BREAKOUT SESSION 15th Annual Emergency Management Higher Education Conference June 4-7, 2012

Foresight Security ScenariosAlexander SiedschlagAndrea JerkovićCEUSS | Center for European Security Studies, Sigmund Freud University Vienna/Austria

June 7, 2012

The Future Starts Today: General Lessons from Scenario Foresight of the Emerging European Union Homeland Security System and the Comprehensive Approach

BREAKOUT SESSION 15th Annual Emergency Management Higher Education Conference June 4-7, 2012Emergency Management Institute, Emmitsburg, MD

2 FOCUS – Foresight Security Scenarios

References

Contributing CEUSS team includes Alexander Siedschlag, Andrea Jerković and Rosemarie Stangl

Presentation draws from results of the following FOCUS documents:

– Deliverable 3.2 Alternative futures of the comprehensive approach– Deliverable 4.1 Problem space report: nature/environment – Deliverable 5.2 Report on interdependencies of critical infrastructures– Summary of FOCUS problem space descriptions

Public versions of these documents are available on the FOCUS website: http://www.focusproject.eu/web/focus/downloads

http://www.focusproject.eu/web/focus/downloads




Objectives

To present, discuss and elaborate on mid-term results of the European Union co-funded research project FOCUS (“Foresight Security Scenarios: Mapping Research to a Comprehensive Approach to Exogenous EU Roles”).

To introduce selected aspects of the European Union’s emerging homeland security system, as among other things addressed by FOCUS.

To address the EU “comprehensive approach” and its future. To place FOCUS results into a comprehensive context of

future roles of higher education research and teaching in homeland security and emergency management.


Overview

EU security research project FOCUS FOCUS’ five big themes (“2035”) FOCUS three levels of analysis & development FOCUS contribution to future higher education programs Emerging European Union homeland security system Example: EC Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection Department & MIC Example: European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP) Example: EU concept of the comprehensive approach FOCUS results on comprehensive approach (CA) Alternative futures of & needs for CA-related research and higher education Indicative scenario space for future EU security research Further challenges for higher education programs


Topic won by FOCUS

Topic SEC-2010.6.3-2 Fore sighting the contribution of security research to meet the future EU roles

Description of the topic:New tasks are expected to strengthen the EU's role towards providing a comprehensive security approach to its citizens. The external dimension of security may become every more important. The security impact of global climate change needs to be addressed. Furthermore, a stronger common approach to civil protection and crisis management is needed. The task is to develop scenarios as how security research under FP7 and beyond can best contribute to this comprehensive approach while giving due consideration to the ethical and societal dimension.

Expected impact: Provide input for the planning of security research to meet future EU roles beyond those defined in the ESRAB report.


EU security research project FOCUS

FOCUS: “Foresight Security Scenarios: Mapping Research to a Comprehensive Approach to Exogenous EU Roles”

FOCUS has the mission to propose future tracks of civil security research and emergency management research in order to support a comprehensive approach to future European homeland security, including exchange and cooperation with international key players

The main idea of FOCUS is to perform inclusive foresight, resulting in multiple scenarios (in a 2035 time frame) for

– Challenges whose causes are external to the territory of the Union, but whose consequences will be experienced on the territory of the Union

– EU responses using tangible contributions from security research IT-supported foresight in the form of alternative futures Use of FOCUS IT-based Knowledge Platform in teaching


Main contribution

To identify and assess alternative future tracks for security research in a 2035 time frame that will support the EU to adopt new roles in dealing with external threats, risks, and vulnerabilities.

To develop and effective long-term prediction and assessment tool at EU level (IT-based Knowledge Platform).

To populate that IT-based Knowledge Platform with analyses done in the project.

To explore the usability of the IT-based Knowledge Platform beyond the project.


FOCUS IT-based knowledge platform (example)


Main FOCUS output beyond the IT-based product

Studies and scenario syllabi, and cross-cutting reference scenarios. Option roadmap for new tracks of security research to support EU roles in

response to exogenous threats, risks and vulnerabilities (including prioritised lists of themes), be based on a so-called matrix of context options, assessing scenarios for security research against the background of scenarios for EU roles.

Context development roadmap: Description of several paths of how the context for European security research as well as for exogenous EU roles can develop in the future, based on assessment of alternatives.

European Security Research Glossary (ESG) with definition of tracks, terms and concepts, including broadened concepts of security research.

Qualification profile for future security research experts. Related education scheme (in the form of modules for a curriculum).


FOCUS foresight

“Scenario foresight”: Foresight presented in the form of scenarios.

“Embedded scenario” approach: Alternative futures of security research in the context of future EU roles.


Inclusive nature of theFOCUS approach to foresight

Bringing new actors into the strategic debate: FOCUS will use foresight as an instrument to broaden the range of actors engaged in EU security policies, planning of security research, and related stakeholder, expert and public discussions.

FOCUS will conduct foresight on an inclusive basis, trying to integrate multiple stakeholders, experts from a broad range of fields and interested public in variably mixed Future Groups, composed so to address security in relation to other societal as well as to ethical values. In order to better understanding the external dimension, these groups will also encompass non-European participants.

Future Groups will also convene online/supported by the IT Platform. FOCUS will seek stakeholder involvement in four dimensions:

“spread”, “choice”, “exchange” and “implementation”.


Exchange: Work with FOCUS

Get involved in FOCUS multidirectional flow of information and make a difference about FOCUS foresight outcomes:

Online and offline expert consulations

Expert questionnaires

Future Groups and scenario foresight workshops

Online deliberation about the five Big Themes

More, depending on your interests and level of ambition End-user Test

and Evaluation Panel

Conferences and thematic workshops

Voice of the citizens in new social media representations of FOCUS

13 FOCUS – Foresight Security Scenarios13

FOCUS project structure


FOCUS’ five big themes (“2035”)

Different tracks regarding the future of the comprehensive approach as followed by European institutions, Member States, and international strategic actors – including links between the internal and external dimension of security.

Natural disasters and environment-related hazards, with an emphasis on comprehensive risk reduction, civil protection, and reconstruction.

Critical infrastructure and supply chain protection, centred on preventing, mitigating, and responding to exogenous threats that could have a significant impact on EU citizens.

The EU as a global actor, building on EU-level and Member States instruments and capability processes as well as on effective multilateralism.

The evolution of the EU’s internal framework and prerequisites for delivering a comprehensive approach, including strategies for engagement with other international actors, ethical acceptability, and public acceptance of future security roles of our Union.


FOCUS three levels of analysis & development

Level 1: Problem space descriptions – Ready and online per big theme– Summary available, also as foresight guide– Initial working version of IT-based Knowledge Platform

Level 2: Context scenarios– Future EU roles and capability/knowledge challenges – Further elaboration of IT-based Knowledge Platform

Level 3: Alternative futures for security research that support those roles

– Completion of IT-based Knowledge Platform


FOCUS cross-scenario drivers from level-1 and early level-2 work Globalization and international system change Changing modes of governance Changing values and norms Economic and social change Technological change Extent of common threat assessment Consistency and coherence of future research


FOCUS contribution to future higher education programs

Curriculum development scheme as an implementation aspect of the FOCUS roadmap proposal for future security research.

Syllabus of FOCUS modules for implementation in curricula of the projects’ partner universities.


Emerging European Union homeland security system

The European Union has now the legal power to “encourage cooperation between Member States in order to improve the effectiveness of systems for preventing and protecting against natural or man-made disasters.“ (Article 196 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – Lisbon 2009 version)

This includes preparing civil-protection personnel, promoting effective operational cooperation between national civil protection services, and promoting “consistency in international civil-protection work.”

The European Union’s initiative for a designation process of “European Critical Infrastructure” (ECI) as well as its initiative for an integrated risk assessment method adds to the challenges for future graduate studies and academic training.


EC DG ECHO: Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC)

• Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection department of the European Commission (ECHO, i.e. [former] European Community Humanitarian Aid Office)

• MIC works in close cooperation with national crisis centers throughout the 32 countries participating in the Mechanism (EU 27, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway).

• The MIC handles over 20 emergencies a year. In addition, it monitors many more emergencies.

• During emergencies the MIC plays three important roles: Communications hub, information provision, coordination


European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP)

The Council Directive 2008/114/EC on the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures (ECI) and the assessment of the need to improve their protection (EU, 2008) provides the following definitions:“(a) ‘critical infrastructure’ means an asset, system or part thereof located in Member States which is essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions, health, safety, security, economic or social well-being of people, and the disruption or destruction of which would have a significant impact in a Member State as a result of the failure to maintain those functions;(b) ‘European critical infrastructure’ or ‘ECI’ means critical infrastructure located in Member States the disruption or destruction of which would have a significant impact on at least two Member States. The significance of the impact shall be assessed in terms of cross-cutting criteria. This includes effects resulting from cross-sector dependencies on other types of infrastructure […].”


EU concept of the comprehensive approach

Nato EU Crisis Management

Operational Theoretical

Origin

Concepts

Coordination of Harmonized Deployment of

Prepared-ness

ResponseRecovery

Mitigation

Actors & Strategies

ResourcesCapabilitiesCapacities

EU Security Research

The Comprehensive Approach While the EU has only started to move from a consensual top risk approach to an all-hazards approach, it has always advocated the comprehensive approach.

The comprehensive approach aims at overarching solutions to problems, with broad effects based on complementarity of actors, while considering all available options and capabilities, as well as the normative end-state of the security of society as a whole, based on a whole of community approach.

The EU, like NATO et al., at first referred to “comprehensive approach” as a concept pertaining to international crisis management (harmonized deployment of resources, capabilities, and capacities throughout the crisis management cycle). Later, it applied the term also to the field of civil security and civil security research.


Conceptual aspects

The comprehensive approach reflects the cross-border and cross-sector nature of security threats and challenges as well as the complexity of instruments and objectives in security policy.

The comprehensive approach addresses the internal-external continuum.

Nowadays it focuses on the holistic nature and broad trade-offs in increasing the security of the EU and its citizenry as a whole.

The comprehensive approach still lacks an overarching definition, but there is at least broad agreement that in its external dimension, it implies integrating the political, security, development, rule of law, human rights and humanitarian dimensions of the EU’s international missions and operations.

However, the concept is not limited to the external dimension.


Other approaches

An integrated approach focuses on cross-sector solutions based on platforms, such as providing security of both persons and goods in public transport by unified models, strategies, and technologies; or such as comprising different sectors of the strategic management cycle. In practice, there are various concepts of “integrated approach” that differ in their focus on managing different threats. There are integrated approaches to economic threats, to natural disasters, etc.

A holistic approach builds on multifunction, such as linking security and environmental protection, security and (resource) efficiency, etc. in one single package of measures and solutions.

An all-hazards approach centres on cross-sector, cross-risk analyses, and measures.


Conceptual evolution

The comprehensive approach was originally used by NATO (cf. RAND study 1992), both as an operational approach and a strategic concept. It involved the coordination of different actors and strategies, with all trying to achieve political objectives in an increasingly complex environment. The concept has since undergone a significant expansion of scope.

The EU first referred to the “comprehensive approach” as a concept for international crisis management (harmonized deployment of resources, capabilities and capacities throughout all the crisis management cycle phases from primary prevention to reconstruction).

Later, the EU started to apply the term also to the field of civil security and civil security research, including the description of methodological requirements for civil security research projects to meet.

Based on analysis of (approx. 50) pertinent forward-looking definitions, FOCUS identified a set of possible future definitional components.


Core ingredients of conceptual definitions of “comprehensive approach” in forward-looking policy, strategy, and security research documents

Coordination between autonomous actors ; 11,9%

Division of labour between all actors involved; 10,5%

International combination of capabilities/pooling ; 10,5%

Integrated assessment and decision making (systemic

approach); 9,8%

Intervention-based approach (top-down/transfer of solutions, as opposed to bottom-up); 9,1%Developement of capabilities,

including cross-cutting capabilties; 7,7%

All-societal outreach and transfer of knowledge; 6,3%

Civil-military cooperation/coordination/interaction

; 5,6%

Acceptance/ acceptability (ethical aspects); 5,6%

Information sharing; 4,9%

Effects-based approach to operations ; 4,9%

Resilience/ownership; 4,2%

Review of systems (overarching state-of analysis of currently used

systems); 3,5%

Common operational picture ; 2,1%

Internal-external threat/security continuum; 2,1%

Knowledge/anticipation/foresight; 1,4%


Top-5 and bottom-5 conceptual elements of “comprehensive approach” in forward-looking policy, strategy, and security research documents

Top 5 Bottom 5

Coordination between autonomous actors 11.9% Resilience/ownership 4.2%

Division of labour between all actors involved 10.5%

Review of systems (overarching state-of analysis of currently used systems)

3.5%

International combination of capabilities/pooling 10.5% Common operational picture 2.1%

Integrated assessment/ decision making(systemic approach)

9.8%Internal-external threat/security continuum 2.1%

Intervention-based approach (top-down/transfer of solutions, as opposed to bottom-up)

9.1%Knowledge/anticipation/foresight 1.4%


Sceanrio space for alternative futures of CA-related research and higher education


Key drivers for alternative futures of the “comprehensive approach”

Political and/or religious radicalism Organized crime, including piracy, illegal finance transactions, and trafficking of drugs, arms, and humans Demographics, with resulting global migration and increasing conflict over natural resources Severe political crisis and (civil) war in EU neighbouring or in close countries Growing interconnectedness of the internal and the external dimensions of security Failed states Illegal immigration Infectious diseases and health crises Disasters, either of human or natural origin, including industrial accidents Natural resources and energy transition Aggression against national territory or violation of sovereignty territories Proliferation of weapon of mass destruction (WMD) Terrorism as a strategy of action and political influence Cyberattacks and attacks against telecommunication and information systems Economic instability, with resulting reduced resources to address external security threats Climate change and environmental changes/hazards Interruption of essential resource supplies, mainly in the energy sector Increasing reliance/dependency on information and communication technologies, with increasing vulnerability Abuse or inadequate use of emerging technologies and new scientific knowledge


Foreseen core of concept of the EU comprehensive approach

A comprehensive approach addresses the range of threats by the full menu of instruments in order to realize overarching security.

A comprehensive approach aims to find and implement overarching solutions to problems, with broad effects and based on complementarity of actors, while considering all available options and capabilities, as well as the normative end-state of the security of society as a whole.

A comprehensive approach also entails the tackling of cross-cutting issues in home affairs.


Foreseen research and teaching needs in the context of the CA

Balanced, flexible, and effective civilian and military capabilities for domestic ( solidarity clause) and external use;

Comparative assessment of national policies in crisis management; Cybercrime as a global phenomenon causing significant damage to the EU

internal market; New technologies for collecting and integrating data from various different

sources; Intelligent, knowledge based focusing and filtering functions for new social media

and other open information source monitoring; Training schemes for technology use including new social network technologies; Advancement and integration of approaches to foresight, with special

consideration of the following: use driven shifts, user experience as a dominant influence in the technology trend, identification, and analysis of disruptors from normative end states.


Indicative scenario space for future EU security research (draft)

Academic discipline, including reflection on politics of fear, securitisation, cultural selection of risks, etc. Planning tool

for civil security

Driver of technological/economic development

?

RTD for Common European Capabilities

Knowledge foundations for new policy initiatives for coherence

Knowledge foundations for an integrated approach (citizen resilience, societal acceptance, ethical acceptability, etc.)

Challenges for research that derive from the Stockholm Programme (European Council had already encouraged “greater cooperation between JLS and ESDP“ to further shared objectives


Thematic challenges associated with emergency management higher education programs

Comparative studies of the governance of homeland security and emergency management, including analyzing citizens’ needs

Social science/humanities aspects in designation of critical infrastructure (e.g., securitization and cultural selection of risks)

Vulnerability studies and supply chain/essential services management Civil-military “dual use” systems (e.g., in the surveillance sector) Monitoring of new social media and other open information sources Implementation perspective, with indicators for effectiveness of a comprehensive

approach Multi-disciplinary scenarios of maximum credible natural events Ethics aspects, such as unintended reproduction of inequality or creation of uneven

distribution of security in society Training schemes for use of relevant technology Training schemes for use of new social network technologies, to coordinate response

and for empowerment of victims, and of first responders including volunteers

Dis

cipl

ine-

rela

ted

Tran

sver

sal

Ski

lls


Further challenges associated with emergency management higher education programs Enhanced accessibility and more comprehensive analysis/

use of previous studies and their results Vulnerability studies

– Security scrutiny of the results and possible revealing of security gaps – Resulting restriction of dissemination – Resulting classification and non-accessibility of content vs. transparency and

possibility of independent verification of the results as cornerstones of quality management as well as integrity of research and teaching

How can the coherence of security with societal preferences be achieved?

– Major consideration of non technological issues, such as trust and resilience– Resilience implies the recognition of the fact that we cannot prevent all

incidents and that we must also builds societies and infrastructures that can cope, also in order to prevent largely uneven distribution of security in society


Contact

Sigmund Freud Private University Vienna Institute for Security Research CEUSS | Center for European Security Studies

FOCUS Coordinator &FOCUS Foresight Coordination Cell (FoCC)

http://www.european-security.infohttp://www.focusproject.eu

[email protected]@european-security.info

http://www.european-security.info/

http://www.focusproject.eu/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


http://www.focusproject.eu

FOCUS is co-funded by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme, theme "security", call FP7-SEC-2010-1, work programme topic 6.3-2 "Fore sighting the contribution of security research to meet the future EU roles“, Grant Agreement no. 261633.

BREAKOUT SESSION 15th Annual Emergency Management Higher Education Conference June 4-7, 2012

Documents

Transcript of BREAKOUT SESSION 15th Annual Emergency Management Higher Education Conference June 4-7, 2012