Critical Infrastructure involves 16 sectors whose system, assets and networks are considered as very vital in the United States and their incapacitation has got deliberating effects on the “national economic security, public health, safety and other combinations thereof”. The “critical infrastructure security and resilience” advances as a result of the advances the strengthening of functioning and maintaining of infrastructure by national policy. This annex tends to describe the functions and the policies of concept of operation in assessing and reestablishing the “critical infrastructure and key resources (CIKR)” and its territories during the incidents that are actual and domestic. These annex details processes ensure coordination and the integration of the “CIKR- related activities” among other private and public managers and the “CIKR security partners” with immediate regional and national levels. CIKR protection becomes an ongoing process of multiple intersecting elements. “The National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP)” provides frameworks for the unprecedented cooperation developed and implemented in an effort that is coordinated and national bringing together governments at different levels. The NIPP addresses protection of infrastructure and the resilience of environmental hazards. The most effective practices and strategies employed offers benefits in case of naturally occurring hazards and other failures which are manmade.
According to O'Brien (2013), continuity and protection of “critical infrastructure and key resources” of U.S. are very important in the other economic vitalities and national security. Critical infrastructure are assets and systems which are vital to the United States and the incapacitation of destruction debilitating the effects of security. O'Brien (2013 ) note that the main key resources include the resources which are controlled by private and public sectors and are essential to the minimal government and economic operations. Attacks on the CIKR significantly affects the functioning if the government and economy producing cascading effects beyond the targeted sector and the physical location of the incident. Fisher et al. (2010 ) notes that the “Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7 (HSPD-7)” was a policy which was developed in the United States which helps in enhancing the protection of CIKR by creating frameworks for the partners identifying, analyzing and protecting the national CIKP from terrorist attacks.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Policies Guiding Critical Infrastructure and Key Sectors
Stewart (2010 ) notes that the policies which are concerned with the protection of CIKR are established by the following authorities, “Homeland Security Act of 2002; the National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets; the National Strategy for Securing Cyberspace; and other relevant statutes, executive orders, and Presidential directives.” The security of Homeland is charged by the presidential directive on the responsibilities for coordinating the national efforts in general through enhancing the protection of CIKR of the United States. These directives designate the SSAs with the roles of coordinating planning- and protection- related activities within the CIKR sectors. This policy provides structure that is needed in addressing the unique characteristics and also operating the models of each of the CIKR sectors. Fisher et al. (2010 ) emphasizes on the importance of collaboration and partnering among various partners and the reliance of the voluntary information sharing among the private sectors. The NIPP provides a framework in the developing, implementing and maintaining the coordinated national effort which protects the CIKR in its 16 sectors. Each of the sector is represented in the federal planning sector- specific agency process which is coordinated by the council representing the interests of each sector among the government agencies. And the coordinating council that represents each sector being responsible of developing specific plans.
Structure and Function of CIKR Sectors
Fisher et al. (2010 ) notes that information technology is a central part of the national security, public health and its safety as well as the economy safety. Businesses and other private organizations are dependent of the IT sectors and services of all the critical infrastructure sectors’ products and services. The CIKR has got a lot of diverse global operations that are interconnected and have interrelationship with the infrastructure sectors. These operations faces a lot of global and multifaceted daily threats. Individual CIKR sector entities proactively have responsibilities of managing the risks of own operations and those of their customers through monitoring and mitigating activities constantly with an aim of preventing daily incidents from happening which might cause disruption to the national security and the safety of public health and economy. Although the infrastructure of the IT has got certain levels of inherent resilience, it is interconnected and interrelated to the present challenges and opportunities for coordinating the public and private sectors preparedness of the activities. Homeland Security Act identifies the Act of 2002 in the first- ever all- encompassing coordinated national critical infrastructure and key resources. They ensure that they provide core mechanisms that enables the government and other private sectors to enhance security partners who works together in the implementation of CIKR protection initiatives.
Regulatory Instruments for CIKR Sectors
The resilience shift is a global initiative which was launched in the year 2006 to address the recommendations of the world’s Register Foundation’s Foresight Review of the resilience engineering. This aims at inspiring and empowering the shift of the critical infrastructure resilience practice so that the engineered structures and infrastructure gets safer and better. Chen et al. (2013) notes that this resilience shift is funded by the Lloyd’s Register Foundation. Stewart (2010 ) notes that the transitioning of the resilient critical system of infrastructure system addresses the fundamental challenges that are posed during the expansion of the infrastructure system and other complex interdependencies and the uncertainties. This necessarily does not mean the abandoning of the traditional risks with other forms of analysis and management but rather the complementing frameworks and the practices of the support system- wide resilience. This broad concept is deployed for many uses and emerges powerful in the framing concept of the recent decades across the diverse sectors of the disaster management and the framing of concepts across diverse sectors of disaster management. Resilience is highly associated with the systems of socio- technical and socio- ecological responses which overcomes the uncertainties and disruptions.
Sortino (2009 ) notes that the department of Homeland Security prevents against any form of terrorist attacks responding to any form of threats and hazards of the nation. To advance in this objective, they have developed NIPP and the National Response Framework. The NIPP acts a comprehensive risk management framework which clearly defines the critical infrastructure of the protection roles helping to ensure that the government and other private sectors are non- tribal partners. The NIPP comes up with a plan for the settings of the requirements for the protection of infrastructure helping to ensure that the government and the economy continues in the event of the terrorist attacks and other disasters. The main purpose of NIPP is building a safer and a more secure resilient America through enhancing of security of the nation’s CIKR mitigating the deliberate efforts of terrorists to destroy and exploit the national preparedness and the rapid recovery of the event of an attack and other forms of emergencies.
Vulnerabilities of CIKR Sector and its potential Threat
The critical Infrastructure consists of the systems and the assets that are so vital to United States that their incapacity can harm the nation’s physical security and economic security. Critical infrastructure is geographically concentrated so as to ensure that they mitigate the vulnerable to events like natural disasters and other forms of terrorist attacks. The disruption of the concentrated infrastructure can have great disproportionate effects within the costs of the potentially running billions which spreads in the immediate area of disruption. This is demonstrated by the geographic vulnerability caused by the disruption of the United States economic activities. The geographic concentrations of the United States and most critically the infrastructure typically has developed through the combination of the market influences including the resource location and other community preferences. Congress and the federal agencies adopt the policies affecting the capacity and the location of critical infrastructure with the inclusion of the environmental regulation incentives ( Stewart, 2010 ). Other federal policies have developed specifically for addressing the perceived threats of the critical infrastructure. All these influences had been existing for many decades gradually driving the critical infrastructure to the geographical configuration to date.
Some of the analysts argue that the little government interventions necessarily alleviated the geographical vulnerabilities of the critical infrastructure because the private sectors adjust the practices of the own financial interest. However, the congress comes up with a conclusion that the federal intervention and the employment of different number of policies can help in the encouraging of geographical dispersion ensuring that there is survivability and also ensuring that the infrastructure recovers from many in capabilities through mitigating the impacts that are concentrated in the disruption of infrastructure. Chen et al. (2013 ) notes that addressing of all these vulnerabilities involves calling for the combination of many options. The congress can also consider using the legislative proposals with the potential effect of ensuring that the effects that goes to the infrastructure development either directly or indirectly is mitigated. This helps in relieving the exacerbation of the geographic vulnerability. The economic efficiency of the public critical infrastructure and the efficient use of the federal funds for the development of infrastructure which requires important consideration.
Whenever there is critical infrastructure in the geographically concentration is distinctively vulnerable to a range of geographical hazards. This includes the natural hazards such as the natural occurring and the non- natural events which varies potentially for the infrastructure disruption depending on the type of event and the location of the infrastructure sectors which are present in the location. These types of events have similar geographic scale. Among the other geographic events that pose the greatest hazards to CIKR sector of the United States includes the meteorological events such as the existence of hurricanes, topical storms and any other form of potentially physically disruptive critically infrastructure related to the critical workers in many geographical areas. For instance, the damaging effects of hurricanes and other energy and chemical infrastructure. Other persistent power and communication blackouts disrupts the power dependent- services. Sortino (2009 ) notes that earthquakes also have a potential damage to the concentration of the critical infrastructure in active regions of the United States. For instance, the 1994 earthquake is an example of a seismic activity in a region that is concentrated in critical infrastructure. This earthquake had a limited impact on the region’s major spots such as the airport and the energy infrastructure causing a significant damage to the bridges and the highways which caused vital damage to the public transportation. IN addition to the highway damage, the earthquake heavily damaged the port of Kobe which was the Japanese largest container of the shipping port
The Historical Incident that affected CIKR Sector
Yusta, Correa & Lacal-Arántegui (2011) notes that the Toronto experience with the several acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) which was an illustration of how quickly the diseases spread in the hospital and the highlighted dangerous phenomenon. The unrecognized case of Toronto caused a significant morbidity and mortality. The absence of rapid tests distinguishes new diseases such as influenza and pneumonia which were common diseases of the future outbreak. In the meantime, the number of simple precautionary measures significantly reduced the hospital- based transmission of the SARS coronavirus during this outbreak. Lopez et al. (2017) notes that the first phase of the outbreak of Toronto affected healthcare workers. The second phase occurred in the workers and the visitors of the single hospital ward. The chronicles of the phase of the SARS outbreak described the preventive measures taken by the hospitals and the individuals once the outbreak of the disease became apparent.
The Nonsocial transmission in the hospitals began after the presentation of the first phase to the department of emergency. A general observation was placed on the emergency department and this was received with nebulized salbutamol. At this time, the SARS was transmitted to other patients in the department of emergency with a rapid atrial fibrillation and was adjacent to other cases. This was presented after the shortness of the breath of the secondary pleural effusion which was transferred to a hospital ward and was later discharged ( Sortino, 2009 ). This case was transferred to the medical unit and intensive care unit was offered after the presentation of the emergency department. Sometime later, the placed airborne isolation included the differential diagnosis. The implementation of contact and droplet was evident by the ICU staff who were trying to take care of the case. Some of the patients remained in the isolation until they met their death. At this time, the family was facing febrile and other respiratory symptoms and therefore, chest radiographs were done for the family members who had abnormal radiographs an therefore, they were instructed to wear facial masks all the times as well a wash their hand upon any attempt of entering to the ICU as well as limit their visits to the ICU.
Sortino (2009 ) notes that many health interventions were made trying to control the spread of the disease which had spread through the respiratory droplets in the air. These interventions included detecting the disease in its earlier stages, isolation of the affected people as well as the droplet and contact precautions and the use of personal protective equipment including the wearing of the masks and the isolation gowns. A screening process was also recommended which helped in putting in place all the airport for monitoring the air travel and controlling the infections from other affected countries. Lopez et al. (2017) notes that no cases had been identified and therefore, the CDC was working with the federal and local rapid response guidelines to ensure the infection reappeared in the virus events. SARS is considered as the most infectious disease where illnesses occurs during the second week of the illness. These delayed infectious periods meant that quarantines were highly affected where people were isolated before the fifth day of their isolation made transmission of this disease very minimal.
Recommendations to Improve CIKR Sectors6 sectors
Stewart (2010 ) notes that the Department of Homeland Security defines the critical infrastructure as assets that provides essential services underpinning the American Society serving as a backbone of the nation’s economy security and health. It is well recognized that the power of using the measures that moves us to maintaining the 16 sectors must be adhered to. There being more than 80% of critical infrastructure in the United States which are owned by the private sectors, other expensive security measures inevitably need to be complete against an array of other economic considerations therefore creating the reality of security as a deciding factor.
Resource Disparity
Chen et al. (2013) notes that cyber and other physical security measures which are expensive ventures which requires allocation of the resources. Large companies require other organizations can afford to outlay resources which the small companies can rely on. This therefore becomes an essential critical infrastructure such as the outfits of the under- protected and exposure.
Outsourcing Complexity
Yusta, Correa & Lacal-Arántegui (2011) notes that the current companies and organizations focuses on the core competencies and the outsourcing of other outside providers. This at times includes the transportation utilities, other financial services and outsource. Both the physical and cyber security protection measures should be outsourced making optimized defense a bit complicated creating more opportunities of the leaked defense- related knowledge, the procedure, data and the contribution of the shortages.
Other evolutionary approaches to resilience includes the emphasize laid on the need of learning from different disruptions therefore adapting the change and merely getting back to the forward part. This is very important in places and communities where the status quo of people is not adequate and equitable. Lopez et al. (2017) notes that this is also very important for communities were for critical infrastructure systems, it means the transitioning from the managerial approach towards getting into a safe-to- fail strategy that accepts there being comptonization of function supporting the rapid restoration of other normal operations and the capability of learning from the disruptions. Resilient critical information systems are therefore made to prepare, plan, absorb and also recover some hazards. Resilience infrastructure also means both the minimization of the loss function which occurs as a result of disruptions therefore coming up with a recovery curve. Resilient engineering might include the modularization, decision making and the multifunctionality ( Yusta, Correa & Lacal-Arántegui, 2011) . The operationalization of the resilience- based approaches extends beyond the approaches of engineering approaches includes resilient management, policy and the regulation. Adaptive strategy is also a requirement in the value of long chain of infrastructure in planning and other operations of the critical infrastructure which meets the challenges which are met when managing the risks known as the hazards and the deep uncertainties which are involved in the emerging risks. The resilient shift seeks to ensure that they offer support in the transition of decision making.
References
Chen, J., Chen, T. H. Y., Vertinsky, I., Yumagulova, L., & Park, C. (2013). Public–private partnerships for the development of disaster resilient communities. Journal of contingencies and crisis management , 21 (3), 130-143.
Fisher, R. E., Bassett, G. W., Buehring, W. A., Collins, M. J., Dickinson, D. C., Eaton, L. K., ... & Millier, D. J. (2010). Constructing a resilience index for the enhanced critical infrastructure protection program (No. ANL/DIS-10-9). Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States). Decision and Information Sciences.
Lopez, J., Liefer, N. C., Busho, C. R., & Temple, M. A. (2017). Enhancing critical infrastructure and key resources (CIKR) level-0 physical process security using field device distinct native attribute features. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security , 13 (5), 1215-1229.
O'Brien, C. C. (2013). Discerning the CIKR Classification of Commercial Marijuana Production Facilities for the Lefthand Fire Protection District . National Fire Academy.
Sortino, F. A. (2009). The Sortino Framework for Constructing Portfolios: Focusing on Desired Target ReturnTM to Optimize Upside Potential Relative to Downside Risk . Elsevier.
Stewart, M. G. (2010). Risk-informed decision support for assessing the costs and benefits of counter-terrorism protective measures for infrastructure. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection , 3 (1), 29-40.
Yusta, J. M., Correa, G. J., & Lacal-Arántegui, R. (2011). Methodologies and applications for critical infrastructure protection: State-of-the-art. Energy Policy , 39 (10), 6100-6119
