PPD-8 National Preparedness: Strengths, Weaknesses & SNRA

Introduction to PPD-8 and National Preparedness

Presidential Policy Directive 8 (PPD-8) examines how the nation should approach preparing for threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk to U.S. security. It is the view of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that "national preparedness is the shared responsibility of our whole community. Every member contributes, including individuals, communities, the private and nonprofit sectors, faith-based organizations, and Federal, state, and local governments" (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2011). Therefore, the Department of Homeland Security holds that increasing preparedness across all sectors — public and private — better enables the entire society to deal with potential disasters. Moreover, one of the Department's goals is to increase resiliency; it acknowledges that not all disasters can be avoided, but seeks to ensure the country is well-prepared to weather any disaster.

One of the recurring issues with homeland security legislation is that it is seen by many as overbroad and unconstitutional. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, Americans were willing to endorse laws that emphasized security over constitutionality. "As has been true in the past, such events typically lead to a movement in the federal power pendulum toward centralization of power in the national government" (Clovis, 2006). However, after the immediate threat dissipated, people became increasingly uncomfortable with this new balance of power and sought to undo some of that centralization. History has shown that power, once preempted by the federal government, rarely returns wholly to state or local governments. This appears to be the case in homeland security: it has been over a decade since the last terrorist attack on U.S. soil, yet there has been no significant rollback of post-9/11 governmental power increases. Moreover, even those who advocate for reducing federal power are stymied by the unprovable argument that these increasing restrictions have resulted in greater safety for Americans. Advocates of these laws repeatedly suggest that governmental confidentiality prevents the release of supporting information, because doing so would reveal to terrorists how planned attacks have been foiled and increase vulnerability to future ones.

Unclassified Strategic National Risk Assessment

Under the auspices of PPD-8, the Secretary of Homeland Security — supported by the offices of the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General — sought to conduct a Strategic National Risk Assessment (SNRA) to identify which threats to national security are most significant. The SNRA identified the biggest national security issues as: terrorism, cyber attacks, natural disasters, and pandemics. The SNRA helps establish a new baseline for homeland security risk by evaluating "the risk from known threats and hazards that have the potential to significantly impact the Nation's homeland security. These threats and hazards were grouped into a series of national-level events with the potential to test the Nation's preparedness" (Department of Homeland Security, 2011).

It is important to recognize that the concerns addressed in the SNRA were not necessarily those that many people typically perceive as risks to homeland security. The assessment included only "events that have a distinct beginning and end and those with an explicit nexus to homeland security missions." This approach excluded chronic societal concerns such as immigration and border violations; conditions generally unrelated to homeland security national preparedness, such as cancer or car accidents; and political, economic, environmental, and societal trends that may contribute to a changing risk environment but are not explicitly homeland security national-level events — for example, demographic shifts or economic trends (Department of Homeland Security, 2011).

The SNRA identified several factors as posing a significant risk to domestic security. These national-level events were grouped into three categories: natural, technological/accidental, and adversarial/human-caused (Department of Homeland Security, 2011). Examples of natural events include wildfires, earthquakes, and other natural disasters, as well as outbreaks of human or animal disease. Examples of technological/accidental events include accidental release of nuclear material, chemical spills, biological food contamination, and dam failure. Examples of adversarial/human-caused activity include the use of aircraft as weapons, armed assaults, chemical or biological terrorism, cyber attacks, nuclear attacks, and explosive terrorist attacks (Department of Homeland Security, 2011).

What the SNRA revealed is that national security prior to 9/11 was at tremendous risk, and that the greatest risk was not necessarily from a terrorist attack. One of the assessment's key themes was that "a wide range of threats and hazards pose a significant risk to the Nation, affirming the need for an all-threats/hazards, capability-based approach to preparedness planning." Natural hazards — including hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, wildfires, and floods — present a significant and varied risk across the country (Department of Homeland Security, 2011). Infectious disease, particularly an influenza pandemic, could pose a real threat to Americans, as could technological failures whose risk increases as America's infrastructure ages.

Efficacy of PPD-8 in Homeland Security

Most research on post-9/11 legislation has focused on PPD-8 and HSPD-5, Management of Domestic Incidents. Together, the two directives "lay the foundation of all subsequent policy development related to homeland security national preparedness" (Clovis, 2008). PPD-8 is strongly associated with national security, particularly in response to terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies. The document describes "preparedness as the existence of plans, procedures, policies, training, and equipment for governments to maximize their respective abilities to deal with major events" (Clovis, 2008). As a result, PPD-8's directives have shaped current policies regarding national preparedness. The guidelines of PPD-8 direct the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to: build support for and assessment of state and local first responders; develop methods for effective, efficient, and timely delivery of federal assistance to state and local governments; focus on terrorist events; establish readiness priorities and targets that balance the potential threat and magnitude of terrorist attacks, disasters, and other emergencies with the resources required to address them; develop standards for preparedness assessments; award grants based on risk calculations; and develop quantifiable performance measures for federal, state, and local governments (Clovis, 2008).

Furthermore, the SNRA suggests that, despite recent history, it is reasonable to expect the recurrence of significant events within a decade-long cycle. Its findings support the development of core capabilities for dealing with any of these issues. While some have criticized the emphasis on resiliency as an inadequate goal, the reality is that many of these events are simply not preventable. The U.S. will face natural disasters, industrial accidents, and pandemic illness at some point in the future, and it is impossible to completely eliminate the risk. Moreover, the U.S. will continue to be at risk for terrorist attacks. Therefore, resiliency is an appropriate and necessary goal.

Furthermore, "although historic events provide a useful perspective on homeland security risks, the changing nature of society and the risk landscape means that the Nation must also be prepared for new hazards and threats or for events that result in greater consequences than have occurred in the past" (Department of Homeland Security, 2011). Disaster preparedness cannot be treated as a one-time undertaking; as risks evolve, so must the nation's capacity to respond. Particularly, within an all-hazards preparedness context, certain events — such as nuclear attacks or chemical releases — require additional specialized response activities. Some events, such as explosive attacks or earthquakes, generally cause more localized consequences, while others, such as human pandemics, may cause consequences dispersed throughout the nation, thus creating different types of challenges for preparedness planners (Department of Homeland Security, 2011).

Conclusion

Because so much information regarding the efficacy of post-9/11 laws is classified, it is difficult to assess whether those laws have increased the U.S. government's effectiveness in responding to threats. The SNRA makes clear that PPD-8 has led to a comprehensive evaluation of the nature and scope of threats that could seriously harm the nation. There are certainly indications within the intelligence community that laws enacted in support of PPD-8 have had a deterrent effect on terrorism. However, as the SNRA demonstrates, terrorism is only one of many threats facing the nation. While terrorism may be the most emotionally daunting threat because it is man-made, seemingly random, and unpredictable, it does not necessarily pose the same level of risk as some of the natural disasters identified as serious national hazards. It seems unrealistic to believe that laws alone could render the country invulnerable to all risks, but an efficient and well-coordinated response to disasters could certainly improve the nation's resiliency.