Enterprise Risk Management

 

 

Lessons in Liabilityhttps://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Lessons-in-Liability.aspxLessons in LiabilityGP0|#28ae3eb9-d865-484b-ac9f-3dfacb4ce997;L0|#028ae3eb9-d865-484b-ac9f-3dfacb4ce997|Strategic Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a43444652017-03-01T05:00:00Zhttps://adminsm.asisonline.org/pages/megan-gates.aspx, Megan Gates<p>​Yvonne Hiller was not having a good day. On September 9, 2010, Hiller had a quarrel with her coworkers—Tanya Renee Wilson, LaTonya Brown, and Bryant Dalton—at the Kraft Foods plant in Northeast Philadelphia where she had worked for 15 years. At a union stewards and supervisors meeting that evening, a decision was made. She was suspended and had to vacate the facility immediately.</p><p>Kraft had contracted U.S. Security Associates, a private-sector firm, to provide security for the plant, and U.S. Security Site Supervisor Damon Harris was called to escort Hiller to her vehicle and ensure that she left the property.</p><p>However, Harris did not walk Hiller to her car. He left her at the guard booth at the security gate at the entrance to the plant and allowed Hiller to walk to her vehicle, alone. But Hiller did not drive away.</p><p>Instead, she retrieved a firearm from her car and drove back to the security gate where she pointed her gun at U.S. Security Officer Marc Bentley, who was inside the guard booth, and demanded to be allowed back into the plant.</p><p>When Bentley did not open the gate, Hiller drove through it. Bentley then paced back and forth inside the guard booth, while his supervisor—Harris—ran away. Both security officers called 911 after several minutes of panic and confusion, but they failed to alert anyone else in the plant that Hiller was inside, and that she was armed.</p><p>Hiller made her way through the plant to where the union meeting had taken place earlier that evening, opened fire, and shot Wilson, Brown, and Dalton. Wilson and Brown were killed, but Dalton survived the attack.</p><p>Local law enforcement responded to the scene, taking Hiller into custody. She was eventually convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and one count of attempted murder. She is currently serving a life sentence in prison.</p><p>The estates of Wilson and Brown filed a civil suit against U.S. Security and Hiller in 2015, alleging that the security company was guilty of negligence for failing to protect the people at the plant during the shooting and for failing to warn employees that Hiller was in the plant, armed with a gun.</p><p>The First Judicial District Court of Pennsylvania agreed with them, granting the estates more than $46.5 million in damages—$8.02 million in compensatory damages and $38.5 million in punitive damages.</p><p>“The verdict is an important message to U.S. Security that their guards can’t simply run away in the middle of a crisis,” said Shanin Specter of Kline & Specter, P.C., which represented the Wilson and Brown families in the civil suit, in an interview with Philadelphia’s NBC local affiliate. U.S. Security did not return requests for comment on this article. </p><p>The case served as a lesson for the contract security industry that negligent behavior by officers can be a form of premises liability. Premises liability is a legal concept typically associated with personal injury cases where someone is injured by an unsafe or defective condition on someone else’s property. The classic example is a slip-and-fall case.</p><p>Kraft had contracted with U.S. Security and set forth the service agreement in written documents, outlining the security officers’ guide and post orders. </p><p>The service agreement explained that U.S. Security personnel would have administrative and operations experience in security services at a level adequate to the scope of work and would be “responsible for maintaining high standards of performance, personal appearance, and conduct,” according to court documents. </p><p>Personnel would be responsible for duties such as access control; escort services; incident reports; in-depth knowledge of facility-specific requirements, expectations, and emergency procedures; patrol service duties; alarm response; emergency and accident response; and security gate control.</p><p>The service agreement also outlined what was expected of security personnel in response to an emergency at the Kraft plant in Philadelphia. The nine-step procedure included remaining calm if the officer was witness to a threatening situation, contacting a Kraft representative immediately, calling 911 if the threat was immediate, being prepared to assist if the situation became confrontational, and noting all facts about the incident in the security log.</p><p>However, the U.S. Security officers on site that day did not follow the emergency response protocol or the service agreement to escort Hiller from the plant to her vehicle, which is why the jury sided with the plaintiffs, says Eddie Sorrells, CPP, PCI, PSP, chief operating officer and general counsel for DSI Security Services, a contract security provider based in Dothan, Alabama.</p><p>The jury initially said to U.S. Security “you failed in your responsibility contractually to make sure that this bad person got off the premises,” Sorrells explains. “You didn’t do your job. And then when the person came back and started making threats and ultimately shooting, you didn’t communicate it. You didn’t do your job to warn the people inside; you didn’t communicate there was an emergency or a shooter on the premises. All you did was call 911 and hide. And we’re going to say that wasn’t enough.”</p><p>This is why it is critical for contract security providers and their clients to draft and review policies related to security officer duties and emergency response.</p><p>“Any plans, procedures, and policies that you had in place are going to be front and center when a tragedy like the Kraft case happens—or even something far less tragic,” Sorrells says. </p><p>For contract security providers, the case illustrates the importance of reviewing background screening and training processes for security guards. One criticism in the U.S. Security case, according to court documents, was that Bentley—a relatively new security officer—was not adequately trained to know how to use the available technology to communicate that Hiller had reentered the plant with a gun.</p><p>“One of the most important lessons learned from this case is how critical training is for the security officer,” Sorrells explains. “That’s not a suggestion that U.S. Security didn’t have that; it just reinforces the need to have real policies and procedures that can be…exercised and trained on.”</p><p>The case also shines a light on another security risk that can sometimes be overlooked by contract security: high-risk terminations. While Hiller was suspended from Kraft—not fired—the same principles apply, and contract security providers should make sure that their clients know the warning signs for an individual who might be a high-risk termination and require a security escort from the facility.</p><p>The client hiring a contract security firm also has a responsibility to make sure the firm has the background, resources, and knowledge to advise them on best security practices.</p><p>“I’m fond of saying that corporations are not hiring a staffing agency; they’re hopefully hiring security experts who can come in and advise them on what is needed in terms of emergency communications, training, and internal education for your employees,” Sorrells adds. </p><p>“We have to make sure that training is there to hopefully prevent these things from happening; and even if all those efforts fail, once someone does show up with a weapon, we need to have procedures in place to make sure emergency notifications are sent out,” Sorrells says. ​</p><h4>Insider Threats</h4><p>Around 10:09 a.m. on September 8, 2013, Yale University doctoral student Annie Le swiped her security card and entered the research lab on Yale’s campus where she conducted experiments into enzymes that could have implications for cancer, diabetes, and muscular dystrophy treatments. </p><p>Later that day, a fire alarm went off in the lab, requiring everyone to evacuate the facility. But Le did not leave. And Yale University did not search the building to locate her. Eventually, when Le did not come home that night, her roommate called the authorities at Yale to report her missing.</p><p>However, authorities did not begin looking for Le until the following morning. They would not find her until five days later—on the day she was scheduled to be married—when they discovered her body stuffed into a wall in the basement of the lab facility.</p><p>Authorities would later determine that fellow laboratory technician Raymond J. Clark III had brutally assaulted and strangled Le on Sep­tember 8. He pleaded guilty to her murder and is currently serving a 44-year prison sentence.</p><p>Following his sentencing, Le’s family filed suit against Yale, alleging that it was negligent and failed to use reasonable care by hiring Clark for a position that allowed him unsupervised access to students and staff; by retaining Clark in that position; by failing to adequately supervise and monitor Clark’s activities; and by permitting Clark to work alone in remote areas of the building with Le and others.</p><p>The family also claimed that Yale was negligent for failing to inform and warn Le about the potential threat Clark posed; failing to take “reasonable steps” to provide a safe and secure environment for Le to work at the facility; failing to maintain a properly qualified and trained security staff at the lab; failing to respond to a fire alarm that sounded the same day Le was murdered; fostering an atmosphere of tolerance of sexual harassment and sexual assaults that emboldened Clark; failing to investigate Le’s unexplained disappearance; and failing to detect, prevent, or intervene in Clark’s attack and murder of Le.  </p><p>Yale denied the allegations, ABC News reported. “Yale had no information indicating that Raymond Clark was capable of committing this terrible crime, and no reasonable security measures could have prevented his unforeseeable act,” the university said. Yale later agreed to pay the Le family $3 million to settle the suit in 2016, according to the Associated Press.</p><p>Paul Slager, a lawyer for Le’s family and a partner at Silver Golub & Teitell LLP, declined to comment on the settlement but did say that the case was part of a broader trend he’s seen in negligent security cases. </p><p>“Ten years ago when people talked about negligent security it was ‘How do you keep unauthorized intruders out?’” he explains. “As a lawyer, the issues have shifted now that there has to be recognition by security professionals that just keeping intruders out doesn’t mean you’re maintaining a safe and secure environment.”</p><p>For instance, the security precautions that Yale had taken—installing security cameras and using a card access control system—were designed to keep unauthorized individuals from entering the laboratory that Le worked in. However, they were not designed </p><p>to address insider threats from those who had authorized access to the facility.</p><p>Now, there is a greater acknowledgment that sometimes the threat to employees and students is an insider threat, and there may be other ways to prevent those crimes or acts of workplace violence from taking place, Slager explains.</p><p>“Workplace violence is such a big issue, and this case had layers of workplace violence to it,” he says. “These people (Le and Clark) knew each other really well.”</p><p>One security method Slager says he’s seen more of recently is the rise in portable personal protective devices, which are designed to be carried by individuals and allow them to request help immediately.</p><p>For instance, the University of Bridgeport in Connecticut began giving all new students National Protective Systems’ Personal Alarm Locators (PALs) in 2003. When pressed, the device can pinpoint a student’s location on campus and alert campus security. </p><p>“The PAL system is only used on the main campus of the university. Your picture and location will automatically appear on two screens at the security office,” according to the university’s 2016 Annual Security and Fire Report. “Security will then respond to the location of your PAL, even if it is in motion.”</p><p>The device also provides critical health information about students in the event of an emergency. The university won the Jeanne Clery Campus Safety Award in 2003 for its use of the technology to improve campus safety.</p><p>The devices have been effective at deterring crimes, and in one instance prevented a crime when there was a conflict between a man and a woman on campus, Slager says. </p><p>Because of this, Slager explains that he argued in the Le family’s suit against Yale that giving this type of personal protective device to students and employees would have been an effective way to deter or interrupt the assault on Le, which killed her.</p><p>Le worked in an isolated part of the lab facility and Yale “didn’t offer sufficient protections from coworkers or people who had proper authority to be there,” Slager says. </p><p>Because Yale and the Le family settled their suit, no damages were awarded. But in the U.S. Security Services case, the damages the jury awarded the plaintiffs were significant. The case was being appealed at the time Security Management went to press, so they may be reduced, but the high amount was initially awarded, Sorrells says, due to the loss of life and the perception that more could have been done to prevent it. ​ ​ </p>

Enterprise Risk Management

 

 

https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Lessons-in-Liability.aspx2017-03-01T05:00:00ZLessons in Liability
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/SM-Online-February-2017.aspx2017-02-01T05:00:00ZSM Online February 2017
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Trade-Secrets-2.0.aspx2017-02-01T05:00:00ZTrade Secrets 2.0
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Secrets.aspx2017-01-01T05:00:00ZBook Review: Secrets
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/December-2016-Industry-White-Papers.aspx2016-12-01T05:00:00ZDecember 2016 Industry White Papers
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Security-Matters.aspx2016-12-01T05:00:00ZBook Review: Security Matters
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Metrics-and-the-Maturity-Mindset.aspx2016-12-01T05:00:00ZMetrics and the Maturity Mindset
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/What-If-It’s-Real.aspx2016-11-01T04:00:00ZWhat If It’s Real?
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---COSO-ERM.aspx2016-11-01T04:00:00ZBook Review: COSO ERM
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Bringing-Clarity-to-Chaos.aspx2016-10-01T04:00:00ZBringing Clarity to Chaos
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/CSO-Center’s-Petri-Ponders-a-Matter-of-Trust.aspx2016-09-13T04:00:00ZCSO Center’s Petri Ponders a Matter of Trust
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Compliance-Trends.aspx2016-09-01T04:00:00ZCompliance Trends
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Insights-on-Asia.aspx2016-08-01T04:00:00ZInsights on Asia
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/A-Strategic-Response.aspx2016-08-01T04:00:00ZA Strategic Response
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Risk-Analysis-and-Security-Countermeasure-Selection.aspx2016-07-29T04:00:00ZBook Review: Risk Analysis and Security Countermeasure Selection
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Biological-Laboratory-Applied-Biosecurity-and-Biorisk-Management-Guide.aspx2016-07-29T04:00:00ZBook Review: Biological Laboratory Applied Biosecurity and Biorisk Management Guide
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Kidnap-Face-to-Face-with-Death.aspx2016-07-29T04:00:00ZBook Review: Kidnap: Face to Face with Death
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Threat-Assessment-Goes-to-the-Dogs.aspx2016-07-29T04:00:00ZSeminar Sneak Peek: Threat Assessment Goes to the Dogs
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/SM-Online-June-2016.aspx2016-06-01T04:00:00ZSM Online June 2016
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Anti-Fraud-Program-Design.aspx2016-06-01T04:00:00ZBook Review: Anti-Fraud Program Design

 You May Also Like...

 

 

https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/The-Road-to-Resilience.aspxThe Road to Resilience<p>Of course, 100RC had neither the resources nor staff to partner with 10,000 cities. But organization leaders argued that its 100 member cities could be models for institutionalizing resilience—that is, embedding resilience thinking into all the decisions city leaders make on a day-to-day basis, so that resilience is mainstreamed into the city government's policies and practices. Other cities could then adapt the model to fit their own parameters, and institutionalized resilience would spread throughout the world. </p><p>Toward this aim, 100RC recently released a report that discusses three case studies of institutionalizing resilience in New Orleans, Louisiana; Melbourne, Australia; and Semarang, Indonesia. </p><p>For all cities that 100RC works with, the organization provides funding to hire a new executive, the chief resilience officer (CRO). The group also advocates that member cities take the "10% Resilience Pledge," under which 10 percent of the city's annual budget goes toward resilience-building goals and projects. So far, nearly 30 member cities have taken the pledge, which has focused more than $5 billion toward resilience projects.</p><p>Of the three case study cities, New Orleans may be most known as a jurisdiction that has had to recover from repeated recent disasters, including Hurricanes Katrina and Isaac and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Given these experiences, New Orleans was one of the first cities to release a holistic resilience strategy, which connected resilience practices to almost all sectors of the city, including equity, energy, education, and emergency planning.</p><p>The strategy, Resilient New Orleans, has three underlying goals: strengthen the city's infrastructure, embrace the changing environment instead of resisting it, and create equal opportunities for all residents. </p><p>To better implement the strategy, New Orleans CRO Jeff Hebert was promoted to the level of first deputy mayor, and departments were joined to unite resilience planning with key sectors like water management, energy, transportation, coastal protection, and climate change.</p><p>Once this reconfiguration was complete, the city took several actions. It created the Gentilly Resilience District, which is aimed at reducing flood risk, slowing land subsidence, and encouraging neighborhood revitalization. The resilience district combines various approaches to water and land management to move forward on projects that will make the area more resilient. The city will also train some underemployed residents to work on the projects. </p><p>In addition, New Orleans leaders are developing and implementing new resilience design standards for public works and infrastructure, so that efforts to improve management of storm water and multi-modal transit systems will be included as standard design components.</p><p>Melbourne has its own challenges. Situated on the boundary of a hot inland area and a cool Southern Ocean, it can be subject to severe weather, such as gales, thunderstorms and hail, and large temperature drops. Governmentally, it is a "city of cities" made up of 32 local councils from around the region, so critical issues such as transportation, energy, and water systems are managed by various bodies, complicating decision making.</p><p>City leaders created the Resilient Melbourne Delivery Office, which will be hosted by the City of Melbourne for five years, jointly funded by both local and state governments. The office—an interdisciplinary team of at least 12 people, led by the CRO Toby Kent—is responsible for overseeing the delivery of the resilience strategy.</p><p>The strategy has four main goals: empower communities to take active responsibility for their own well-being; create sustainable infrastructure that will also promote social cohesion; provide diverse local employment opportunities to support an adaptable workforce; and ensure support for strong natural assets.</p><p>For Semarang, a coastal city in an archipelago, water is the main focus of sustainability. Factors like a rise in sea levels and coastal erosion have increased the negative impact of floods.</p><p>These impacts can challenge the city in many ways. Thus, for its resilience strategy, Semarang leaders focused on building capacities, including more economic opportunity, disaster risk management, integrated mobility, and sustainable water strategies.</p><p>In Indonesia, like many other Asian countries, the national government sets the goals and parameters for much of the development that takes place at the local level. Thus, Semarang leaders worked with members of the Indonesian Parliament to educate them on the city's existing resilience strategy, and to integrate the city's findings and insights into Indonesia's National Development Plan.</p><p>These coordination efforts bore fruit in the establishment of projects like a bus rapid transit system, which had strong support from the national government. The system has already been implemented in several main corridors and will be expanded. It is expected to offer insight and experience in cross-boundary resilience-related travel.</p><p>As 100RC cities look to institutionalize resiliency, the organization is also helping members improve their emergency management programs. The group is partnering with the Intermedix Corporation, which will help some member cities assess their current emergency management programs, and develop a blueprint for addressing gaps in the program and meeting resiliency goals.</p><p>"As new and complex problems and challenges arise, it's becoming more and more important for cities to look outside of their own organizations for the expertise and solutions required to meet and overcome these challenges," says Michael Berkowitz, president of 100RC. ​​</p>GP0|#28ae3eb9-d865-484b-ac9f-3dfacb4ce997;L0|#028ae3eb9-d865-484b-ac9f-3dfacb4ce997|Strategic Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a4344465
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Book-Review---Port-Security-Management.aspxBook Review: Port Security Management<p><em>​</em><span style="line-height:1.5em;"><em>CRC Press; available from ASIS; item #2196; 376 pages; $90 (ASIS members); $99 (nonmembers).</em></span></p><p>This authoritative and comprehensive work looks at the significant components involved in managing the security of maritime transport and port facilities. It offers an over­view of international conventions on maritime security and delves into the spectrum of threats facing the maritime sector, such as terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, hazardous materials, criminality, workplace violence, economic espionage, and the new threat of cyber sabotage. It also explains how to manage port-related threat intelligence and apply risk management methodologies. </p><p>The author outlines the responsibilities of security managers, such as coordinating port security with local and federal security agencies and managing and training security personnel. Modern technology is covered, including components of access control, sonar, and CCTV.</p><p>All the book’s chapters are useful, but this reviewer found Chapter 4, “Port Security as a Risk Management Activity,” especially valuable. It discusses a variety of risk assessments of maritime transport assets and port facilities. Following a discussion of three different risk assessment methodologies—design-basis threat, catastrophe modeling, and levels of probability—author Kenneth Chris­to­pher presents the components of a security survey. These include identifying one’s assets, establishing the criticality of those assets, and determining their vulnerability to determine the probability or likelihood that a particular hazardous event or occurrence might compromise the security of the maritime transport or port facility’s assets. Such risk assessment, Christopher writes, can be quantified against identified assets as: R (risk) = C (criticality) x V (vulnerability) x P (probability). </p><p>Once an asset’s overall level of risk is quantified, he concludes, the allocation of a security manager’s resources to mitigate such risk will be based on the anticipated outcomes of the possibility of harm or loss produced by the particular threats against it. Once these risk assessment steps are completed, “port management can objectively quantify and prioritize the risks to the port and begin to conceptualize and initiate the [facility security plan].” </p><p>Each chapter concludes with a summary, key points, and reference resources. The volume also includes a glossary of terms and organizational resources, plus an extensive bibliography. The author is associate professor of criminal justice at Park University, Parkville, Missouri, and has previously worked with the U.S. Maritime Administration in curriculum development and instruction. All those involved in maritime transport and port security will benefit from this informative, authoritative reference and will find it useful in their daily work.</p><p><em><strong>Dr. Joshua Sinai</strong> is director of analytics and business intelligence at Resilient Corporation, in Alexandria, Virginia. He is the author of Active Shooter–A Handbook on Prevention, published by ASIS International.  </em></p>GP0|#cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8;L0|#0cd529cb2-129a-4422-a2d3-73680b0014d8|Physical Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a4344465
https://sm.asisonline.org/Pages/Resilience-Trends.aspxResilience Trends<p>​<span style="line-height:1.5em;">“Thousands have lived without love, not one without water,” poet W.H. Auden famously said. In many countries, enjoying a safe and secure water supply is something most take for granted. The United States, for example, has had an “unrivalled tradition” of low-cost, universal access to drinking water, says Robert Glennon, a water policy expert at the University of Arizona and author of Unquenchable: America’s Water Crisis and What to Do About It. In actuality, a safe and secure water supply is never a given, and there are signs that the recent water crisis in Flint, Michigan (covered in Security Management’s May issue), may be a canary in the coal mine for the future of America’s water. The U.S. water and wastewater system is in urgent need of repair and replacement; some of the piping dates back to the Civil War era, experts say. But federal and state funding appropriations have been insufficient for keeping water supply infrastructure in good repair.</span></p><p>“For years, there’s been a general inadequacy in funding,” Glennon says.  As recent proof, Glennon cites the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, commonly known as President Barack Obama’s $787 billion stimulus package. “A small fraction of that, less than 1 percent, was devoted to water and wastewater,” he explains.</p><p>The American Water Works Association has estimated that repairing the million-plus miles of water mains across the country, and expanding that infrastructure so that it can adequately serve the country’s growing population, could cost up to $1 trillion over the next 25 years. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has a lower estimate: roughly $330 billion over 20 years.</p><p>Both of these estimates dwarf the existing $1.38 billion that state and local governments are spending annually on drinking water and wastewater infrastructure, according to statistics from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (Using a comparable 20-year time frame, the ASCE estimate comes to roughly $28 billion, or only about 8 percent of the EPA’s estimate of needed funding.) </p><p> Besides inadequate funding for repair, demand is growing, not only from an increasing population but from high-tech industries. Large corporations with cloud computing operations occupy enormous industrial facilities that are air conditioned. “This requires a heck of a lot of water,” Glennon says. </p><p>In addition, environmental factors pose challenges to a secure U.S. water supply. In states like Florida, rising sea levels are pushing into coastal aquifers and causing saltwater intrusion, making the aquifers more saline and problematic for human consumption. </p><p>Worldwide, a possible future water crisis is a problem alarming many, in part because of its potentially disastrous cascading effects on the global economy. A survey released by the 2016 Global Economic Forum found that a water crisis is the top concern for business leaders over the next 10 years. Further in the future, the global water situation continues to look grim, by several measures. By 2030, a stable supply of good quality fresh water can no longer be guaranteed in many regions, and a 40 percent global shortfall in supply is expected, according to the Carbon Disclosure Program’s (CDP) Water Program.</p><p>By 2050, an inadequate supply of water could reduce economic growth in some countries by as much as 6 percent of GDP, “sending them into sustained negative growth,” says a recent World Bank report, High and Dry: Climate Change, Water, and the Economy. Regions facing this risk include India, China, the Middle East, and much of Africa. Water insecurity could also ramp up the risk of conflict and instability—droughts can spur a spike in food prices, which can in turn cause civil unrest and increase migration. While 2050 might seem quite far in the future, water-related challenges are happening right now. The World Bank report also found that 1.6 billion people currently live in nations that are subject to water scarcity, and that number could double over the next two decades.</p><p>Moreover, a water crisis can have a devastating effect on the global economy. The CDP’s Water Program estimates that, if current status quo water management policies are sustained worldwide, $63 trillion in assets will be put at risk. Such economic challenges are highlighting the importance of improved water governance, which includes an emphasis on positioning the water supply so that it is more resilient in the face of challenges due to demand, the environment, and other factors, says Hart Brown, who leads the organizational resilience practice at HUB International and is a member of the ASIS International Crisis Management and Business Continuity Council.</p><p>“In light of the case in Flint, as well as droughts, floods, and the potential competition for water resources, improved water governance is being brought to the forefront of many conversations,” Brown says. When resilience enters the conversation, the challenge becomes creating an “adaptive capacity,” or “diversification of the water and sanitation systems.” </p><p>However, there is no one resilience model that can be successfully replicated for all water supply and treatment plants, because each system is a unique combination of human, technological, and environmental factors, Brown explains. In the United States, a wide range of water systems could potentially benefit from resiliency upgrades, he says. Those include conventional utility piped water supply systems; dug wells and tube wells (wells in which a long pipe is bored into an underground aquifer); rainwater harvesting operations; unprotected water sources such as rivers and streams; and cooperative developments in areas that share transboundary water resources.</p><p> Improving the resiliency of any water system takes investment, but just as important, it takes sound science, Brown says. </p><p>“Water managers need access to the best available scientific information and water risk assessments to support these long-term water-related decisions, including the ability to forecast and plan for important capital expenditures,” he explains.  Businesses also have a role to play, especially those that rely on water for production, manufacturing, agriculture, and power generation purposes, he adds. Some businesses are already being strategic in this area; they consider shared responsibility and sustainability of water systems a core function. </p><p>“Partnerships with local communities are important in the ability to overcome shared water risks,” Brown says. </p><p>Globally, improved resiliency and water management practices, if given sufficient investment, have the potential to pay tremendous dividends, the World Bank report argues. It calls for a three-point approach: improving resiliency to extreme weather events by improving storage capacities, reusing facilities, and other tools; optimizing the use of water through better planning and incentives; and expansion of the water supply, where appropriate, through recycling, desalination, and damns.</p><p>“While adopting policy reforms and investments will be demanding, the costs of inaction are far higher. The future will be thirsty and uncertain,” the report says.</p>GP0|#28ae3eb9-d865-484b-ac9f-3dfacb4ce997;L0|#028ae3eb9-d865-484b-ac9f-3dfacb4ce997|Strategic Security;GTSet|#8accba12-4830-47cd-9299-2b34a4344465