|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 13
1
________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
Rigorous and coordinated disaster preparedness planning is often thwarted because of
a lack of shared understanding and agreement on common goals as well as situational
awareness among community leaders who link economic, cultural, social, and political
sectors constituting the strength of the nation’s civic infrastructure. Although a majority
of the nation’s critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector, there
has been limited collaborative engagement between the public and private sectors for the
purpose of improving community-level resilience and disaster preparedness. The public
sector often does not capitalize on the experience and expertise resident in the nation’s
private sector.
Since the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001 (9/11),
numerous federal policy documents have stressed that the private sector shares equal
responsibility with government for the security of the nation’s critical infrastructure and
key assets. In 2008, the National Response Framework1 (NRF) made explicit that private
sector entities have a role in the safety, security, and resilience of communities in which
they operate. Implicit in this concept is an assumption that the degree of security and
resilience attained in a community will be a function of the level of coordination and
involvement between local government, response agencies, and the private sector.
Indeed, the NRF states that “during an incident, key private sector business partners
should be involved in the local crisis decision-making process or at least have a direct
link to key local emergency managers. Communities cannot effectively respond to, or
recover from, incidents without strong cooperative relations with the private sector” (U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, 2008).
The Human Factors Division of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Science and Technology Directorate applies the social and behavioral sciences to support
the preparedness, response, and recovery of communities affected by catastrophic events.
The goal of the division is to advance homeland security planning and technology
development through consideration of human factors. DHS contracted with the National
1
See www.fema.gov/emergency/nrf/ (accessed January 15, 2010). Other examples that address the role of
the private sector include the National Incident Management System, available at
www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/, and the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, available at
www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0827.shtm (accessed January 15, 2010).
13
OCR for page 14
14 PRIVATE-PUBLIC SECTOR COLLABORATION FOR COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
Research Council (NRC) to assess the current state of the art in private-public sector
collaboration dedicated to strengthening community resilience, identify gaps in
knowledge and practice, an recommend research areas that could be targeted for research
investment by the DHS Human Factors Division. To address this charge, NRC formed an
ad hoc committee under the auspices of the Geographical Sciences Committee of the
Board on Earth Sciences and Resources. The committee’s statement of task is provided in
Box 1-1. Part of its charge was to plan and organize a 2-day data-gathering workshop,
conducted September 9-10, 2009 in Washington, D.C. The workshop emphasized expert
panel presentations on topics related to the committee objectives along with interactive
plenary and small group sessions (see agenda, Box 1-2). Panels focused on why
collaborative approaches to resilience planning should become a national priority,
characteristics of sustainable state- and local-level collaborative models, and the roles of
state and local government in building community resilience. Presentations addressed the
DHS voluntary private sector preparedness accreditation and certificate program, and the
critical importance of community and cross-sector partnerships.
BOX 1-1
Statement of Task
An ad hoc committee will assess the current state of the art in private-public sector
partnerships dedicated to strengthening community resilience, identify gaps in knowledge
and practice, and recommend research areas that could be targeted for research investment
by the DHS Human Factors Division. In its final report, the committee will:
• Identify the components of a framework for private-public sector partnerships dedicated
to strengthening community resilience;
• Develop a set of guidelines for private sector engagement in the development of a
framework for enhancing community resilience; and
• Examine options and successful models of existing collaborations ranging from
centralized to decentralized approaches, and make recommendations for a structure
that could further the goal of collaboration between the private and public sectors for the
objective of enhancing community resilience.
The study will be organized around a public workshop that explores issues including the
following through invited presentations and facilitated discussions among invited participants:
• Current efforts at the regional, state and community levels to develop private-public
partnerships for the purpose of developing and enhancing community preparedness and
resilience;
• Motivators, inhibitors, advantages and liabilities for private sector engagement in
private-public sector cooperation in planning, resource allocation and preparedness for
natural and man-made hazards;
• Distinctions in perceptions or motivations between large national-level corporations and
the small business community that might influence the formation of private-public sector
partnerships, particularly in smaller or rural communities;
• Gaps in current knowledge and practice in private-public sector partnerships that inhibit
the ability to develop collaboration across sectors;
• Research areas that could bridge these gaps; and
• Design, development and implementation of collaborative endeavors for the purpose of
strengthening the resilience of communities to natural and man-made hazards.
OCR for page 15
INTRODUCTION 15
BOX 1-2
Workshop on Private-Public Sector Collaboration to Enhance Community Disaster Resilience
September 9-10, 2009
AGENDA
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
8:30 a.m. Welcome and Introductory Remarks
William Hooke, Chair, Committee on Private-Public Sector Collaboration to Enhance
Community Disaster Resilience, American Meteorological Society
PLENARY SESSION
PANEL 1: WHY A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
MUST BECOME A NATIONAL PRIORITY
8:45 Reactions and Reflections
Moderator: Randolph Rowel, Morgan State University
Jason McNamara, Chief of Staff, Federal Emergency Management Agency
Mary Wong, President, Office Depot Foundation
Jim Mullen, Director, Washington State Emergency Management Division
9:30 Discussion
PANEL 2: BUILDING COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE THROUGH PRIVATE-PUBLIC
COLLABORATION:WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO CREATE AND SUSTAIN EFFECTIVE
CROSS-SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVELS?
10:30 Best Practices for Establishing Sustainable Partnerships
Moderator: Inés Pearce, Pearce Global Partners, Inc.
Brit Weber, Program Director, Critical Incident Protocol-Community Facilitation,
Michigan State University
Jami Haberl, Executive Director, Safeguard Iowa Partnership
Maria Vorel, National Cadre Manager, Mitigation Disaster Workforce and Head,
Regional and Disaster Support Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
Emergency Management Agency
11:15 Discussion
12:00 p.m. Presentation:
The Critical Importance of Community and Cross-Sector Partnerships
Arif Alikhan, Assistant Secretary for Policy Development, Office of Policy
Development, Department of Homeland Security
PANEL 3: MAKING THE BUSINESS CASE: MOBILIZING BUSINESS TO HELP ENSURE
COMMUNITY AND NATIONAL DISASTER RESILIENCE
1:00 Sustaining Business Involvement in Business-Government Collaboration
Moderator: Lynne Kidder, Business Executives for National Security
Mickie Valente, President, Valente Strategic Advisers, LLC
Stephen Jordan, Executive Director, Business Civic Leadership Center, U.S.
Chamber of Commerce
Gene Matthews, Senior Fellow, North Carolina Institute for Public Health, University
of North Carolina
1:45 Discussion
OCR for page 16
16 PRIVATE-PUBLIC SECTOR COLLABORATION FOR COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
BOX 1-2 (continued)
CONCURRENT SESSIONS
2:45 Factors that facilitate or provide barriers to effective private-public partnerships
Workshop participants to break into four groups (details provided in appropriate
section of the briefing materials). Each group will discuss both topics.
Topic 1 Facilitating Factors
Topic 2 Barriers
PLENARY SESSION
4:30 Summary and Discussion of Concurrent Sessions
5:30 Adjourn
Thursday, September 10, 2009
PLENARY SESSION
PANEL 4: ROLES AND PERSPECTIVES OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN
BUILDING COMMUNITY RESILIENCE
8:30 a.m. Fitting in a National Framework
Moderator: Michael Lesnick, Meridian Institute
Governor Scott McCallum (Wisconsin, 2001-2003), President and CEO, The
Aidmatrix Foundation, Inc.
Ron Carlee, County Manager, Arlington County, Virginia
Leslie Luke, Group Program Manager, County of San Diego, Office of Emergency
Services
9:15 Discussion
10:15 The DHS Voluntary Private Sector Preparedness Accreditation and Certification
Program
Emily Walker, Consultant and Member, National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
Upon the United States
11:00 Discussion
12:30 p.m. Building Sustainable Partnerships
Topic 3 Sustainability
Topic 4 Resilience-Building Efforts and Widespread Implementation
3:15 Overarching Workshop Themes: Presentation
Brent Woodworth, President and CEO, Los Angeles Emergency Preparedness
Foundation
3:40 Discussion: Game Changing Ideas and the Path Forward
4:20 Closing Remarks
William Hooke, Chair
4:30 Adjourn
OCR for page 17
INTRODUCTION 17
WORKSHOP PLANNING
The Study and Workshop Planning Committee
The study committee, who also served as the workshop planning committee, consists
of 10 members with expertise in the areas of natural disasters and science policy, private-
public partnerships, social science and disaster preparedness, community resilience, crisis
and risk management for disasters, disaster risk reduction policy, private sector disaster
response and resilience, disaster planning and geographical information systems,
vulnerability and resilience of underserved populations, and emergency management.
Appendix A provides biographies of the planning committee members. The committee
met once prior to the workshop and held several teleconferences to discuss the statement
of task, identify presumptive principles, identify workshop participants, and develop a
workshop agenda.
Workshop Presumptive Principles
The committee began preparations for the workshop by developing the presumptive
principles that would guide their selection of workshop topics, speakers, and participants.
Chief of those principles are that
• Community disaster resilience is essential to sustainable economic vitality and
community quality of life;
• Collaboration is essential to build community disaster resilience; and
• Private-public collaboration implies engagement between governmental
entities; diverse industry sectors; nongovernmental organizations including
faith-based, voluntary, and citizen organizations; and other elements of the
community that comprise the full fabric of the community.
Implicit in the discussion of building resilience in a community is that all sectors of the
community can and should participate in all phases of a disaster—from preparedness and
mitigation to long-term recovery. To further inform and clarify the assumptions in
planning the workshop, the committee drew upon Etienne Wenger’s definition of
community as a group of people with common relevant interests (Wenger, 1999).
Further, the committee accepted that a person’s sense of community includes a “sense of
place.”
Given these presumptions, the committee sought to engage with workshop
participants to understand more about the roles and needs of community actors with
respect to resilience building and disaster preparedness planning and recovery. They
wanted to understand how a community benefits from broad, resilience-focused
collaboration as well as the requirements to support this type of collaboration:
OCR for page 18
18 PRIVATE-PUBLIC SECTOR COLLABORATION FOR COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
• As a national priority at the local, state, and federal levels;
• By large and small organizations within the private sector;
• By nonprofit, voluntary, and faith-based organizations; and
• By individuals and families.
Information gathered at this workshop was intended to inform the committee’s
recommendations that will appear in its final report.
What Is Resilience?
The term “resilience” is encountered in many disciplines. Each discipline may
emphasize different elements of resilience, but all definitions speak in a general way to
the continued ability of a person, group, or system to function during and after stress. The
committee did not want to limit discussion by imposing an arbitrary definition for
resilience, but provided a definition it found helpful in scoping their own committee work
and which they believed would be relevant for orienting workshop discussions.
The committee used a definition of resilience put forward by Norris and others (2008)
that is becoming a standard in many academic circles. Norris and others describe
resilience as the ability of groups (such as communities or cities) to withstand shock such
as disaster. Because communities constantly change, the ability to withstand disaster
constantly changes. Building and maintaining resilience depends on the ability of a group
to monitor changes and appropriately modify its plans to deal with adversity. A well-
functioning community composed of healthy members with a high quality of life is more
likely to possess the ability to adapt to adversity. Building community disaster resilience
involves fostering the characteristics and abilities within a community that allow it to
continue to function during and following a disaster.
What Is Collaboration?
The term “collaboration” may also be defined in different ways. Definitions
encountered by the committee included mention of mutually beneficial arrangements of
roles and relationships in which all parties share responsibilities and coordinate resources
toward the pursuit of common objectives (for example, Regan, 2009). The intensity of
engagement of individuals and organizations within collaboration can vary from simple
networking to one of contractual obligation. Identifying the elements of effective
collaborative efforts was a purpose of the workshop and the larger study effort.
The term “collaboration” is used somewhat interchangeably with the term “partnership”
in literature and discussion. The committee made a conscious decision to use the term
“collaboration” in its discussions because “partnership” often connotes, in some
disciplines, legally binding agreements between parties.
OCR for page 19
INTRODUCTION 19
Structure of the Workshop
The workshop planning committee organized the workshop in order to gather
information on the qualities of successful and enduring collaboration, and to identify
elements of the cultural environment necessary for such collaborations to form and
thrive. The workshop agenda was specifically planned to avoid the emotion that often
accompanies discussion of failures af previous disaster response in order to focus
objective discussion on issues of collaboration. The committee organized the workshop to
encourage discussion on three major themes:
1. Identifying the facilitating factors and barriers to the formation of private-
public collaboration for the purpose of enhancing community resilience;
2. Identifying the characteristics of effective, robust, and sustainable private-
public collaboration; and
3. Encouraging widespread development of private-public collaboration for the
purpose of enhancing community resilience.
The committee invited researchers; representatives from private and nonprofit
organizations; emergency management practitioners and leaders from local, state, and
federal governments; community organizers; and private-public sector partnership
sponsors, facilitators, and members. Researchers and community leaders from different
regions of the country with varying disaster experiences were invited so that a broad
range of issues and perspectives could be considered. Approximately 60 people
participated in the workshop. Participants are listed in Appendix B of this report.
The workshop included four panel discussions and two keynote presentations.
Additional discussions were held in both larger plenary and smaller breakout sessions. A
concluding plenary session focused on identifying overarching issues. Participants
identified areas of research that could provide the information needed to build a culture of
resilience and identify the path toward more extensive collaboration throughout the
nation.
WORKSHOP REPORT ORGANIZATION
This workshop report is the first of two reports to be disseminated by the committee.
This report is the committee’s summary of what transpired at the workshop, but does not
contain any consensus conclusions or recommendations. Committee recommendations
will appear in the committee’s final report. Further, this workshop report reflects only
those topics emphasized during workshop presentations and discussions and is not
intended as a comprehensive summary of all relevant topics and issues related to
community resilience and collaboration. The committee will have assembled information
in addition to what is presented in this report to inform its conclusions and
recommendations. Although the committee is responsible for the overall quality and
accuracy of this report as a record of what transpired at the workshop, the documented
OCR for page 20
20 PRIVATE-PUBLIC SECTOR COLLABORATION FOR COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
observations or views contained in the workshop report are those of individual
participants or groups of participants and do not necessarily represent the consensus of
the workshop participants or committee, or of the sponsor.
This workshop summary is organized into four chapters. This chapter introduces the
reader to the purpose and organization of the workshop and report. Chapter 2 explores the
components of successful collaboration from the points of view of the private and public
sectors and from different levels of government. Chapter 3 explores challenges and
barriers to successful and sustainable collaboration. Chapter 4 describes potential
research themes and mechanisms identified by workshop participants that could inform
or enhance the ability of communities to develop private-public sector collaborations for
enhancing community resilience.
