Critical Infrastructure and Key Resource Asset Protection Strategies DB
Comparison of DHS Risk Formula and FEMA Analysis Matrix
It can be established that the current risk formula is more effective and efficient as compared to the previous formulas used in risk assessments. In most cases, the previous method was not as effective and efficient in assessing risks because it was unable to evaluate the various variables that existed. Some of the variables that existed include availability of essential infrastructure, population, weakness, and resident’s density within a given jurisdiction. There is a difference between the current DHS risk formula and FEMA risk and hazard analysis matrix, which makes them not entirely similar. FEMA’s risk and hazard analysis matrix was developed to analyze hurricanes, earthquakes, and flooding, and use the model . FEMA’s risk and hazard analysis matrix is focused mainly on determining natural hazards, especially assessing floods (Gallina et al., 2016). However, the FEMA’s and DHS’s model on risk analysis focuses on the three functions of threat, threat, vulnerabilities, and consequences that help break the risk into its constituent elements.
Compatibility of DHS Risk Formula and FEMA Analysis Matrix
Although FEMA’s risk and hazard analysis matrix focus mostly on natural hazards, it still complies with DHS’s risk formula. As indicated initially, FEMA’s risk analysis matrix based on the three functions of threats, which include threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences. Therefore, the formula is suitable for assessing risks and its constituent elements. However, FEMA’s formula has been tested to be effective and efficient while estimating the dangers involved in terrorism environments because of the independence of threats. Vulnerabilities and consequences, on the other hand, do not hold. However, the feedbacks of the assessment do exist. Therefore, this implies that FEMA’s formula does not have the capability to estimate the probability distributions for the Threat, T, Vulnerabilities, V, and Consequences, C, that can record the interdependencies and still determine the risk. In this situation, feedbacks on the assessments cannot be represented easily. Therefore, FEMA’s risk and hazard analysis and DHS risk formula are not compatible.
Critical Infrastructure Facilities
Critical infrastructure facilities are essential for a nation to function, and may include communications, transport, energy, and water systems. The United States government has identified 16 sectors as part of critical infrastructures (Young et al., 2016). My community has several critical infrastructure facilities that are prone to risks and hazards. The DHS risk formula would apply to my community because it would be able to assess the vulnerabilities and threats within this jurisdiction. While the formula is suitable for this community, it would not be used for a long time. The current DHS risk assessment formula is designed to provide near-term decisions, while the critical infrastructure in my community have been developed for long-term use. The DHS risk formula works best in my community because it entails all the essential variables necessary in determining the vulnerabilities and weaknesses of my county’s critical infrastructure facilities.
Alternative Risk Formula
There is no better alternative risk formula that is as efficient and effective as the DHS risk formula that would protect the Critical Infrastructure facilities in my community. There would not be an alternative formula because while assessing risks, the DHS formula distinguishes the general conceptualization of challenges from the various actual applications of a department. Additionally, DHS risk formula has established several formulas that have helped in assessing threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences, and this has facilitated the commencement of aware principles. Risk assessment using the DHS risk formula involves a three-stage formula. The first stage of the formula can be expressed as , while the second stage is expressed as , and the final step is presented as . It can be concluded that using the DHS risk formula, the Critical Infrastructure for my community is protected.
References
Gallina, V., Torresan, S., Critto, A., Sperotto, A., Glade, T., & Marcomini, A. (2016). A review of multi-risk methodologies for natural hazards: Consequences and challenges for a climate change impact assessment. Journal of Environmental Management, 168, 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.11.011
Young, D., Lopez, J., Rice, M., Ramsey, B., & Mctasney, R. (2016). A framework for incorporating insurance in critical infrastructure cyber risk strategies. International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, 14, 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2016.04.001