Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space

Transcription

1 CREATE Research Archive Current Research Project Narratives 2013 Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space Henry H. Willis RAND, Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Risk Analysis Commons Recommended Citation Willis, Henry H., "Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space" (2013). Current Research Project Narratives. Paper This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CREATE Research Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Current Research Project Narratives by an authorized administrator of CREATE Research Archive. For more information, please contact

2 National Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events University of Southern California Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space October 2012 to September 2013 Henry H. Willis RAND Corporation "This research was supported by the United States Department of Homeland Security through the National Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events (CREATE) under Cooperative Agreement No ST-061-RE0001. However, any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect views of the United States Department of Homeland Security or the University of Southern California." Cooperative Agreement No ST-061-RE0001 Department of Homeland Security October 31, McClintock Avenue, RTH 314 ~ Los Angeles, CA ~ (213) ~

3 ABOUT CREATE Now in its tenth year of operation, the National Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events (CREATE) was the first university-based Center of Excellence (COE) funded by University Programs of the Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). CREATE started operations in March of 2004 and has since been joined by additional DHS centers. Like other COEs, CREATE contributes university-based research to make the Nation safer by taking a longer-term view of scientific innovations and breakthroughs and by developing the future intellectual leaders in homeland security. CREATE's mission is to improve our Nation's security through research and development of advanced models and tools to evaluate risks, costs and consequences of terrorism and natural and man-made hazards and to guide economically viable investments in homeland security. We are accomplishing our mission through an integrated program of research, education and outreach that is designed to inform and support decisions faced by elected officials and governmental employees at the national, state, and local levels. We are also working with private industry, both to leverage the investments being made by the Department of Homeland Security in these organizations, and to facilitate the transition of research toward meeting the security needs of our nation. CREATE employs an interdisciplinary approach merging engineers, economists, decision scientists, and system modelers in a program that integrates research, education and outreach. This approach encourages creative discovery by employing the intellectual power of the American university system to solve some of the country s most pressing problems. The Center is the lead institution where researchers from around the country come to assist in the national effort to improve homeland security through analysis and modeling of threats. The Center treats the subject of homeland security with the urgency that it deserves, with one of its key goals being producing rapid results, leveraging existing resources so that benefits accrue to our nation as quickly as possible. By the nature of the research in risk, economics, and operations, CREATE serves the need of many agencies at the DHS, including the Transportation Security Administration, Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, FEMA and the US Coast Guard. In addition, CREATE has developed relationships with clients in the Offices of National Protection and Programs, Intelligence and Analysis, the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office and many State and Local government agencies. CREATE faculty and students take both the long-term view of how to reduce terrorism risk through fundamental research, and the near-term view of improving the cost-effectiveness of counterterrorism policies and investments through applied research. In 2011, the University of Southern California (USC) and a team of 23 partner institutions were awarded a new 5-year Cooperative Agreement resulting from a recompetition of the Center s charter. This annual report covers the third year under Cooperative Agreement 2010-ST-061-RE0001, the ninth year overall of CREATE s DHS funding, from October 2012 to September ii

4 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary Research Accomplishments Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space Research Products Publications and Reports Presentations Research Transition Applied Relevance Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space Collaborative Projects Education Outreach Executive Summary The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for protecting communities from the consequences of countless types of accidents, disasters and malicious attacks motivated by terrorism and crime. Managing risks from these hazards involves making choices among alternatives to protect facilities, strengthen infrastructure resilience, and enhance communities emergency preparedness. However, doing this requires comparing risks that are different in kind and consequence, and these differences influence risk management priorities. Reliably capturing these priorities for addressing different accidents, disasters, and terrorism events is a challenging example of comparative risk assessment. The recent National Academy of Sciences review of DHS risk analysis identifies developing methods of comparative risk assessment as an analytic priority for homeland security planning and analysis. This study builds on methods of comparative risk assessment in the field of environmental policy to demonstrate and evaluate approaches to help DHS set strategic risk management priorities. This research: (a) demonstrated and evaluated an approach for understanding public and policymaker risk management priorities, (b) used that approach, along with broader surveys, to describe the priorities of these different stakeholder groups, (c) communicated the results of the studies to policymakers developing DHS strategic policies and plans, and (d) described the process of conducting comparative risk assessments to homeland security practitioners who could leverage these methods for their own planning. In previous years, this research answered several research questions: What information do people need to know about disasters, accidents, and terrorism risks to make an informed judgment of their concern about the risks? Does adequate information exist in the public realm to describe risks in terms of this required risk information? How could components of these methods can support planning and analysis used in the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review? Page 3 of 10

5 The answers to these questions resulted in a recommendation for a concise set of characteristics for describing homeland security risks and 10 risk summary sheets for a representative set of hazards that span the DHS mission space. These risk summary sheets were subjected to independent peer review and form the basis of ongoing work directed towards understanding public preferences for prioritizing homeland security risk management. Work during the past year has focused on using the methods developed to understanding public priorities for risk management through results of a risk ranking workshop and a survey of public perceptions conducted using the RAND American Life Panel. The results of this work have been disseminated at academic meetings and through consultations with DHS officials at the Office of Policy. Through these interactions, DHS has incorporated insights from the risk summary sheets into completing the US National Homeland Security Risk Assessment and incorporated results of the study into recommendations to FEMA of how to conduct regional Homeland Security Risk Assessments. 2. Research Accomplishments 2.1. Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space The terrorism, natural disaster, and accident hazards that DHS is responsible for addressing affect communities in a variety of ways. A first step in managing this broad set of risks is to better understand how to compare them and, having done so, to understand what drives the public s concerns about the risks the hazards pose. To address this research challenge this study developed a set of 17 attributes that describe the consequences of risks from natural disaster, accidents, and terrorism and factors that affect individual perceptions of these risks. The set of characteristics included five (5) measures describing health and safety consequences, four (4) describing economic consequences, and three (3) describing other environmental and social concerns. Additionally, the set includes five (5) characteristics of hazards that risk perception research has shown to influence how individuals perceive risks (see Table 1). The study then used the attributes listed in Table 1 to develop risk summary sheets for ten hazards (See Table 2). These hazards were selected to be representative of the types of events that DHS is responsible for managing. They stem from both natural and human-induced causes. They produce different combinations of economic, health and safety, and environmental outcomes. They also span the range of well understood and newly recognized hazards. By describing current knowledge about these hazards, this study demonstrated the feasibility of producing concise summaries available information about risks that can be used as a foundation for informed discussions about risk management priorities. Page 4 of 10

6 The format for these risk summary sheets followed experience from prior comparative risk assessment studies 1. Consistent with the approaches used in these studies, the risk summary sheets answer four questions, in order: 1. What is included within the scope of the hazard being described? 2. What is known about the causes and consequences of the hazard in the U.S.? 3. What is known about exposures to the hazard in the U.S.? 4. What has already been done to reduce or control risks from the hazard in the U.S.? Table 1. Characteristics for describing risks from terrorism, natural disasters, and accidents Public Health and Safety Average number of deaths per year Greatest number of casualties in a single episode More severe injuries/illnesses Less severe injuries/illnesses Psychological damage Other Economic, Environmental and Social Consequences Average economic damages per year Greatest economic damages in a single episode Duration of economic damages Area effected by economic damages Average environmental damage per year Average households displaced per year Expected disruption of government operations Aspects of Dread and Uncertainty Cause of event (Natural or human-induced) Ability of individual to control their exposure Time between exposure and health effect Quality of scientific understanding Combined uncertainty in health and economic consequences Table 2. Hazards described by risk summary sheets Natural Disasters Terrorism Accidents Earthquakes Hurricanes Pandemic influenza Tornados Nuclear detonation Anthrax attacks IED attacks Cyber attacks Oil spills Industrial gas release Looking across the descriptions reveals qualitative differences in the risks posed by hazards DHS manages. Some risks have higher expected consequences than others. The expected consequences of some risks are better understood for some risks than others. The overall level of uncertainty surrounding some risks is greater for some and low for others. Each of these factors, and others, can influence how concerned policymakers and the public are about the risks DHS manages. 1 Willis, H. H., M. L. DeKay, B. Fischhoff, P. S. Fischbeck, H. K. Florig, M. G. Morgan (2004). Ecological risk ranking: Evaluation of a method for improving the quality of public participation in environmental decision making. Risk Analysis, 24, Page 5 of 10

7 To understand public concerns about disaster and security risks and their views about preferences for managing them we conducted a risk ranking workshop with members of the general public. The process for ranking risks from accidents, disasters and terrorism builds on validated decision-sciences methods of eliciting preferences from individuals and groups (see Figure 1). The first step in this process is to allow people to rank the hazards after reviewing the risk summary sheets. The risk summary sheets provide a basis for consistently informing judgments of concern about hazards to transportation systems. Next, because ranking these risks is a complex cognitive task, participants are guided through use of a multi-attribute approach to calculating a ranking of the hazards based on their perceptions of the risk characteristics. These first to rankings are typically different and doing both allows participants to better understand the risks and their perceptions so that they can revise their individual ranking accordingly. Third, because people can learn about hazards from each other, participants are led through a facilitated group process to produce a consensus ranking of the hazards. Finally, because group processes could lead to forced consensus, participants are provided a final opportunity to express their concerns to dissent from the group or incorporate new insights into their original rankings. Together this process produces five rankings. Results of the risk ranking workshops were both unsurprising and surprising (see Figure 2). For example, it was unsurprising that participants were able to effectively compare diverse hazards when given comprehensive information about them. It was also not surprising that participants largely disagreed about how concerning nuclear detonations are; some participants focused on the potential catastrophic consequences while others fixated on the low probability of this risk occurring. On the other hand, it may come as a surprise to some that participants largely were more concerned with natural hazards and accidents than with terrorism events and were in complete agreement that cyber attacks were the least concerning of the risks discussed. Individual Rankings Group Discussion and Ranking Final Rankings 1. First ranking 2. Calculated 3. Revised 5. Final Ranking 4. Ranking by groups of 8-10 people Allow dissent from group ranking Workshop process lasted 6 hours Figure 1. Schematic of elicitation process used in risk ranking workshops Because the workshops consisted of a small, convenience sample it is not possible to draw broad conclusions about the prevalence of these findings across the American public. Thus, we conducted a Page 6 of 10

8 Research Theme Referred Not Referred PDF Sent to CREATE survey to understand how different groups perceive risks from these types of hazards, what factors most influence their concerns, and what implications such information would have for national homeland security risk management. This survey collected data through the RAND American Life Panel, a statistically characterized, longitudinal internet panel. The results of this survey are being analyzed to test hypotheses about risk perceptions that emerged from the risk ranking workshop results. Characteristics Number (total=26) Percent Race White 14 54% Black 7 27% Other 5 19% Age 20s 4 15% 30s 6 23% 40s 6 23% 50s 7 27% 60s or more 3 12% Education High school diploma 4 15% Some college 5 19% Bachelors 10 38% Post-graduate degree 7 27% Gender Male 14 54% Female 12 46% Figure 2. Characteristics of 26 workshop participants and results of risk ranking workshops 2.2. Research Products Pandemic Influenza Hurricane Earthquake Tornado Terrorist Nuclear Detonation Terrorist Explosive Bombing Toxic Industrial Chemical Accident Oil Spill Anthrax Attacks Cyber-attacks Average ranking among individuals 25 th and 75 th percentiles Natural disasters Terrorist attacks Accidents Final Ranking Research Product Metrics # # of peer-reviewed journal reports published 1 # of peer-reviewed journal reports accepted for publication 0 # of non-peer reviewed publications and reports 1 # of scholarly journal citations of published reports? # of scholarly presentations (conferences, workshops, seminars) 4 # of outreach presentations (non-technical groups, general public) Publications and Reports CREATE PUBLICATIONS Willis, Henry RAND Corporation 1. Willis H. H., D. Potoglou, W. Bruine de Bruin, S. Hoorens The validity of the preference profiles used for evaluating impacts in the Dutch National Risk Assessment. TR-1278, RAND Europe, Cambridge, UK. 2. Lundberg R Comparing Homeland Security Risks Using a Deliberative Risk Ranking Methodology. Dissertation. RAND Corporation. RM RA x x Page 7 of 10

9 Presentations CREATE SCHOLARLY PRESENTATIONS Willis, Henry RAND Corporation 1. Willis, H. H., Incorporating Deterrence Into Security Planning. Paper presented at the 2012 Maritime Risk Summit, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, November 15, Willis, H. H., Reflecting Public Values in National Risk Assessments. Plenary talk presented at the Society for Risk Analysis Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, December 10, Willis, H. H., National Risk Assessments: Analysis to Guide Risk Management Around the World. Plenary talk presented at the Society for Risk Analysis Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, December 11, Willis, H. H., Improving Risk Regulation through Retrospective Analysis Incorporating Logic Modeling. Paper presented at the Society for Risk Analysis Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, December 12, Research Transition 3.1. Applied Relevance Comparing Risks in the Homeland Security Mission Space This study was conceived of and carried out in a manner to enhance the applied relevance of study results. Presidential Preparedness Directive 8 emphasized the importance of a national risk assessment to the process of setting DHS priorities. Consistent with this direction, DHS is integrating comparative risk assessment and a strategic review of the nation s risks into the analytic process supporting the upcoming Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR). Consequently, the study plan was designed to provide opportunities for the research team to interact with the officials at the DHS Office of Policy responsible for developing analytic methods and products to support the QHSR. This allowed the CREATE study to better focus on the research questions of greatest interest to the Office of Policy. It also provided opportunities for the DHS Office of Policy to learn about interim results and recommendations produced by the CREATE study, and thus incorporate them into the QHSR methods and results. As a result, this CREATE study has directly supported efforts in DHS to implement Presidential Preparedness Directive 8 and the DHS requirements to complete a QHSR. Specifically, the QHSR methods were informed by and incorporated the following results of this CREATE project: Approach for describing hazards: The approach DHS Office of Policy approach for selecting risk characteristics and consequences used in the Strategic National Risk Assessment was influenced by the selection of hazard characteristics used in this study. Documenting risk assessments: The DHS Office of Policy adopted the concept of risk summary sheets, which was demonstrated in this study, for SNRA supporting materials Assessing the mental health consequences of disasters: The DHS Office of Policy used the method to assess mental health consequences of catastrophes in this study to validate and adapt its own approach to assessing this consequence Page 8 of 10

10 Understanding risk management priorities: The study team provided regular updates to the DHS Office of Policy contributing insights from risk ranking workshops to DHS during QHSR selection of prioritized Study Topics Collaborative Projects Over the course of this study the project involved collaboration both across CREATE and with homeland security professionals at federal, state and local levels. This year, collaboration was primarily with DHS Headquarters to advise on analytic methods being used to complete the Quadrennial Homeland Security Review and with FEMA related to the THIRA process. In support of DHS Office of Policy (specifically Assistant Secretary Alan Cohn, Dr. Caryl Bryzmialkiewicz, Mr. Ron Salazar, Mr. Tony Cheesebrough, and Ms. Elisabeth Olmo), the study PI (Henry Willis) briefed study results several times during the course of the year to review preliminary findings and results, discuss analytic issues related to comparative risk analysis raised by the Office of Policy, and discussed the pros and cons of alternative courses of action being explored by the Office of Policy. In support of FEMA, the PI has been working with Melissa Forbes in the National Preparedness Office and her colleagues in the National Integration Center to explore how the methods and results could be incorporated into THIRA guidance. COLLABORATIVE PROJECTS Project Title Institution Contact Name CREATE Lead Status QHSR Department of Homeland Security Caryl Bryzmialkiewicz and colleagues Henry Willis Completed THIRA Review Department of Homeland Security Melissa Forbes Henry Willis Completed 4. Education Education Initiatives (Please detail below) # # of students supported (funded by CREATE) 1 # of students involved (funded by CREATE + any other programs) 0 # of students graduated 0 # of student theses or dissertations 1 # of contacts with DHS, other Federal agencies, or State/Local (committees) 6 # of existing courses modified with new material 0 # of new courses developed 0 # of new certificate programs developed 0 # of new degree programs developed 0 CREATE STUDENTS Last Name First Name 1. Lundberg Russell University School Department Degree RAND Corporation Pardee RAND Graduate School Pardee RAND Graduate School PhD Research Area Public Policy CREATE Funded x Graduated x Page 9 of 10

11 5. Outreach Outreach Initiatives # # of memberships in major DHS-related Committees 1 # of contacts with DHS 6 # of contacts with other Federal agencies, or State/Local (committees) 0 # of contacts with State/Local (committees) 0 # of Workshops and Events 0 # of media events 0 Outreach Contacts with DHS or other Federal Agencies Member, National Academy of Sciences Committee on Chem-Bio Defense S&T Capabilities Collaboration on developing methods to support QHSR with DHS Office of Policy staff through meetings and conference calls - Tony Cheesebrough, November 28, Antonio Kirsan and colleagues, January 14, 2013 Collaboration with FEMA related to THIRA process - Melissa Forbes, November 29, Melissa Forbes, John Barnwell, and Brian Beisheim, January 15, 2013 Congressional testimony - Willis, H.H. (2013). Strengthening Strategic Planning and Management at DHS. Testimony presented before the House Homeland Security Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency on April 26, Page 10 of 10