behavior to
develop. That emergent behavior has evolved into the homeland security enterprise. The
synthesis created between the previously mentioned disasters and policies has resulted in
a “steeling” effect upon the nation. Each of the following events contributes to the
concept of national resilience.
• The Mississippi River Flood of 1927 resulted in significant population shifts from the Mississippi Delta region of the United States. This event established the need to construct and strengthen a system of levees and control structures to prevent a similar event.
• Three Mile Island forced the integration of various federal agencies with emergency management responsibilities into the newly created FEMA.
• The Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995 served as the impetus for the Nunn- Lugar-Domenici Act that established the Office of Domestic Preparedness within the U.S. Department of Justice. Federal assistance authorized by the Nunn-Lugar-Domenici Act was provided to state and local governments to prepare for acts of terrorism. Preparedness programs, such as the Metropolitan Medical Response System and the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium, were created in response to the threat of weapons of mass destruction.
• The events of 9/11 served as the impetus for the largest reorganization of the federal government through the creation of DHS.
• The anthrax attacks that occurred in 2001 resulted in the enhancement of public health preparedness programs designed to protect the population from terrorist events using biological agents.
• The response to Hurricane Katrina, a possible victim of the complexities of government policies established post 9/11, served as the impetus for further government reform of emergency management and homeland security.
55
F. CHAPTER SUMMARY
In a broad context, many outside of Louisiana would consider that gumbo is
simply a roux based dish served with rice. However, when gumbo is discussed in the
narrower context of a specific region of Louisiana, gumbo is not just gumbo. In the
narrower context, gumbo is a synthesis of cultural identity, resources, and experiences.
The process to create the synthesis of a gumbo varies from region to region and is based
on the experiences and interactions of the cook. This chapter focuses on recognizing the
various factors that influence resilience in the context of homeland security.
In Chapter II, the journey to learn about resilience at a macro level explored
resilience in a variety of contexts and concluded that resilience is a process of
adaptability to adversity. In other words, resilience is simply resilience. The next stop in
this journey, Chapter III, magnified the focus to explore the concept of resilience in the
context of homeland security policies and initiatives of the federal government of the
United States. This current stop, Chapter IV, concluded that resilience is a foundation of
the homeland security enterprise of the United States that is based on a variety of factors.
In this chapter, the focus was magnified to identify those factors that influence or
contribute to the clarification of resilience in the context of homeland security. The
magnification of focus was accomplished by synthesizing existing research obtained from
the areas of systems engineering and psychology. The synthesis of information
contributed to the clarification of resilience in the context of homeland security. Foresight
and adaptive capabilities contribute to the development of the resilience sketch. The
development of the resilience sketch requires the ability to foresee the challenges of the
future, while at the same time, build adaptive capacities to current adversities. Various
factors influence resilience in the context of homeland security. Clarifying resilience
requires that the practitioner possess the capability to recognize these factors. This
analysis concludes that resilience is a complex adaptive system of systems. Recognizing
resilience in this context allows the practitioner to develop adaptive capabilities based
upon the presumption that the concept is a continual process of adaptation influenced by
interaction and experience.
56
Resilience is a dynamic and continual process of adaptation rather than a specific
and singular event.161 The prior determination is based on the differences in which
citizens respond to the influences of an adverse condition. The influences of adversity
vary and include both known and known systems. The prior historical events provide an
example of resilience as a process of adaptability occurring over time.
In certain cases, single communities are impacted by catastrophic events. While,
in other events, such as Hurricane Katrina and the Mississippi River Flood of 1927,
disasters impact a large geographic area encompassing multiple communities and
states.162 Regardless of the scope of the disaster, each disaster influences the resilience of
impacted individuals, communities, and the nation. Collectively, these events influence
national resilience over the life span of the American enterprise.
Academic research alone will not clarify the concept of resilience within the
context of homeland security. Clarifying the concept of resilience to the homeland
security practitioner requires that the topic be introduced and applied to the domains of
the enterprise. The recommendations and conclusions learned during this journey are
applied in the following chapter.
161 Ungar, The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice, 14. 162 Flynn and Council on Foreign Relations, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation, 240.
57
V. APPLYING RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Resilience exists. Evidence supporting the existence of resilience is provided as
part of this research. The prior chapters magnified the focus of the homeland security
practitioner’s view of resilience to define the “what is” of resilience. This chapter focuses
on bridging the gap between the “what is” and the “how to” of resilience in the context of
the homeland security enterprise.
This research intends to establish a transfer of resilience-based knowledge from
the academic to the practitioner. The transfer of knowledge occurs through a process of
clarification, introduction, and application. This chapter offers conclusions to clarify the
concept of resilience in the context of homeland security, and introduces the concept as a
foundational element of the enterprise. Finally, this chapter offers recommendations to
apply the concept of resilience to the homeland security enterprise of the United States.
A. OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH
The purpose of this research is to clarify the concept of resilience in the context of
homeland security. Clarity is established through focus. For purposes of this research,
focus is achieved by narrowing the context of resilience from a macro to a micro
perspective. The first step in this process is the exploration of resilience in a broad
context. The second step is the exploration of resilience in the context of existing
homeland security policies and initiatives of the U.S. government. The third step of this
process is the identification of factors that influence resilience in the context of the
homeland security enterprise.
This journey began with a simple question. What benefits or contributions to the
homeland security enterprise are obtained through the clarification of resilience? The
conclusion is that resilience is a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United
States approached through a process of adaptability based on a synthesis of complexity,
interaction, and experience. Although the main research question is simple, developing
the answer requires an exploration of this emerging theory of resilience in the context of
58
homeland security. The exploration is guided by a set of subordinate questions. What is
resilience in a broad non-sector specific context? What is resilience in the context of
homeland security policies of the United States? What might resilience look like or be in
the context of the homeland security enterprise? How might a sketch of resilience be
developed in the context of the homeland security enterprise? These subordinate
questions frame the research and outcomes of each chapter of this thesis.
What is resilience in a broad non-sector specific context? In Chapter II, it was
determined that resilience exists in a variety of contexts. Although a common
understanding of resilience exists between these contexts, the application of resilience
varies between these examples. Based upon these findings, it was determined that a broad
or macro understanding of resilience does not clarify the concept to the homeland
security practitioner. Thus, additional research is required to clarify the role of resilience
in the homeland security enterprise of the United States.
What is resilience in the context of homeland security policies of the United
States? In Chapter III, it was determined that resilience is a key element of existing
homeland security policies and initiatives of the federal government of the U.S. These
policies indicate that the concept of resilience contributes to the foundation of the
homeland security enterprise of the United States. Although a resilient nation is
considered an outcome of the national preparedness goal of the United States, the
documents reviewed in Chapter III contribute little to determining the homeland security
practitioner’s role in this concept of resilience.
What might resilience look like or be in the context of the homeland security
enterprise? In Chapter IV, the focus on resilience is magnified to a micro level. At this
level, resilience is observed as a complex adaptive system of systems influenced by a
number of factors. The factors influencing resilience include foresight, adaptation,
interaction, and experience. The identification of these factors clarify the concept to the
homeland security practitioner and offer a means to bridging the gap between the “what
is” and “how to” of resilience in the context of homeland security. The remainder of this
chapter focuses on answering the following research question.
59
B. WHAT IS RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HOMELAND SECURITY?
Clarifying resilience requires an understanding of the concept in the context of the
homeland security enterprise. Presently, the application of resilience in the context of
homeland security is based upon a broad definition. Bridging the gap between the “what
is” and the “how to” of resilience requires a clear definition of the concept. Clarifying
resilience is necessary to develop recommendations that address the “how to” of
resilience in the homeland security enterprise. The introduction and application of the
concept to the practitioner requires a specific definition. Based upon the findings of this
research, the following definition is offered as a means of clarifying the concept of
resilience in the context of homeland security.
1. Resilience Is a Process of Adaptability Based on a Synthesis of Complexity, Interaction and Experience
This research concludes that resilience is a process of adaptability based on a
synthesis of complexity, interaction and experience. The development of this definition is
based on the following conclusions obtained through this research.
Resilience within the context of homeland security is the following.
• A process of adaptability experienced over a lifespan
• A complex adaptive system of systems that includes both known and unknown variables
• Experienced and demonstrated in different means dependent upon the stressor, the system, and the environmental conditions at the time
• A vision of the homeland security enterprise based upon the adaptive capacities of government and the public
2. Resilience Is a Process of Adaptability
Resilience is a process of adaptability influenced by a number of factors. The
concept of resilience is a continual process of adaptation to adversity and is not
measurable against a standard set of criteria or time. Resilience is understood as a vision
of the homeland security enterprise that continues to be shaped by the shared experiences
of individuals, communities, and the nation. The existence of resilience in the American
60
enterprise pre-dates the application of the term to the homeland security enterprise and
should not be framed as a new concept of the homeland security enterprise.
3. Resilience Is a Complex Adaptive System of Systems (CASoS)
In Chapter IV, the concept of resilience is evaluated against the requirements of a
CASoS. The result of this evaluation determined that the concept of resilience exists as a
CASoS. The theory of CASoS is approached from an academic perspective. Minimal
practitioner level training exists in the concept of CASos and should be introduced to
local first responders and communities as a means of building adaptive capacity within
their community. Important to the discussion of resilience is the development of local
capabilities through an understanding of the complexities of relationships between
systems belonging to a CASoS. Additional research is needed to map or diagram the
complexities inferred in this thesis.
Resilience is a complex adaptive system of systems (CASoS) that includes both
known and unknown variables. The proposed definition of resilience is based on the
application of the concept in the context of homeland security. The homeland security
enterprise is a complex adaptive environment. Initiatives, such as THIRA identify the
potential threats and hazards of a jurisdiction. Tools, such as the State Preparedness
Report and Core Capabilities determine a jurisdiction’s level of preparedness based on an
established set of criteria deemed necessary to prevent, respond, recover, or mitigate
perceived threats. The THIRA and SPR aid in the identification of known variables of
resilience. Any number of unknown variables creates the complexity of resilience. The
prior experiences and interactions of an individual or community create unknown
variables. How will individuals or communities respond to adversity? How have the prior
experiences and interactions of an individual or community influenced the resilience of
the system?
4. Resilience Is Experienced and Demonstrated in Different Ways
Resilience is dependent upon the interaction between the individual, the stressor,
and existing environmental conditions. The resilience of communities cannot be used as
benchmarks for other communities impacted by the same event or even a similar type of
61
event. The resilience discourse should consider that for resilience to exist, a system must
be exposed to some level of stress or adversity. The manner in which the community
responds to and adapts to the stressor or adversity depends on the prior experiences of the
community. Future resilience approaches should consider the influence of historical
experiences and prior adaptations. As an example, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita impacted
numerous communities along the Gulf Coast of the United States in 2005. In January
2013, U.S. Senator Harry Reid compared Hurricane Sandy to Hurricane Katrina. His
comments indicated that Hurricane Sandy was much worse than Hurricane Katrina.163 In
the days following these comments, Senator Reid offered an apology to the survivors of
Hurricane Katrina. This example demonstrates a tendency to benchmark disasters against
prior events. The resilience of each community impacted by any of the previously
mentioned hurricanes was demonstrated differently and based on a variety of factors that
included the interactions, the experiences, and the particulars of the adversity.
5. Resilience Is a Vision of the Homeland Security Enterprise
The concept of resilience establishes a vision for the homeland security enterprise
of the United States. Achieving this vision requires a homeland security approach to build
and sustain the adaptive capacities of the government and the public. The sustainment or
enhancement of resilience is based upon the establishment of programs and initiatives
promoting adaptive capacities. The adaptive capacities of local and state governments
should be enhanced to influence the resilience of individuals and communities.
Accomplishing this task requires the enterprise to recognize the importance of foresight,
adaptation, interaction, and experience.
6. Evaluating the Conclusion
The research methodology for this research is based on Ball’s Pragmatic
Evaluation Criteria (Table 1). The following paragraphs offer evidence supporting the
development of the above definition of resilience in the context of homeland security.
163 Bruce Alpert, “Reid Says Hurricane Katrina was ‘Nothing in Comparison’ to Sandy,” The Times-
Picayne, January 7, 2013, http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/01/reid_says_hurricane_katrina_wa.htm.
62
The role of adaptation is mentioned in the previous chapters and contributes to
clarifying the concept of resilience in a variety of contexts. The process of synthesizing
existing research on resilience from a variety of contexts contributes to the development
of this definition. The relationship between complexity and resilience is common to all
sources used in this research. Finally, it was determined that experience contributes to
and influences the concept of resilience through the interactions of an individual,
community, system, or nation.
The context for this thesis magnifies the focus from a broad context to a specific
context of resilience as a complex adaptive system of systems of the homeland security
enterprise. Resilience exists in each of the domains of the homeland security enterprise.
The homeland security enterprise of the United States is complex and is comprised of
various domains and dependent systems. The relevance of the proposed definition offers
an approach to understanding the vision of resilience as a national preparedness goal of
the United States.
Any number of disagreements with the proposed value of the above definition of
resilience exists in the context of homeland security. Palin provides three potential threats
to the proposed definition of resilience in the context of homeland security. Those threats
include an acceptance of reality, having a purpose, and an ability to improvise.164
Disagreement based on the acceptance of reality suggests that a definition exists. The
existing definition of resilience is broad and based on a variety of contexts rather than a
specific homeland security context. Disagreement based on having a purpose suggests
that the clarification of resilience does not add purpose to the homeland security
enterprise. The proposed definition of resilience adds clarity to the concept and provides
purpose to the concept as a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United
States. Disagreement based on an ability to improvise suggests that clarifying resilience
adds specificity to the concept and diminishes the ability to innovate. The proposed
164 Philip J. Palin, email message to the author, February 22, 2013.
63
definition of resilience places emphasis on the function of adaptation and encourages the
use of improvisation at the local and state levels of government as a means of influencing
resilience.
According to Ball, the coherence of the proposal is determined by evaluating the
policy argument against the three prior criteria. In any context, resilience is the ability of
a system to adapt to adversity. The ability to adapt is based upon recognizing and
understanding the complexities and systems affected by the adversity. Adaptation to
adversity is influenced by the prior experiences and interaction of the system. The
proposed definition of resilience is relevant to the complex environment of the homeland
security enterprise. Disagreements will occur with the proposed definition of resilience.
However, the proposed definition offers a sense of realism, purpose, and improvisation to
the process of resilience in the context of the homeland security enterprise. Although
these disagreements exist, the proposed definition offers clarity to future discussions
regarding resilience in the context of homeland security.
Maintaining focus requires continual modifications to the clarity of an object.
Although this research adds clarity to the concept of resilience, maintaining the focus of
the homeland security practitioner’s vision of resilience requires additional research and
exploration.
C. OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
This research project excluded several areas of future research related to this
topic. One area excluded from this research is a comparative analysis of policy in each of
the common domains of resilience found in the homeland security enterprise of the
United States. Research conducted as part of this thesis did recognize the domains of
physical and social resilience as contributor to a complex adaptive system of systems, but
did not explore these relationships in greater detail. Another area excluded during this
journey was an exploration of the relationship between a concept of Whole Community
and resilience during adversity. Minimal research exists to describe how the relationships
between these partners behave within a complex adaptive system of systems. Future
64
research conducted in the areas of resilience and homeland security should frame the
discourse properly by using these recommendations and evaluation criteria.
Recommendations for further research regarding the concept of resilience in the
homeland security context will influence the future. However, a present need exists to
clarify the present day vision of resilience. This thesis recommends the development of a
sketch of resilience to clarify the homeland security practitioner’s understanding of the
concept. The final step in clarifying this concept is the development of a sketch of
resilience for the homeland security practitioner.
D. THE SKETCH OF RESILIENCE
A sketch describes an object or issue and is depicted as a drawing or text. For
purposes of this thesis, the sketch of resilience is a narrative. The narrative clarifies the
concept of resilience in the context of homeland security. The sketch of resilience
contributes to the following sections of this thesis and offers a frame of reference for the
development of future homeland security policies. The narrative is not final; future
research and the application of the recommendations of this thesis will influence
modifications to the product.
THE RESILIENCE NARRATIVE
The history of the United States of America contains numerous examples of citizens and communities demonstrating resilience. Throughout the history of this nation, resilience has existed as a continual process of adaptation influenced by a variety of man made, natural, and economic adversities. These adversities have ranged from isolated events to global conflict. Resilience has and continues to exist in this nation.
Resilience is a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United States that consists of a process of adaptation based upon a synthesis of complexity and experience. The concept of adaptation based upon complexity and experience is not new and has been demonstrated from the first explorer to set foot upon the soils of America through the most recent newborn child born in this nation. Resilience is a foundational concept of the homeland security enterprise.
The concept of national resilience is a goal of the homeland security enterprise of the United States. Prior to the establishment of the homeland
65
security enterprise, resilience described the purpose of traditional emergency management mitigation projects. In the early years of the homeland security enterprise, the term resilience was used in the context of critical infrastructure protection. Critical infrastructure systems were to be designed or enhanced to withstand significant pressures and rebound from stress. In this context, resilience was observed more from an engineering perspective rather than a social perspective. The need to analyze physical systems for vulnerabilities gave rise to studies in self- organized criticality and preparing for low probability-high consequence events commonly referred to as a Black Swan.165 The concept of resilience adds purpose to the evolving enterprise known as homeland security.
Understanding resilience requires a microscopic view of today, and a telescopic view of the future. Existing homeland security policies of the United States offer a high-level view of resilience. Local and state governments of the United States have the ability to influence resilience through strengthening their capabilities to adapt to adversity. Strengthening this ability depends on the interactions of government, the private sector, communities and the citizen. This perspective combined with a retrospective view of past adversities strengthens the foresight capability of the community. Resilience adds to the development of a vision of the homeland security enterprise.
A significant shift in homeland security policy has occurred since the issuance of the National Security Strategy and the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review. These two documents elevated the use of the term resilience to a goal of the homeland security enterprise. Thus, propelling the term into the evolving narrative of the enterprise. The emphasis placed on resilience within the enterprise shifted from a context of critical infrastructure to a broader context of resilience of the whole. The concept of resilience contributes to the evolution of the homeland security enterprise.
Resilience has become a “buzz word” of the enterprise. The frequency of the use of the term resilience continues to increase and has migrated from the vernacular of public policy to the vocabulary of the general populace. Resilience is not only used to describe the response and recovery of communities impacted by adversity, but is also used to describe sporting teams who come from behind to win a game. Resilience is about overcoming adversity.
Resilience is an approach to navigating through the complexities of the homeland security enterprise of the United States. Foresight, adaptability, interaction and experience will influence the practitioner’s ability to
165 Taleb, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, 366.
66
navigate through the enterprise. The practitioner should posses the ability to identify future threats and hazards to their jurisdiction. The practitioner should possess the ability to critically think through and adapt to emerging or active threats to their jurisdiction. The ability to operate in this environment will require the practitioner to consider the influences of their interactions within the jurisdiction and their prior experiences. Homeland security is no longer just about prevention and response. Homeland security has evolved into an approach to a resilient and secure nation influenced by adaptation, complexity, interaction, and experience.
The Community Resilience Task Force (Table 5) and the Strategic Foresight Initiative
(Table 7) introduce the concept of resilience into the homeland security enterprise. The
insight offered by the CRTF is applicable to the development of training programs to
introduce the concept of resilience to the homeland security practitioner. The CRTF
recommends the building of a shared understanding of the shared responsibilities of the
enterprise, building a coherent and synergistic campaign to strengthen and sustain
national resilience, organize for effective execution, build the knowledge and talent base
for resilience, and align federal grant programs to promote and enable resilience
initiatives.166 The SFI identifies the future needs of the enterprise as a knowledge base to
identify essential capabilities; develop innovative models and tools, and the development
of dynamic partnerships.167 The recommendations provided by these two separate
documents agree with the conclusion of this thesis that resilience in the context of
homeland security is influenced by foresight, adaptation, interaction, and experience. The
introduction of the concept to the homeland security practitioner should consider these
recommendations.
E. INTRODUCING RESILIENCE THROUGH A TRANSFER OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH TO PRACTITIONER KNOWLEDGE
The prior sections of this chapter answer the “what is” requirement necessary to
clarify the role of resilience in the context of homeland security. The following sections
bridge the gap between the “what is” and the “how to” requirement of this research. A
166 President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.), Community Resilience Task Force,
Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations, 59. 167 United States. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Crisis Response and Disaster Resilience
2030: Forging Strategic Action in an Age of Uncertainty.
67
significant portion of the existing literature on resilience contributes to the academic
knowledge base. The intent of this thesis is not only to contribute to the knowledge base
of the academic community, but also to add to the practitioner knowledge base. The first
step clarifies the concept. The second step introduces the concept to the practitioner. The
third step applies the concept to the homeland security practitioner.
Clarifying resilience from an academic perspective is only one part to clarifying
resilience in the context of homeland security. The majority of information regarding the
application of resilience in the homeland security context currently resides in the
academic realm of the enterprise. Strengthening resilience requires that homeland
security practitioners and academics clearly understand the concept and its application to
the enterprise. The SFI introduces the term foresight capability as a means of forecasting
the future. Psychology-based research suggests that the adaptive capacity of the
individual influences resilience. This thesis concludes that resilience is viewed as a
complex adaptive system of systems. Adaptation provides a means to navigate through
the complexities of resilience and the homeland security enterprise. However, the
evolving homeland security narrative and existing training have yet to include these
terms.
Introducing the concept of resilience as a vision of homeland security based on a
process of adaptability influenced by a synthesis of complexity, interaction and
experience is accomplished through the application of the resilience narrative and the
development of homeland security practitioner training. Introducing the resilience
narrative is important to understanding the concept. This thesis offers several
recommendations to introduce the issue. Table 8 offers a crosswalk between the
academic conclusions of this research and the potential application of those conclusions
to the homeland security practitioner.
68
Table 8. Academic to Practitioner Cross Walk
Academic Based Conclusions Application to the Practitioner
Resilience is a process of adaptability experienced over a life span
• Resilience is influenced after every major or minor event.
• The conduct of after action reviews, the production of improvement plans, the procurement of equipment and technologies to improve response efforts above the prior event are all processes to improve the enterprise.
• Resilience is experienced and demonstrated in different means dependent upon the stressor, the system, and the environmental conditions at the time.
• No one standard image of resilience exists.
• Resilience has to begin and occur at the lowest level of a system.
• Resilience is not a benchmark.
Resilience is a complex adaptive system of systems that includes both known and unknown variables
• Resilience is a process of interaction between the community and government
• Resilience is a process of identifying the relationships between systems of a community.
• Resilience is a process of understanding capabilities.
Sroufe outlines five implications to describe resilience. The transfer of these
implications to a homeland security context offers a guide to clarifying resilience to the
homeland security practitioner. (Table 9)168
168 United States. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Crisis Response and Disaster Resilience
2030: Forging Strategic Action in an Age of Uncertainty, 138.
69
Table 9. Sroufe’s Implications of Resilience
Sroufe’s Implications of Resilience Applicability to the Homeland Security Enterprise
Resilience is a product of development over time
• Resilience is constantly being enhanced within the United States
• A significant number of disasters and complex historical events have and continue to shape the resilience of the United States.
Multiple pathways to similar locations manifest into one outcome
• No boilerplate or one size fits all template to resilience exists.
Different outcomes of the same pathway
• Disasters, such as hurricanes Katrina and Rita, have demonstrated that the same pathway may produce differing results. Within the State of Louisiana, various coastal communities impacted by these storms recovered quicker than the city of New Orleans.
Change is possible at many points
• Viewing resilience through the lenses of complex adaptive systems of systems may also influence change.
• Minor system changes within any linked system may result in changes to the life span of resilience.
Change is constrained by prior adaptations
• Along the timeline of the American Enterprise and the homeland security enterprise change is constant.
• Constant changes within policy and strategies influence the nation’s ability to adapt to adversity.
F. POTENTIAL MODELS OF RESILIENCE BASED COURSES FOR THE PRACTITIONER
A review of FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute’s Catalog of Training
Programs determines the existence of minimal resilience-based training. A possible
reason is a lack of clarity in understanding the role of resilience within the homeland
security context. Several options to increase the resilience knowledge base of the
70
homeland security practitioner do exist. The first option is the development of an online
course to introduce and clarify resilience in the context of homeland security. The second
option is the development and introduction of a resilience module into existing training
programs sponsored by FEMA and training partners, such as the National Domestic
Preparedness Consortium. The third option is the development of an on-site training
program available to local jurisdictions. The proposed series of resilience training will
broaden the knowledge base of the practitioner and aid in the development of a resilience
approach for the jurisdiction’s homeland security program. Resilience 101 is an
introductory course for the individual. The inclusion of a resilience module into existing
homeland security training programs broadens the knowledge base from a basic level to a
practitioner level. The multi-day course of instruction broadens the knowledge base from
the practitioner level to a community level.
1. Resilience 101-Online Introduction to Resilience
The Resilience 101 course provides a basic level of resilience training and offers a
foundation for additional resilience courses. The core learning objectives of this course
are as follows.
• Obtain knowledge in the resilience approach of homeland security
• Obtain knowledge into the relevant federal policies and initiatives that aid in the framing of the resilience approach
• Introduce the concepts of foresight capability and adaptive capacity as tools of resilience
• Demonstrate an understanding of connecting the dots of homeland security to develop a sketch of resilience
The Resilience 101 course builds upon the recommendations of the CRTF (Table
5). The course aids in the building of a shared understanding of the shared responsibilities
of the enterprise regarding this concept of resilience. The Resilience 101 course would be
an Independent Study course and provided through the Emergency Management Institute
(EMI) online training program. The following elements of resilience in the context of
homeland security are introduced to the homeland security practitioner through this
proposed course.
71
a. Presidential Policy Directive 8 The National Security Strategy
The use of PPD-8 introduces the concept of resilience as a goal of the
homeland security enterprise as well as discusses the national frameworks established as
by the directive. The “Learning Check” for this module is a series of questions related to
the five mission areas identified in PPD-8.
b. Threats Hazards Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA)
This module introduces the THIRA concept to the homeland security
practitioner. As a result of this module, the homeland security practitioner is exposed to
key terms necessary to participate in the development of a jurisdictional THIRA. The
“Learning Check” for this module requires the participant to apply key terms contained
within the THIRA.
c. Core Capabilities
This module introduces the concepts of the core capabilities to the
homeland security practitioner. As a result of this module, the homeland security
practitioner is able to understand the application of the core capabilities to enhance the
resilience of the nation. Although this module introduces the core capabilities in the five
mission areas required by PPD-8, the module focuses on the application of the capability
to the enterprise rather than the mission area. The “Learning Check” for this module
requires the participant to select appropriate core capabilities for a specific scenario. As
an example, the participant would be given a hazardous materials scenario and asked to
identify relevant core capabilities.
d. The Resilience Narrative of the Homeland Security Enterprise
The Resilience Narrative introduces resilience as a complex issue of the
homeland security enterprise. Rather than focus on resilience in the context of any one
specific domain of the homeland security enterprise, the narrative introduces the concept
as an existing process of American society. This module introduces resilience as a
process of adaptation based on a synthesis of complexity, interaction and resilience. The
72
“Learning Check” for this module requires the participant to identify relevant historical
events that have influenced both the experiences and homeland security policies of the
United States.
2. Incorporation of Resilience Training into Existing Courses
The introduction of resilience modules into existing training courses builds upon
the basic level learning objectives of the Resilience 101 course. In addition to the prior
recommendations of the CRTF contained in the Resilience 101 course, the development
of resilience modules into existing homeland security training programs would
implement the CRTF’s recommendation of organizing for effective execution. In this
level of training, the practitioner is able to understand and effectively execute their
mission in support of resilience. The homeland security practitioner must not only
possess a basic knowledge level of resilience, but they must also possess an
understanding of how their respective discipline influences the resilience of the nation.
The SFI will be introduced into various modules of these onsite or instructor led
homeland security courses. The practitioner applies the ability to develop a foresight
capability by identifying essential core capabilities specific to the course topic,
identifying innovative models and tools to support these core capabilities, and the
development of dynamic partnerships as a base to understanding the functions of
interaction and experience. Accomplishing this recommendation requires revisions to a
number of homeland security courses provided by DHS, FEMA EMI, the National
Domestic Preparedness Consortium and others. Although the introduction of this module
requires modifications to existing training programs, the emphasis placed on resilience as
a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United States requires that this concept
be introduced as a core module of all homeland security-based training programs.
As an example, an Agro-Terrorism course would emphasize the significance of
America’s agricultural community to the overall resilience of the nation. Class
participants are required to demonstrate the ability to apply foresight to the development
of adaptive capacities and the identification of prior experiences and interactions that
influence the resilience of the America’s agricultural community. The introduction of a
73
resilience module into an Incident Command System course might prove to be more
difficult than the prior example. However, the concepts of foresight, adaptation,
interaction, and experience are applicable to the context of an Incident Command System
(ICS) course.
3. Integrated Resilience Training Course
The Integrated Resilience Training Course (IRTC) is an advanced level of
training that builds upon the core learning objectives established in the online course. The
IRTC course is a multi-day program of instruction held in a requesting jurisdiction. The
delivery of the training program to local jurisdictions allows for the alteration of the
course to meet the specific needs of the community. The purpose of the IRTC course is to
approach resilience from a community perspective rather than from the perspective of an
individual or practitioner. This course incorporates the prior recommendations of the
CRTF and SFI and accomplishes the intent of the CRTF by addressing the
recommendation to build the knowledge and talent base for resilience. The delivery of the
IRTC course at the local level of government promotes a Whole Community approach to
resilience. The IRTC builds upon the learning objectives of prior courses and provides
opportunities for the practitioner to experiment with existing products such as THIRA.
The outcome of the IRTC is the development of a strategic homeland security approach
for the community that connects the dots between existing systems of the community.
Day One: Introduction to Resilience in the Context of the Homeland Security
Purpose: The purpose of day one is the introduction of resilience as a process of adaptation based on a synthesis of complexity, interaction, and experience. Participants are introduced to the various federal documents that influence the homeland security enterprise.
Resources: Day one utilizes and expands upon the resource documents identified in the Resilience 101 Course.
Outcomes: Through the use of lecture, facilitated discussions, and group work the participants modify the Resilience Narrative based upon their own jurisdiction. The outcome is a narrative describing the adaptability, foresight, interaction, and experiences of the jurisdiction.
74
Day Two: Introduction and Development of a Jurisdictional THIRA
Purpose: Day two introduces the THIRA concept to participants. The introduction and application of the tool expands the knowledge base of participants.
Resources: Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 201-THIRA
Outcomes: At the conclusion of day two, participants have expanded their knowledge base through the development of a THIRA document for the jurisdiction. The development of this document demonstrates knowledge in the application of key terms associated with THIRA and an understanding of the linkages between the process and the jurisdictional resilience narrative.
Day Three: Introduction and Application of Core Capabilities
Purpose: Introduces and applies core capabilities to the jurisdictional THIRA. Participants will identify past, present and future capacities required in their jurisdiction.
Resources: Jurisdictional Resilience Narrative, Jurisdictional THIRA, FEMA Core Capabilities
Outcomes: At the conclusion of day three, participants have expanded their knowledge of core capabilities. Through facilitated discussions and group work, the participants have identified the necessary core capabilities to sustain or develop a process of adaptation based on a synthesis of complexity, interaction and experience.
Day Four: Foresight and Adaptation
Purpose: Day four serves as a capstone for the program. The knowledge base of participants is expanded through the development of a jurisdictional resilience narrative, jurisdictional THIRA, and jurisdictional core capabilities inventory. The expansion of knowledge contributes to the development of a foresight and adaptation statement for the jurisdiction. The foresight and adaptation statement outlines the intent and priorities of the jurisdiction to sustain or enhance their resilience.
Resources: Work products of the three previous days
Outcomes: The development of a homeland security resilience strategy for the jurisdiction. The participant develops a skill set to connect the dots of resilience as a means to map and understand the complexities of their jurisdiction.
75
The intent of this chapter is the clarification, introduction, and application of the
concept of resilience in the context of homeland security. In clarifying the concept,
resilience is described as a process of adaptability based upon a synthesis of complexity,
interaction, and experience. The introduction of resilience to the homeland security
practitioner through training transfers academic knowledge to practitioner understanding.
Applying the concept of resilience influences the practitioner’s understanding of not only
resilience, but the homeland security enterprise of the United States.
G. CONNECTING THE DOTS
Previously in this chapter, the Resilience Narrative is offered as a sketch of
resilience. The intent of the narrative is to offer a means to clarify and introduce the
concept of resilience to the homeland security practitioner. The narrative purposely
excluded the relationships and dependencies between the numerous systems of the
homeland security enterprise. This thesis acknowledges the existence of domains within
the enterprise that exist at the individual or community level, the private sector, and
government levels of American society.
This thesis suggests that the homeland security enterprise of the United States is
best described as a “connect the dots” sheet of a child’s activity book. For purposes of
this analogy, each system of the enterprise is represented by a dot on the page. The
following examples are a representative sample of potential dots on the homeland
security “activity page.” The theoretical dots represent food defense, cyber security,
biological terrorism, chemical terrorism, radiological terrorism, natural disasters, PPD-8,
the National Preparedness Goal, the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, FEMA EMI,
public health preparedness grants, homeland security preparedness grants, emergency
management preparedness grants, Urban Area Security Initiatives, hazard mitigation
grants, hazard mitigation planning, disaster assistance, infrastructure protection, security
clearances, agro terrorism, recovery, THIRA, state government, local government, tribal
authorities, agencies of the federal government, the community, and the State
Preparedness Report. Resilience is mentioned in many of these activities. However,
current conversations on resilience in each of these activities only relate to the specific
76
topic. Connecting the dots of resilience produces a drawn sketch to bring final focus to
the concept of resilience in the context of homeland security.
Ball indicated that a valid policy argument is feasible and valuable.169 The
development of a drawn resilience sketch through connecting the dots between existing
programs and initiatives of homeland security meets both of these criteria. The GAO,
Congressional Research Service and numerous academics have researched the
effectiveness of government programs developed in the name of homeland security.
Several of these reports are cited in this research. In reviewing the cited reports, it was
noticed that although a significant amount of literature exists, minimal research connects
the dots of the homeland security enterprise. Additional data obtained from cited reports
should be collected and analyzed to develop the dots of the homeland security “activity
sheet.”
The value to identifying and connecting the dots is gained by providing the
practitioner the ability to not only view a drawn sketch of resilience, but to also identify
the numerous federal programs developed in the name of homeland security. Connecting
the dots influences the administration of federal assistance to state and local jurisdictions
to support preparedness efforts. The relevance of future homeland security policies,
initiatives, and programs should be evaluated against their contribution to the overall
resilience of the nation. The final day of the proposed Integrated Resilience Training
Program requires the practitioner and jurisdiction to diagram the various systems
necessary to support their foresight and adaptation strategy. Connecting the dots of
resilience at any level of government in the United States strengthens the concept of
resilience as a process of adaptation based upon a synthesis of complexity, interaction,
and experience to define and clarify the complex environment known as homeland
security.
H. APPLICATION TO THE HOMELAND SECURITY ENTERPRISE
The primary research question of this thesis is to determine what benefits or
contributions to the homeland security enterprise are obtained through the clarification of
169 Ball, “A Pragmatic Framework for the Evaluation of Policy Arguments,” 3–24.
77
resilience. The research conducted in support of this thesis includes an extensive review
of literature from a wide variety of subject areas. In addition to this review of literature, a
number of personal conversations and discussions were conducted during this research
and provided valuable background information to this research. Several analogies of
resilience were identified during these conversations including a comparison of resilience
to the wind. The wind is invisible, but an individual can feel and experience the effects of
the wind. In contrast, other conversations suggested that resilience simply exists. Thus, it
is not necessary to clarify the concept of resilience in the context of homeland security.
These analogies and statements define a need to clarify, introduce, and apply this concept
to the homeland security practitioner.
Resilience is a vision of the homeland security enterprise of the United States that
is approached through a process of adaptability based on a synthesis of complexity,
interaction, and experience. The approach involves all domains and stakeholders of the
enterprise and offers the opportunity to clarify the homeland security enterprise of the
United States.
This thesis concludes with a final thought on the concept of resilience in the
context of homeland security. Resilience is a vision of the enterprise. The clarification,
introduction, and application of the proposed definition of resilience offer the homeland
security practitioner a way to navigate and explore the complexities of the homeland
security of the enterprise.
The need to explore has driven technological advancements in navigational aids
for centuries. These advancements have benefited the exploration of the New World by
European explorers, the exploration of the sea, and the exploration of space.
Improvements to navigational aids build upon the original concepts of the compass. The
exploration of the homeland security enterprise at the academic and practitioner level
requires a directional heading. The concept of resilience recommended by this thesis
establishes a directional heading for the homeland security practitioner.
78
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
79
LIST OF REFERENCES
Alpert, Bruce. “Reid Says Hurricane Katrina was ‘Nothing in Comparison’ to Sandy.” The Times-Picayne, January 7, 2013. http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/01/reid_says_hurricane_katrina_wa. htm.
Ball, William. “A Pragmatic Framework for the Evaluation of Policy Arguments.” Policy Studies Review 14, no. 1/2 (1995): 3–24.
Biddle, Stephen, Laurie Garrett, James M. Lindsay, Maurice R. Greenberg, Stewart M. Patrick, Adam Segal, Steven Simon, and Paul B. Stares. “Obama’s NSS: Promises and Pitfalls.” Council on Foreign Relations, May 28, 2010. http://www.cfr.org/defensehomeland-security/obamas-nss-promise- pitfalls/p22240.
Broughton, Pamela N. “Measuring Preparedness: Accessing the Impact of the Homeland Security Grant Program.” Master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, 2009.
Chandra, Anita. Building Community Resilience to Disasters a Way Forward to Enhance National Health Security. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2011.
Coafee, Jon, David Murakami Wood, and Peter Rogers. The Everyday Resilience of the City. United Kinkdom: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
Cutter, Susan L. Christopher Burton, and Christopher Emrich. “Disaster Resilience Indicators for Benchmarking Baseline Conditions.” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 7, no. 1 (2010): art. 51.
DSBlog, The. http://www.dsbox.com/index.php/blog/archives/2011/04/.
Flynn, Stephen E., and Council on Foreign Relations. The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation, 1st ed. New York: Random House: in cooperation with the Council on Foreign Relations, 2007.
Freed, Judson M., and Naval Postgraduate School, Department of National Security Affairs. No Failure of Imagination. Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School, 2011.
Glass, Robert J., Arlo L. Ames, William A. Stubblefield, Stephen H. Conrad, S. Louise Maffitt, Leonard A. Malczynski, David G. Wilson, Jeffrey J. Carlson, George A. Backus, Mark A. Ehlen, Keith B. Venderveen, and Dennis Engi. Sandia National Laboratories: A Roadmap for the Complex Adaptive Systems of Systems CASoS) Engineering Initiative. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories, 2008.
80
Haimes, Yacov, Y. Kenneth Crowther, and Barry M. Horowitz. “Homeland Security Preparedness: Balancing Protection with Resilience in Emergent Systems.” Systems Engineering 11, no. 4 (2008): 287–308.
Homeland Security Studies and Affairs Institute. Community Resilience Profiles: Assessment and Evaluation, 2011.
International Association of Emergency Managers. Preparedness: A Principled Approach to Return on Investment. Falls Church, VA: International Association of Emergency Managers, 2011.
Luthar, Suniya S., Dante Cicchetti, and Bronwyn Becker. “The Construct of Resilience: A Critical Evaluation and Guidelines for Future Work.” Child Development 71, no. 3 (2000): 543–562.
Madia, James D. “Homeland Security Organizations: Design Contingencies in Complex Environments.” Mmaster’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, 2011.
Manning, Timothy. Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Requirement: Grant Programs Directorate Information Bulletin no. 385. Washington, DC: United States Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2012.
Obama, Barak. Presidential Policy Directive 8. Washington, DC: White House Office, 2011.
Palin, Philip J. “Resilience: The Grand Strategy.” Homeland Security Affairs 6, no. 1 (January 2010). http://www.hsaj.org/?article=6.1.2.
Paton, Douglas. Disaster Resilience: Building Capacity to Co-Exist with Natural Hazards and their Consequences. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Ltd., 2006.
Paton, Douglas, and David Moore Johnston. Disaster Resilience: An Integrated Approach. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas, 2006.
Porter, Wayne, and Mark Mykleby. A National Strategic Narrative. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, 2011.
President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council (U.S.). Community Resilience Task Force. Community Resilience Task Force Recommendations. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Advisory Council, 2011.
“SEC Issues Report on Efforts of Private Sector to Implement Interagency Paper on Sound Practices to Strengthen Resilience of U.S. Financial System.” US Fed News Service, Including US State News, April 27, 2006.
81
Shanker, Thom, and Eric Schmitt. “How Resilient Is Post-9/11 America?” The New York Times Sunday Review, sec. The Opinion Pages, September 8, 2012.
Stecher, Brian M. Toward a Culture of Consequences: Performance-Based Accountability Systems for Public Services. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 2010.
Taleb, Nassim. The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. 1st ed. New York: Random House, 2007.
U.S. Congress, Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Redundancy Elimination and Enhanced Performance for Preparedness Grants Act: Report of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, United States Senate to Accompany H.R. 3980, to Provide for Identifying and Eliminating Redundant Reporting Requirements and Developing Meaningful Performance Metrics for Homeland Security Preparedness Grants, and for Other Purposes. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2010.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201.” April 2012. https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=705408.
———. “Core Capabilities.” (n.d.). http://www.fema.gov/core-capabilities.
———. Crisis Response and Disaster Resilience 2030: Forging Strategic Action in an Age of Uncertainty. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2012.
———.National Preparedness Goal. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2011.
———. “Presidential Policy Directive 8.” March 30, 2011. http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/laws/gc_1215444247124.shtm.
———. “Whole Community.” (n.d.). http://www.fema.gov/about/wholecommunity.shtm.
———. Quadrennial Homeland Security Review Report: A Strategic Framework for a Secure Homeland. Washington, DC: Department of Homeland Security, 2010.
U.S. Department of Transportation. Recovering from Disasters: The National Transportation Recovery Strategy. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 2009.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. Critical Infrastructure Protection by Stephen L. Caldwell. (GAO-10-772). Washington, DC: GPO, 2010.
82
———. Measuring Disaster Preparedness: FEMA Has Made Limited Progress in Assessing National Capabilities by William O. Jenkins Jr. (GAO-11-2607). Washington, DC: GPO, 2011.
———. Quadrennial Homeland Security Review by David C. Maurer. (GAO-11-153R). Washington, DC: GPO, 2010.
———. Quadrennial Homeland Security Review: Enhanced Stakeholder Consultation and Use of Risk Information Could Strengthen Future Reviews. (GAO-11-873). Washington, DC: GPO, 2011.
U.S. Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. Federal Actions for a Climate Resilient Nation. Washington, DC: Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, 2011.
U.S. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. Defining Homeland Security: Analysis and Congressional Considerations, by Shawn Reese. CRS Report R42462. Washington, DC: Office of Congressional Information and Publishing, January 8, 2013.
Ungar, Michael. The Social Ecology of Resilience: A Handbook of Theory and Practice. New York, NY: Verlag, Springer, 2011.
The White House. “Homeland Security.” (n.d.). http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/homeland-security.
———. National Security Strategy. Washington, DC: The White House, 2010.
83
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Agaibi, Christine E., and John P. Wilson. “Trauma, PTSD, and Resilience: A Review of the Literature.” Trauma, Violence, & Abuse: A Review Journal 6, no. 3 (July 2005): 195–216.
Australia Auditor-General’s Office. Critical Infrastructure Resilience Strategy Supplement: An Overview of Activities to Deliver the Strategy. Canberra, ACT: Attorney General’s Department, 2010. http://www.tisn.gov.au/www/tisn/content.nsf/Page/Resilience.
Bloom, Martin. “Primary Prevention and Resilience: Changing Paradigms and Changing Lives.” In Preventing Violence in America, edited by Hampton, Robert L., Pamela Jenkins and Thomas P. Gullotta. 87–114. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996.
Brafman, Ori, and Rod A. Beckstrom. The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations. New York, NY: Portfolio, 2006.
Cohen, Orna, Iris Slonim, Ricky Finzi, and Ronit D. Leichtentritt. “Family Resilience: Israeli Mothers’ Perspectives.” The American Journal of Family Therapy 30, no. 2 (March–April 2002): 173–187.
Covey, Stephen M. R., and Rebecca R. Merrill. The Speed of Trust: The One Thing that Changes Everything. New York, NY: Free Press, 2006.
Daniszewski, John. “The Bombings in London; A Country’s Resilience; British Response Is Measured, almost Serene; There Has Been Little Public Talk of Altering Policy or of Harsher Measures for Suspects.” Los Angeles Times, July 9, 2005.
Friedman-Peleg, Keren, and Yehuda C. Goodman. “From Posttrauma Intervention to Immunization of the Social Body: Pragmatics and Politics of a Resilience Program in Israel’s Periphery.” Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 34, no. 3 (September 2010): 421–442.
Garbarino, James. “Coping with Resilience.” Psyccritiques 47, no. 3 (2002): 247–248.
Greene, Roberta R., and David G. Greene. “Resilience in the Face of Disasters: Bridging Micro- and Macro-Perspectives.” Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 19, no. 8 (2009): 1010–1024.
Haimes, Yacov Y., Kenneth Crowther, and Barry M. Horowitz. “Homeland Security Preparedness: Balancing Protection with Resilience in Emergent Systems.” Systems Engineering 11, no. 4 (2008): 287–308.
Homeland Security Studies and Affairs Institute. Community Resilience Profiles: Assessment and Evaluation, 2011.
84
Howard, Judith A., and Ernest Zebrowski. Category 5: The Story of Camille, Lessons Unlearned from America’s most Violent Hurricane. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2005.
Innes, Judith Eleanor, and David E. Booher. Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. New York, NY: Routledge, 2010.
Keynes, John Maynard. “The Resilience of Capitalism.” The Atlantic Monthly 297, no. 3 (April 2006): 46.
Kim, W. Chan, and Renée Mauborgne. Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and make the Competition Irrelevant. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2005.
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Meadows, Donella H., and Diana Wright. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Pub., 2008.
Mitchell, Melanie. Complexity: A Guided Tour. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Owens, John E. “The Resilience of Democratic Institutions in Britain, Australia and the United States Under Conditions of Total War.” Australian Journal of International Affairs 66, no. 3 (June 2012): 330–348.
Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. London: Simon & Schuster, 2000.
Stajduhar, Kelli I., Laura Funk, Audrey L. Shaw, Joan L. Bottorff, and Joy Johnson. “Resilience from the Perspective of the Illicit Injection Drug User: An Exploratory Descriptive Study.” International Journal of Drug Policy 20, no. 4 (2009): 309–316.
Straw, Joseph. “Israel’s Lessons in Public Resilience.” Security Management 54, no. 3 (March 2010): 22.
Symon, Fiona. “Resilience in the Face of Terrorism TOURISM: Visitors Appear to have Recognised that Disaster can Strike Anywhere.” Financial Times, December 7, 2005.
Thomas, Gail Fann, Susan Page Hocevar, and Erik Jansen. A Diagnostic Approach to Building Collaborative Capacity in an Interagency Context. Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School, 2006.
85
United Kingdom Cabinet Office. “Strategic National Framework on Community Resilience.” February 20, 2013. http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/content/community-resilience.
Vale, Lawrence J., and Thomas J. Campanella. The Resilient City. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2005.
86
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
87
INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST
1. Defense Technical Information Center Ft. Belvoir, Virginia 2. Dudley Knox Library Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California 3. Tony Russell FEMA Emergency Management Institute Emmitsburg, Maryland 4. Corey Gruber FEMA National Preparedness Washington, DC 5. Tony Robinson FEMA Region 6 Denton, Texas 6. Bob Hendrix FEMA Region 6 Denton, Texas 7. Daniel Walsh National Domestic Preparedness Consortium Socorro, New Mexico