A value model for evaluating homeland security decisions

Introduction In 2007, Michael Chertoff, then secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), characterized the task of the Department as follows: We have to identify and prioritize the risks – understanding the threat, the vulnerability and the consequences. And then we have to apply our resources in a cost-effective manner. (Chertoff, 2007) His successors have confirmed this risk management philosophy of the DHS, and many activities are under way to develop appropriate risk assessment and management approaches, models, and tools at the Department. As part of the Department's risk management strategy, the Office of Risk Management and Analysis was created, whose purpose is to “ensure that risk information and analysis are provided to inform a full range of homeland security decisions” (DHS, 2010). This risk assessment and management framework includes estimating the risks we face from terrorism and making appropriate risk reduction investments to counter terrorism. As several authors have pointed out (Ezell et al., 2010; Willis et al., 2005), this, in turn, requires the estimation of: 1. threat (probability of various types and targets of attempts of terrorist attacks) and threat reduction due to preventive and deterring countermeasures; 2. vulnerability (probability of a successful attack, given an attempt) and vulnerability reduction due to protective countermeasures; 3. consequences (including lives lost, direct and indirect economic impacts) given a successful attack and the reduction of consequences due to response and recovery improvements; and 4. costs and other consequences of counterterrorism policies and actions. Items 1 and 2 can, in principle, be addressed with tools like probabilistic risk analysis, though the practical difficulties are significant (see, e.g., National Research Council, 2008). Items 3 and 4 involve describing the possible consequences of terrorist attacks and the costs and side effects of countermeasures in a way that reflects the nation's values and concerns. This requires identifying the nation's objectives pertaining to terrorism. It is also important to specify metrics for each objective to describe possible consequences of terrorist actions and of counterterrorism strategies. A complete set of homeland security objectives is the common foundation about which almost all individuals can agree. Essentially, everyone agrees with objectives such as minimizing the number of fatalities due to terrorism, limiting the damage to infrastructure, minimizing inconvenience to the U.S. public, protecting civil liberties, and minimizing costs of terrorism protection.

Duke Scholars

Author Ralph L. Keeney Fuqua School of Business