Humans as a Critical Infrastructure: Public-Private Partnerships Essential to Resiliency and Response

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Barnes ◽  
K. Newbold
Keyword(s):  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Public Private Partnerships

Maintenance in Critical Infrastructures

2017 ◽  
pp. 62-82
Author(s):  
Patricia Maraña ◽  
Leire Labaka ◽  
Jose Mari Sarriegi
Keyword(s):  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Crisis Response ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
Critical Infrastructures ◽  
Critical Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Infrastructure Protection ◽  
Basic Service ◽  
Maintenance Activities ◽  
Privately Owned

The increase in the frequency of disastrous events and society's dependence on Critical Infrastructures (CIs) has led to greater concern about the need to increase resilience in order to improve Critical Infrastructure Protection. CIs are basic service providers for society and they need to be effectively protected against hazards. Nowadays, CIs can be owned by private entities. However, although they can be privately owned or managed, they provide a public service that directly affects the whole society. Consequently, those activities that increase the overall resilience level of CIs need to be under the supervision of public entities. Increasing resilience requires special attention be paid to correct infrastructure and crisis response equipment maintenance. This chapter explains why effective Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) are valuable for correctly maintaining CIs and illustrates examples of real situations that demonstrate the need for effective PPPs in maintenance activities.

scholarly journals Cyber Governance and the Financial Services Sector: The Role of Public-Private Partnerships

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeria San Juan Menacho ◽  
Aaron Martin
Keyword(s):  
Information Sharing ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Policy Coordination ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Services Sector ◽  
Financial Services Sector

This contribution is the first to explore in depth the various financial services sector organizations focused on cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection. We first discuss how governance over security and the protection of critical infrastructure has increased the focus on the role of public-private partnerships (PPPs) in addressing issues of cybersecurity. We continue by highlighting three sector-led bodies—the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center, the Financial Services Sector Coordinating Council, and the Financial Systemic Analysis and Resilience Center—and how each facilitates PPPs to address cyber challenges primarily in the areas of information sharing, policy coordination, and threat analytics, respectively. The chapter concludes with a discussion of lessons learned and remarks on future research avenues in the area of cybersecurity governance. These lessons include: 1) validation of the PPP model, with some important caveats, 2) the need to extend PPPs beyond information sharing to address systemic risks, and 3) the limitations of PPPs in regulated industries like finance.

Public-Private Partnerships in Support of Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources

2015 ◽  
pp. 256-269
Author(s):  
Martin A. Negrón ◽  
Doaa Taha
Keyword(s):  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Social Needs ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
New Governance ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
The Government ◽  
Key Resources ◽  
Universal Solutions

In the absence of unlimited resources, governments typically face significant challenges in the process of allocating resources to optimize the benefits to the majority of the members of the society. Government officials look for new and creative ways to address the existing and emerging social needs. It is virtually impossible to identify universal solutions, and for that reason, it is essential to understand the implications as well as the risks associated with the use of new governance methods. This chapter describes emerging challenges in the protection of critical government assets as a result of natural and emerging man-made threats and describes the benefits and limitations derived from the use of Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) to proactively plan for the protection of those assets the government considers critical.

Public–Private Partnerships in Developing Countries

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 152-169
Author(s):  
Duncan Melville
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Capital Investment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Developed Markets ◽  
Local Involvement

First used in developed markets, public–private partnerships (or PPPs) are being increasingly used to deliver critical infrastructure projects within developing countries. The success in developed markets is, however, unlikely to be easily transferrable to developing markets, and the usefulness of the contractual framework unpinning PPPs in such countries is worth questioning. In particular, a number of important developmental questions need to be answered. Are developing countries’ economic objectives best achieved through PPPs? Can developing country’s institutions support successful PPP procurement? Does a pipeline of PPP projects in a developing country ensure the growth of high-skilled jobs in the country? By exploring the experiences of PPP procurement in Chile, this article draws the conclusion that it would be in the best interest of developing countries to require domestic or local involvement within PPP consortiums, either through domestic ownership or in domestic/foreign construction partnering. Such local involvement is most likely to ensure the development of domestic engineering and construction companies and mitigate the potentially negative effects of an infrastructure market dominated by foreign influence. PPPs have been lauded for providing the ‘best of both worlds’ of private and public involvement. But the complex contractual structuring, sophisticated financing and robust institutional support involved, make PPPs an inaccessible tool for many developing countries. Outside of Australasia, Europe and North America, Chile has enjoyed some of the greatest success in promoting infrastructure development through PPPs. Since 1991, Chile has completed more than 50 PPPs, totalling over US$12 billion in capital investment in its roads, hospitals, ports and electricity system, and has been held out as a model for other less developed nations to follow (Hill, 2011, p. 189). What institutional prerequisites do developing countries need before PPPs become a viable option for infrastructure procurement? What can developing countries learn from Chile’s experiences with PPPs? From a developmental perspective, what could Chile have improved in designing its PPP programme? Split into three parts, this article seeks to answer each of these questions. ‘PPP Overview’ outlines relevant definitions, the various PPP contractual structures, which prerequisites make PPPs most effective and how PPPs encourage competition. ‘The Chilean PPP Case Study’ explores in greater detail the history of PPPs in Chile, the country’s institutional framework and some of the key outcomes from its concessions programme. Finally, ‘The Case for Domestic Involvement’ focuses on a noteworthy omission from the Chilean PPP model, requirements for local involvement. It is the author’s view that other developing countries will enjoy longer term benefits from PPPs by establishing a stance supporting the meaningful involvement of domestic companies and should, therefore, encourage PPPs not only for the public–private collaboration but also for the domestic–foreign cooperation they can foster.

scholarly journals Privatizing Political Authority: Cybersecurity, Public-Private Partnerships, and the Reproduction of Liberal Political Order

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel R. McCarthy
Keyword(s):  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Political Order ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
State And Market ◽  
Security Concerns

Cybersecurity sits at the intersection of public security concerns about critical infrastructure protection and private security concerns around the protection of property rights and civil liberties. Public-private partnerships have been embraced as the best way to meet the challenge of cybersecurity, enabling cooperation between private and public sectors to meet shared challenges. While the cybersecurity literature has focused on the practical dilemmas of providing a public good, it has been less effective in reflecting on the role of cybersecurity in the broader constitution of political order. Unpacking three accepted conceptual divisions between public and private, state and market, and the political and economic, it is possible to locate how this set of theoretical assumptions shortcut reflection on these larger issues. While public-private partnerships overstep boundaries between public authority and private right, in doing so they reconstitute these divisions at another level in the organization of political economy of liberal democratic societies.

Public–Private Partnerships and Natural Hazards Governance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dane S. Egli
Keyword(s):  
Natural Hazards ◽  
Critical Infrastructure ◽  
Personal Responsibility ◽  
Transportation Systems ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Public Private Partnerships ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Financial Benefit ◽  
Environmental Goals ◽  
The Impact

The level of interest in public–private partnerships (P3s) is growing—along with supporting literature—and applications are expanding to include new areas where industry supplements public investments in return for measurable rewards. In what follows are timely observations to support P3 operating principles for natural hazards governance—working as an integrated team, sharing innovations, solving technical and operational problems, and engaging in voluntary associations to creatively solve problems. P3s involve voluntary collaboration to achieve common goals and financial benefit. In a globalized economy with highly interconnected systems, this spirit of innovation, sense of personal responsibility, and vision for collective partnerships can be seen throughout the world in the application of P3s. The impact and efficacy of P3s is not just realized in the pursuit of economic, security, safety, social, and environmental goals, but also in establishing integrated governance policies to contend with the persistent vulnerabilities of natural hazards. The emerging world of P3s and natural hazards governance can be illustrated by three real-world examples: (1) a catastrophic regional natural disaster; (2) an urban research-study focused on the measurement of critical infrastructure resilience; and (3) a summary of transportation systems in the unique environment of maritime ports. From these case studies, and a diverse selection of references, it highlights key findings that will benefit future research, critical analysis, and policy application, including academic value, integrated participation, evidence-based metrics, smart resilience, and future innovation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document