11/22/2014

1

From Risk to Resilience:State of Practice in the USA

Igor Linkov, PhD

Risk and Decision Science Focus Area Lead, USACE, ilinkov@yahoo.com

Adjunct Professor, Carnegie Mellon University

Visiting Professor Ca Foscari

Known, quantifiablethreats

Unknown Uncharacterized

Risk

Visiting Professor, Ca FoscariUniversity of Venice, Italy

Co-Authors:

Cate Fox-Lent, USACE

Steve Flynn, Northeastern University

Low-probability Events

Resilience

Global RisksWorld Econ. Forum2014

EmergingGlobalRisks

2

11/22/2014

2

Risk and Resilience: Political Importance and Challenge

Executive Order: "resilience" means the ability to anticipate, prepare for, and adapt to changing conditions and withstand, respond to, and recover rapidly from disruptions.

Top-DownResilience/ Decision &Network

Analysis

Bottom-UpRisk Assessment

Goal Identification and Problem Framing Management

Risk-Resilience Integration

-

What are the goals, alternatives, and

constraints?

Decision Model-

What are the criteria and metrics, How do we measure

decision-maker valuesPhysical/Statistical Model

-

What is the hazard?What is exposure?

Risk Characterization-

What are the risks relative to a threshold? How do they compare

to other alternatives?

Modeling

g

Metrics Generation and Alternative Scoring

-

How does each alternative score along our identified

criteria and metrics?

Data Collection-

What are fundamental properties/mechanisms

associated with each alternative?

Data Collection

Linkov et al., 2014

11/22/2014

3

Outline From Risk to Resilience (US Army Corps Case)

► Risk• Conceptualization

• Risk Assessment Case Studies

• Problems with Risk based Approaches• Problems with Risk-based Approaches

► Resilience • Conceptualization

• Resilience Matrix Approach and Jamaica Bay Case

• Network Science Approach

State of Practice in the US• Army (Installations and Energy)• Army (Installations and Energy)

• DoD (Cyber)

• Department of Interior (Environment and Infrastructure)

• EPA (Environment)

• DHS (infrastructure)

• NIST (framework and Community)

Discussion – UK vs US Approach

Risk Assessment Formulation

11/22/2014

4

Risk Management Challenges

ADD WEB REFERENCE

11/22/2014

5

Risk Assessment is one part of Resilience

RiskAnalysisRi k

Plan Adapt

Critical Functionality

System Resilien

ce

Analysis

Consequence

Risk

Time

After Linkov et al, Nature Climate Change 2014

Importance of Recovery

he

Low HighRisk

Lo

wH

igh

Res

ilien

ce

a b

c d

After Linkov et al, Nature Climate Change 2014

Traditional risk management focuses on planning and reducing vulnerabilities. Resilience management puts additional emphasis on speeding recovery and facilitating adaptation.

11/22/2014

6

UK US

Organization Top-down integrated approach

Parallel but independent agency efforts

Scope Detailed national risk Community-level risk and

Country Comparison

assessmenty

recovery assessment; agency performance monitoring

Threats Off-shore natural disasters, cyber attack, international terrorism

Flooding, domestic natural disasters, cyber attack

Tools Planning toolkits for communities and businesses

Planning toolkits for communities and assessment frameworks for localframeworks for local governments

Focus Critical Infrastructurevulnerability and cascading consequences

Critical Infrastructure and capacity to maintain

Process-based, descriptive Metrics, more prescriptive

DHS Disaster Resilience Index

Metrics in categories of : social,

Demographic data as indicators of scale of vulnerability and resilience/ ability to recover quickly.

economic, institutional, infrastructure, and community.

All categories equally weighted.

Regional assessment, county level resolution.

Spatially reported results,Spatially reported results, comparative.

All hazards assessment

11/22/2014

7

FEMA Disaster Resilience Index

Strength of social systems

Relative importance of community

Community member awareness and vulnerability survey

Potential hazard severity identification

Relative importance of community structures

Rate general mitigation measures on level of effectiveness or feasibility to improve each community component

Guidance on developing specific Guidance on developing specific mitigation actions.

Supplements: specific hazard probability, functional loss, and cost calculator; local all-hazards risk assessment http://www.dhses.ny.gov/oem/mitigation/documents/fema-local-

mitigation-handbook.pdf

NOAA Community Resilience Index

Identify past and expected storm strength for benchmark scenarios.

Checklist of likely losses to criticalChecklist of likely losses to critical infrastructure and facilities under each scenario.

Expected level of recover in 1 week.

Business recovery,

Strength of social systems

E i ti l d t Existing plans and agreements

Rank resilience in each category as High, Medium, Low.

No relative weights

Local Government Use

Specific to coastal stormsADD REFERENCE

11/22/2014

8

Nature Conservancy Coastal Resilience Mapping Tool

ESRI powered geospatial analysis tool

Pre-loaded map layers of relevant demographic and ecological data

4 apps available for decision making purposes► Flood and Sea Level Rise (future projections)

► Habitat Explorer (weighing habitat importance)

► Community Planning (current data map layers)

► Future Habitat (projected marsh advancement)► Future Habitat (projected marsh advancement)

Local decision-makers and planners in coastal communities

Used for land management and wetland preservation prioritization

http://maps.coastalresilience.org/ct/

Resilience Alliance Social-Ecological Resilience Management Workbook

Meant for resource management and gplanning stakeholders

Workbook guides stakeholders through 5 steps of resilience assessment:► Defining your system

► Identifying alternate states and thresholds

► Evaluating dynamics based on system cycles

► Probing the system’s adaptability

Pl i i t ti► Planning interventions

Qualitative resilience assessment helps to frame current state of system, identify desirability of possible changes in system states and functions, and determine disturbances of concern. http://www.sustentabilidad.uai.

edu.ar/pdf/cs/practitioner_workbook_1.pdf

11/22/2014

9

Weaknesses of Existing Methods

Assessments built in ad-hoc manner based on specific expertise of agency.

Most agencies efforts are not framed in context of larger system. These efforts are each components of the necessary changes.

Assessments do not explicitly consider uncertainty

Assume future impacts will reflect past impacts and that locations of past events will be equally p q yimportant in future events.

Tools largely assess vulnerability through risk metrics rather than assess resilience through capabilities to absorb, recover, and adapt.

A highly networked system is governed by domains of warfare that organize system components and establish a basis for measurement.

Learning from Military

estab s a bas s o easu e e t

Physical: system performance in space and time.

Information: creation, manipulation and sharing information.

Cognitive: translating, sharing, and acting upon information to enable system management.

Social: interaction, collaboration and self-synchronization between individuals and entities.

11/22/2014

10

Resilience: Matrix ApproachResilience Matrix: Analyze the functionality of each domain of the system across each stageof the event timeline

Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

• Uses general metrics for measuring relative system resilience

Diff t f l bilit t th t k

Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

PhysicalInformation

CognitiveSocial

• Different from vulnerability assessment – threats unknown

• Useful for identifying weak areas and prioritizing investment to improve overall resilience

From Linkov et al, Env. Sci. & Tech 2013

Time

AdaptRecoverAbsorbPlan/PreparePrevious Cycle

• State and capability of • Event recognition and • System changes to • Changes to improvePhysical

Adverse Event

General Form of Resilience Matrix

• State and capability of equipment and personnel, network structure

• Event recognition and system performance to maintain function

• System changes to recover previous functionality

• Changes to improve system resilience

Physical

Information • Data preparation, presentation, analysis, and storage

• Real-time assessment of functionality, anticipation of cascading losses and event closure

• Creation and improvement of data storage and use protocols

• Data use to track recovery progress and anticipate recovery scenarios

Cognitive • System design and operation decisions, with anticipation of adverse events

• Contingency protocols and proactive event management

• Design of new system configurations, objectives, and decision criteria

• Recovery decision-making and communication

Social Social network social Resourceful and Addition of or changes toTeamwork andSocial • Social network, social capital, institutional and cultural norms, and training

• Resourceful and accessible personnel and social institutions for event response

• Addition of or changes to institutions, policies, training programs, and culture

• Teamwork and knowledge sharing to enhance system recovery

From Linkov et al, Env. Sci. & Tech 2013

11/22/2014

11

Ways to Quantify

From Keisler and Linkov, 2014

Assessment using Decision Analysis

Use developed resilience metrics to comparatively assess the costs and

benefits of different courses of action

11/22/2014

12

Pilot Study in Jamaica Bay, NYTest two analyses to calculate present-day resilience

• Tier 1: Resilience Matrix, screening

• Tier 2: Integrated Risk/Resilience Assessment using Bayesian probabilistic analyses; appropriate for design

NACCS Planning Reaches

Jamaica Bay

POC: Julie Rosati, ERDC, CHL

23

Jamaica Bay, NY

Tier 1 Screening: Resilience Matrix Approach

Jamaica BayGoal: Provide baseline assessment for intercomparing project alternatives

Approach:• Define extent of system & potential

GoodModerateLow

EcosystemHealth re

par

e

Res

ist

eco

ver

Ad

apt

disturbances• Identify function(s) to be evaluated; for Jamaica Bay:

• Ecosystem health• Housing/shelter

• Assess via expert elicitation* capacity of each cell in matrix• Results indicate:

• Gaps in system resilience

Health Pr R Re A

Physical System

Data & Analysis

Decision Support n/a

Communication

Housing and Shelter P

rep

are

Res

ist

Rec

ove

r

Ad

apt

• Gaps in system resilience• Project needs• Partner roles

Detailed assessment focused on Housing & Shelter

*Query experts; review literature; examine historical record

24

Physical System

Data & Analysis

Decision Support

Communication

11/22/2014

13

How will it work: Project Evaluation

Baseline assessment can be used to evaluate proposed projects Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

Physical 71 16 60 10

Information 63 45 21 18

Cognitive 90 49 38 27

Social 82 54 12 52

43

Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

Physical +10 +18 +9 +32

Information +8 +17

Cognitive

Social

Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

Physical

Information +5 +15 +22

Cognitive

Social +3 +12 +21

Project 1 Project 2

Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

Physical 81 34 69 42

Information 71 45 38 18

Cognitive 90 49 38 27

Social 82 54 12 52

Prepare Absorb Recover Adapt

Physical 71 6 60 10

Information 63 50 36 40

Cognitive 90 49 38 27

Social 85 54 24 73

51 47

*Projects may have (+) or (-) in other matricies

Future: Network Science

We quantify resilience by using network science approach by considering the different domains as interdependent multiplex networks.

11/22/2014

14

Resilience and Network Science

A simple illustration of the model, in which a city depends on Power, Mobile Communication and Water services, the latter of which are in turn dependent on Electrical power.

Here:• Power Plant: supplier• City: demander

Cell Water: both suppliers and• Cell, Water: both suppliers and demanders

UK US

Organization Top-down integrated approach

Parallel but independent agency efforts

Scope Detailed national risk Community-level risk and

Country Comparison

assessmenty

recovery assessment; agency performance monitoring

Threats Off-shore natural disasters, cyber attack, international terrorism

Flooding, domestic natural disasters, cyber attack

Tools Planning toolkits for communities and businesses

Planning toolkits for communities and assessment frameworks for localframeworks for local governments

Focus Critical Infrastructurevulnerability and cascading consequences

Critical Infrastructure and capacity to maintain

Process-based, descriptive Metrics, more prescriptive

11/22/2014

15

Top-DownResilience/ Decision &Network

Analysis

Bottom-UpRisk Assessment

Goal Identification and Problem Framing Management

Risk-Resilience Integration

-

What are the goals, alternatives, and

constraints?

Decision Model-

What are the criteria and metrics, How do we measure

decision-maker valuesPhysical/Statistical Model

-

What is the hazard?What is exposure?

Risk Characterization-

What are the risks relative to a threshold? How do they compare

to other alternatives?

Modeling

g

Metrics Generation and Alternative Scoring

-

How does each alternative score along our identified

criteria and metrics?

Data Collection-

What are fundamental properties/mechanisms

associated with each alternative?

Data Collection

Linkov et al., 2014

References Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Bates, M. E., Chang, D., Convertino, M., Allen, J.

H., Flynn, S. E., Seager, T. P. (2013). Managing resilience to meet national needs. Environmental Science & Technology 47:10108-10110.

Park, J., Seager, TP, Rao, PCS, Convertino, M., Linkov, I. (2013). Contrasting risk and resilience approaches to catastrophe management in engineering systems. Risk Analysis 33: 356–367.systems. Risk Analysis 33: 356 367.

Linkov, I., Eisenberg, D. A., Plourde, K., Seager, T. P., Allen, J., Kott, A (2014). Resilience Metrics for Cyber Systems. Environment, Systems and Decisions 33:471-476.

Roege, P., Collier, Z.A., Mancillas, J., McDonagh, J., Linkov, I. (2014). Metrics for Energy Resilience. Energy Policy 72:249–256.

Linkov, I, Kröger, W., Levermann, A., Renn, O. et al. (2014). Changing Resilience Paradigm. Nature Climate Change 4:407-409.

Ei b D A Li k I P k J Ch D B t M E S T (2014) Eisenberg, D.A., Linkov, I., Park, J., Chang, D., Bates, M.E., Seager, T., (2014). Resilience Metrics: Lessons from Military Doctrines. Solutions 5:76-87.

Keisler, J. and Linkov, I. (2014). Models, Decisions and Environment. Environment, Systems, Decision 4:369–372.

Collier, Z., Linkov, I. (2014). Decision Making for Resilience within the Context of Network Centric Operations. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium.

11/22/2014

16

Call for Papers: Springer’s Environment, Systems and Decisions

ESD provides a catalyst for research and innovation inresearch and innovation in cross-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary methods of decision analysis, systems analysis, risk assessment, risk management, risk communication, policy

31

communication, policy analysis, environmental analysis, economic analysis, engineering, and the social sciences.