Urban Area Security Initiative Research Articles

Modeling a multi-target attacker-defender game with multiple attack types

How to allocate limited defense resources effectively and efficiently to prevent damages is a critical and difficult problem, especially when faced with adaptive attackers and various attack types (methods that the attacker uses). There has been a growing amount of literature on studying the strategic interactions between attackers (terrorists) and defenders (government). This research presents a novel class of multi-target attacker-defender games where the attackers have multiple attacking options including assassination, armed assault, bombing/explosion, facility/infrastructure attack, hijacking, hostage taking, and unarmed assault. Different attack types may lead to different attack success probabilities, consequences, and effectiveness of defensive resource allocation. Faced with multiple attack types and adaptive attackers, the defender distributes a limited amount of resources to multiple targets to minimize the total expected loss in a sequential game as the first mover. We provide numerical illustrations for the model results. The model is illustrated by: (a) using historical terrorism and defensive investment data to estimate the model parameters, and (b) comparing the historical resource allocation with the model outputs. From the sensitivity analyses, we find that the defense cost effectiveness against the “Hijacking,” and “Bombing/Explosion” attack types play a critical role in decreasing the expected loss. The proposed multi-attack model leads to less expected loss than that of both the single-attack model and the historical allocation from the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI). This paper provides new insights on modeling defensive resource allocation models related to adaptive adversaries.

Modeling cumulative defensive resource allocation against a strategic attacker in a multi-period multi-target sequential game

This paper fills a literature gap by investigating the strategic interactions between an attacker and a defender with a multi-period multi-target game. At each period, the defender allocates a limited amount of defensive resources over multiple targets, and the attacker assigns some attack probabilities to those targets. We consider four scenarios where the defender could be either myopic or long-sighted, and the defense could be carried over to future periods or not. Our analyses characterize the defender's optimal allocations in these four scenarios and develop a n algorithm to identify the optimal allocations. We find that increases in defense carryover could lead to less allocation to defended targets from the second period at equilibrium, and lead to defending more targets. To gather empirical evidence regarding one key function of the model - success probability of attack, we conduct statistical analysis based on datasets from Global Terrorism Database, which is provided by National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) and the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant allocations from FY 2004 to FY 2012. We conclude that in general, effects of defense resources on reducing success probability of attack are mixed due to scarcity of terrorism data.

The use of exercises to enhance and assess interlocal collaboration in preparedness: A qualitative analysis

Interlocal collaboration, or collaboration among neighboring independent municipalities, has been generally accepted as an emergency preparedness strategy. In the absence of large-scale disasters, emergency preparedness exercises may serve to test the effectiveness of interlocal collaboration on emergency preparedness. However, the use of emergency preparedness exercises to enhance or assess interlocal collaboration, or its impact on preparedness, requires additional empirical exploration. This exploratory study aims to understand the perspectives of key informants (KIs) with broad knowledge of the history, goals, and implementation of the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) program, as well as knowledge of interlocal collaboration exercises conducted as part of the UASI program, about the role of exercises in improving and assessing interlocal collaboration for emergency preparedness. In early 2014, 28 KIs were interviewed during 24 semistructured interviews. Interviews were recorded and analyzed to identify key themes related to emergency preparedness exercises and the enhancement and assessment of interlocal collaboration. KIs perceived exercises to enhance interlocal collaboration in preparedness by promoting regional, interlocal: risk assessment; emergency plan testing and operationalization; relationship development; support for regional plans and operational structures; capability delivery practice; best practice sharing across interlocal collaborations; and engagement of elected or senior leadership in interlocal preparedness endeavors. Exercise participants, scenarios, administration, formats, and assessment strategies to promote interlocal collaboration were identified. Seven distinct mechanisms by which exercises can enhance interlocal collaboration that can be used to guide future research and policy development were identified. The format, scenario, participation, and administration of emergency preparedness exercises can be tailored to enhance collaboration.

Regional collaboration among Urban Area Security Initiative regions: results of the Johns Hopkins urban area survey.

Regional collaboration has been identified as a potential facilitator of public health preparedness efforts. The Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant program, administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) since 2003, has provided 64 high-risk metropolitan areas funding to enhance their regional preparedness capabilities. This study describes informal and formal regional collaboration infrastructure, as well as regional collaboration-related activities and assessment methods, in FFY2010 UASI regions. A cross-sectional online survey was administered via Survey Monkey from September through December 2013. Points of contact from FFY2010 funded UASI metropolitan areas completed the survey, with a response rate of 77.8% (n=49). Summary statistics were calculated to describe the current informal and formal regional collaboration infrastructure. Additionally, the cross-sectional survey collected rates of agreement with 8 collaborative preparedness statements at 3 time points. The survey found that UASI regions are engaging in collaborative activities and investments to build capabilities, with most collaboration occurring in the prevention, protection, and response mission areas. Collaborative relationships in preparedness among emergency managers and municipal chief executive officers improved during the FFY2010 UASI performance period compared to the pre-UASI award period, with lasting effects. The majority of UASI regions reported conducting independent assessments of capabilities and their measurement at the UASI region level. Urban areas that received a FFY2010 UASI grant award are engaging in collaborative activities and have established interjurisdictional relationships in preparedness. The use of grant funds to encourage collaboration in preparedness has the potential to leverage limited resources and promote informed investments.

Interlocal collaboration and emergency preparedness: a qualitative analysis of the impact of the Urban Area Security Initiative program.

Horizontal intergovernmental coordination, or interlocal collaboration, is an ongoing strategy to enhance public health emergency preparedness in the United States. This study aims to understand the impact of interlocal collaboration on emergency preparedness, and how the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) program, a federally administered grant program to promote regional preparedness capability development, has influenced perceptions of this relationship. Semistructured interviews were conducted and recorded in early 2014. Transcribed data were coded and iteratively analyzed. A purposive and snowball sampling strategy was used. Interviews were conducted in person or by phone. Twenty-eight key informants were interviewed during 24 interviews. Individuals were selected as key informants due to their knowledge of a UASI region(s) and its governance structures, investment strategies, and challenges, as well as knowledge of the UASI program&s history and goals. Interviews were used to identify, describe, and characterize perceptions of interlocal collaboration, national emergency preparedness, and the UASI grant. Impacts, challenges, incentives, facilitators, and disadvantages to interlocal collaboration were identified. Interlocal collaboration was found to impact preparedness by promoting the perceived dissolution of geopolitical boundaries; developing self-reliant regions; developing regional capabilities; promoting regional risk identification; and creating an appreciation of interlocal collaboration importance. The UASI program was thought to have a profound and unique impact on the development of interlocal collaboration infrastructure and on national preparedness. Interlocal collaborations contribute to overall national preparedness. Grant programs, such as the UASI, can incentivize and foster interlocal collaboration in preparedness.

Developing a Regional Recovery Framework

A biological attack would present an unprecedented challenge for local, state, and federal agencies, the military, the private sector, and individuals on many fronts, ranging from vaccination and treatment to prioritization of cleanup actions to waste disposal. To prepare for recovery from this type of incident, the Seattle Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) partners collaborated with military and federal agencies to develop a regional recovery framework. The goal was to identify key information that will assist policymakers and emergency managers in shortening the timeline for recovery and minimizing the economic and public health impacts of a catastrophic anthrax attack. Based on discussions in workshops, tabletop exercises, and interviews with local, state, federal, military, and private sector entities responsible for recovery, the authors identified goals, assumptions, and concepts of operation for various areas to address critical issues the region will face as recovery progresses. Although the framework is specific to a catastrophic, wide-area biological attack using anthrax, it was designed to be flexible and scalable so it could also serve as the recovery framework for an all-hazards approach in other regions and jurisdictions. Benefits from this process include enhanced coordination and collaboration across agencies, a more thorough understanding of the anthrax threat, an opportunity to proactively consider long-term recovery, and a better understanding of the specific policy questions requiring resolution.

Of risk and pork: urban security and the politics of objectivity

This article focuses on the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) controversy as a case study in the politics of risk assessment. It examines struggles among diverse actors-think tank experts, journalists, politicians, and government officials-engaged in the contentious process of establishing a legitimate definition of risk. In the field of homeland security, the means of conducting rational risk assessment have not yet been settled, and entrepreneurial officials from urban and regional governments use different techniques to identify local risks and vulner- abilities. In this contentious process, federal bureaucrats are responsible for determining how to allocate resources fairly and rationally to different cities and metropolitan regions, given that local officials have clear incentives to request funds and little cause to refrain. Although "rationality" is supposed to replace "politics" in making bureaucratic decisions over the allocation of resources, what we find instead is a political struggle over how to define, measure, and manage risk. For political actors, victory in debates over urban security comes from codifying one's interests within the technical practice of risk assessment.

Collaborative Relationships Resulting from the Urban Area Security Initiative

Collaborative Relationships Resulting from the Urban Area Security Initiative

All Terrorism Is Local: Resources, Nested Institutions, and Governance for Urban Homeland Security in the American Federal System

This article examines the conditions under which local jurisdictions make effective use of U.S. homeland security resources. It analyzes how resources, institutional context, and governance influence local performance on one homeland security policy dimension—communications interoperability. Governance maturity, nested institutions, and the existence of formal rules are key variables affecting the relationship between resources and performance at the local level. Cities with advanced, multilevel, and formal governance arrangements are more effective at using Urban Area Security Initiative funds to improve their interoperability performance. But current policy approaches slight corresponding demands for shared leadership and cross-sector collaborations.

Guiding Resource Allocations Based on Terrorism Risk

Establishing tolerable levels of risk is one of the most contentious and important risk management decisions. With every regulatory or funding decision for a risk management program, society decides whether or not risk is tolerable. The Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) is a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grant program designed to enhance security and overall preparedness to prevent, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism by providing financial assistance for planning, equipment, training, and exercise needs of large urban areas. After briefly reviewing definitions of terrorism risk and rationales for risk-based resource allocation, this article compares estimates of terrorism risk in urban areas that received UASI funding in 2004 to other federal risk management decisions. This comparison suggests that UASI allocations are generally consistent with other federal risk management decisions. However, terrorism risk in several cities that received funding is below levels that are often tolerated in other risk management contexts. There are several reasons why the conclusions about terrorism risk being de minimis in specific cities should be challenged. Some of these surround the means used to estimate terrorism risk for this study. Others involve the comparison that is made to other risk management decisions. However, many of the observations reported are valid even if reported terrorism risk estimates are several orders of magnitude too low. Discussion of resource allocation should be extended to address risk tolerance and include explicit comparisons, like those presented here, to other risk management decisions.