Global Resiliency Dialogue Releases Report Detailing Consideration of Climate Risk in Building Codes

The Global Resiliency Dialogue published findings of its first international survey in the report, The Use of Climate Data and Assessment of Extreme Weather Event Risks in Building Codes around the World.
The Global Resiliency Dialogue was established in 2019 by The International Code Council, the Australian Building Codes Board, the National Research Council of Canada, and the New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, to foster global collaboration in addressing evolving climate risks in codes and standards. The aim is to create an international resiliency guideline and enable collaborative research efforts that will aid jurisdictions across the globe to better prepare the building stock to withstand the more extreme weather events, including high wind, flooding, and wildfire, that the evidence and science tells us have been and will continue to increase in frequency and duration.
The report is the first deliverable of the Global Resiliency Dialogue and provides valuable context about the current level of integration of climate science in the provisions of advanced building codes around the world. The report shows that, while many countries are actively considering the integration of models and methodologies that would more accurately predict the risk to buildings during their anticipated life cycle, the vast majority of advanced building codes implemented globally still rely on historical data to assess the risk to buildings from extreme weather events.
“There is great value in building code development and research organizations around the world collectively considering how building safety codes and standards can best adapt to address existential challenges like climate change,” said International Code Council Chief Executive Officer Dominic Sims, CBO. , “There is a demand in many jurisdictions in the United States and around the world that have already experienced devastating impacts of more frequent and intense weather-related hazards for buildings that are safe and durable even in these changing conditions. The International Code Council is committed to playing a leading role in working with stakeholders in the government and standards community, as well as with our global partners, to develop tools and solutions that effectively address these concerns.”

Improved Performance Planning Could Strengthen Technology Transfer

A Department of Energy national lab developed a battery that now powers some hybrid and electric cars. But how do new energy technologies get from the lab to the market?
Transferring technologies from the DOE to private companies isn't always easy. Barriers such as the "valley of death"—a gap between the end of public funding and the start of private funding—can stop a transfer.
The Department of Energy (DOE) and its national labs have taken several steps to address potential barriers to technology transfer—the process of providing DOE technologies, knowledge, or expertise to other entities. GAO characterized these barriers as (1) gaps in funding, (2) legal and administrative barriers, and (3) lack of alignment between DOE research and industry needs. For example, the “valley of death” is a gap between the end of public funding and start of private-sector funding. DOE partly addresses this gap with its Technology Commercialization Fund, which provides grants of $100,000 to $1.5 million to DOE researchers to advance promising technologies with private-sector partners. Further, DOE's Energy I-Corps program trains researchers to commercialize new technologies and to identify industry needs and potential customers. However, DOE has not assessed how many and which types of researchers would benefit from such training. Without doing so, DOE will not have the information needed to ensure its training resources target the researchers who would benefit most.
DOE plans and tracks the performance of its technology transfer activities by setting strategic goals and objectives and annually collecting department-wide technology transfer measures, such as the number of patented inventions and licenses. However, the department does not have objective and measurable performance goals to assess progress toward the broader strategic goals and objectives it developed. For example, without a performance goal for the number of DOE researchers involved in technology transfer activities and a measure of such involvement, DOE cannot assess the extent to which it has met its objective to encourage national laboratory personnel to pursue technology transfer activities. Internal control standards for government agencies call for management to define objectives in measurable terms, either qualitative or quantitative, so that performance toward those objectives can be assessed. Moreover, DOE has not aligned the 79 existing measures that it collects with its goals and objectives, nor has it prioritized them. Some lab stakeholders said that collecting and reporting these measures is burdensome. Prior GAO work has found that having a large number of performance measures may risk creating a confusing excess of data that will obscure rather than clarify performance issues.

DHS Awards $1.5M to Small Business for First Responder Emergency Alerts Technology Development

As emergency communications technologies adapt to an increasingly interconnected nation, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) today announced it awarded more than $1.5 million to develop an Alerts, Warnings, and Notifications (AWN) Guidance Tool. The program planning app, which will be available through a portal at FEMA's website, is expected to provide customized resources, best practices and program templates to address the most pressing challenges of alert originators, helping public safety agencies at the federal, state, local, tribal and territorial levels disseminate emergency and life-saving information.
“From the devastating wildfires on the West Coast to the very active Atlantic/Caribbean 2020 hurricane season to the ongoing COVID-19 public health emergency, there is a growing need to push actionable information out quickly to the public in order to save lives,” said Antwane Johnson, director of FEMA’s Integrated Public Alert & Warning System (IPAWS) office.
S&T awarded $1,542,113 through its Long-Range Broad Agency Announcement (LRBAA) program to Corner Alliance, Inc., a small business consulting firm based in Washington, D.C. and Boulder, CO. The research and development of this tool is a continuation of S&T’s partnership with FEMA in creating the IPAWS Program Planning Toolkit, aimed at assisting public safety agencies in minimizing alerting delays; planning for future alerts, warnings and notifications enhancements; facilitating interoperability across different technologies; and improving information sharing among emergency management and public safety officials.
“First responders rely on information to make life saving decisions, often with very little time to spare,” noted William Bryan, DHS Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary for Science and Technology. “This tool will help public safety agencies respond quickly and decisively during emergencies or catastrophic events, and that allows the greater homeland security enterprise to be more prepared and resilient.”
The documents in the IPAWS Program Planning Toolkit were produced based on recent innovative changes to technology and derived from the collection of successful practices and lessons learned from hundreds of data points from stakeholders, including emergency managers, public information officers, alerting originators and administrators, and alerting experts.
“FEMA and DHS S&T plan to expand the toolkit into an online, user-friendly format that will allow stakeholders to download and print pre-filled planning documents with their information,” said DHS S&T Program Manager Norman Speicher. “Through this development, our team will continue utilizing a stakeholder validation process.”
To learn more about the LRBAA program, please visit https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/st-lrbaa.

Africa’s Infrastructure Ministers Validate Africa’s Infrastructure Priorities for 2021-2030

Africa’s infrastructure Ministers convened virtually to discuss the Continent’s infrastructure priorities for 2021-2030 and to validate the outcome of the first extraordinary expert group meeting of the African Union Specialized Technical Committee on Transport, Intercontinental and Interregional Infrastructures, Energy and Tourism (STC-TTIIET) held on December 14, 2021. A large number of African Ministers and institutions actively participated. The AU High Representative for Infrastructure Development, Rt. Hon. Raila Odinga, also addressed the audience.
The Ministerial meeting has looked into the reports of the STCTTIIET experts’ meeting and the bureau of the STC TTIIET, the priority list of projects for PIDA PAP2, the roadmap, policy, and governance structure of the African Single Electricity Market (AfSEM), the implementation of the COVID-19 Emergency Action Plan for Resilience and Recovery and the African Road Safety Action plan of the Decade 2021-2030.
In his opening remarks, Minister of Electricity & Renewable Energy of the Arab Republic of Egypt, Chair of the STC TTIIET, H.E. Dr. Mohamed Shaker El Markabi acknowledged that the determination of the African Union Commission and stakeholders to move Africa’s infrastructure development agenda forward despite the challenges posed by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
The Chair further highlighted that infrastructure development is key for the attainment of Africa’s development aspirations captured by Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the priorities lined up for the next decade speak to these continental and global goals.
H.E. Dr. Amani Abou-Zeid, African Union Commissioner for Infrastructure and Energy, emphasised the importance of infrastructure in Africa in the next decade as the backbone to the realisation of the much-needed integration and trade facilitation in the continent.
According to AU Commissioner, post-COVID-19 recovery requires the fast-tracking of Africa’s infrastructure development to improve resilience and improve livelihoods and economies. “The COVID-19 pandemic also accelerated digitalisation, exposed the gaps in energy in rural areas and highlighted the need to develop infrastructure that is smart, inclusive and sustainable”, said Dr. Abou-Zeid.
The AU Commissioner seized the opportunity to remind the Committee of the bottomup participatory approach and regional consultations conducted leading to preparation of the PIDA PAP2 and the AfSEM, calling on the AU Member States, Regional Economic Communities and Stakeholders to synergize efforts towards the realizationsof Africa’s infrastructure development ambitions.
“Annually, we have an infrastructure financing gap of between $60 -$90 billion. We need effective and efficient plans to mobilize resources to fund the identified PIDA projects.The long-term solution in my view is the creation of an Africa Continental Infrastructure Fund under the auspices of the AU to pool resources. Such a fund would focus on a combination of domestic sources and private sector financiers”, said the Rt. Hon. Raila Odinga, the AU High Representative for Infrastructure Development.
Infrastructure & Partnerships Division Manager at the African Development Bank(AfDB), Mike Salawou recalled that the bank has been the major financier of infrastructure projects in Africa by availing 7bln USD in the past ten years. “We have been actively supporting the first phase of PIDA and we will continue to support PIDA PAP2, recognizing the long-term effect it will have to spur economic advancement for the continent”.
Mr. William Lugemwa, Director of Private Sector Development and Finance Division at the UNECA, also appeals for ownership of the PIDA PAP2 projects, saying “African leadership from the highest political level is critical for the successful implementation of PIDA PAP2”.
In her closing remarks, AU Commissioner Dr Abou-Zeid thanked Member States, Regional Economic Communities, PIDA Institutions, and partners for their active participation and relentless efforts exerted throughout the processes of PIDA PAP2, the PIDA PAP2 guiding documents, and AfSEM policy documents.
The recommendations and declarations validated by the Ministerial meeting of the STC-TTIIET will be presented to the Assembly of the African Union Heads of States and Government for adoption at the African Union Summit in February 2021.

CISA Releases ICT Supply Chain Risk Management Task Force Year 2 Report

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and government and industry members of the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) Task Force released an annual report on its progress to advance meaningful partnerships and analysis around supply chain security and resilience.
The ICT SCRM Task Force Year 2 Report builds upon previous work completed in year one of the ICT SCRM Task Force. It showcases the collective ongoing efforts of four working within the Task Force to address challenges to information sharing, threat analysis, qualified bidder and qualified manufacturer lists, and vendor assurance. It also reflects a new working group, Working Group 5, which recently released an analysis report on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on ICT supply chains.
Developed through the expertise and contributions of government and industry, the ICT SCRM Task Force Year 2 Report addresses the lifecycle of supply chain risk management, including how stakeholders identify and understand risk, communicate about and work together to address risk, grow their structural operations for addressing risks, and improve their understanding and self-assessment of their risk posture.
“Government can’t act in a silo,” said Bob Kolasky, CISA Assistant Director and ICT SCRM Task Force Co-Chair. “We must work in partnership with public and private industry. The Task Force has and will continue to serve as a model of excellence in helping to improve the Nation’s collective ability to assess and mitigate threats to the ICT supply chain.”
“As we were reminded this week, supply chain security is a matter of urgency and consequence, and the best way to increase our defenses is through substantial coordination and cooperation between government and industry,” said Robert Mayer, Senior Vice President of Cybersecurity and Innovation at USTelecom and ICT SCRM Task Force Co-Chair. “That is the mission of our task force. Through this partnership with DHS and more than a dozen agencies, the Information Technology and Communications sectors has tackled tough issues like information sharing, threat assessment, qualified bidders and manufacturer lists, and security issues presented by the pandemic. This is a partnership that will expand in 2021 and further strengthen the security and resiliency of our supply chain.”
“For the past two years, the Information Technology and Communications sectors have worked hand-in-glove with CISA and other federal government partners to establish the Task Force as the preeminent public-private partnership tackling the critical issue of global ICT supply chain security,” said John Miller, Senior Vice President of Policy and Senior Counsel at Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) and ICT SCRM Task Force Co-Chair. “The Year 2 Report represents a significant milestone, delivering actionable recommendations to help public and private sector organizations better assess and manage supply chain risks, including by creating tools to address supply chain threat information sharing, threat analysis, and vendor assurance and trust. The Task Force looks forward to working with our federal partners in 2021 and beyond to operationalize the policy recommendations in this report to better manage today’s all-too-real supply chain threats and to develop future work products that will address other dimensions of this important national security issue.”
The Task Force plans to release working group reports described in the Year 2 Report in the coming weeks. Members will continue to explore means for building partnerships with international partners, new sectors, and stakeholders who can help grow the applicability and utilization of Task Force products.

Asia-Pacific resolves to move from crisis to resilience

In 2019, the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction’s (UNDRR) Global Assessment Report called on countries to abandon “hazard-by-hazard” risk management, in favour of a holistic approach that examines risk in the context of its impact in systems, including cascading impacts.
A year later, the COVID-19 pandemic presented the world with an unfortunate case study of how systemic risk, if left untreated, can snowball into a disaster and a global crisis.
However, the pandemic was not the only disaster of the year, as 2020 saw countries in Asia-Pacific deal with a perfect storm of dual and multiple disasters, including droughts, floods and typhoons.
For countries in the region to guard against future disasters and mitigate the compounded impact of disasters, a fundamental shift in risk governance at national and local levels is required.
The post-COVID recovery process is one avenue to embed this new approach in socio-economic development processes, to avoid the creation of new risks while risk-proofing development gains.
However, some preconditions need to be met to facilitate this transformation, including committed leadership, investments, engagement of all sectors and stakeholders, and an embrace of science-based multi-hazard risk reduction. All of these elements are in line with the commitments that countries made in the adoption of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030.
The 2021 Asia-Pacific Ministerial Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction (APMCDRR), as the first major UNDRR regional platform since the onset of COVID-19, offers countries and stakeholders an opportunity to determine how these conditions can be met to achieve a transformation in risk governance.
With that goal, UNDRR and Australian Government, as the convener and host of the APMCDRR respectively, completed this week a major step in the roadmap to the ministerial conference, the organizing of the Asia-Pacific Partnership for Disaster Risk Reduction (APP-DRR) Forum.
The APP-DRR was organized on 1-2 December as a virtual meeting with 175 participants from 30 Asia-Pacific governments, over 10 intergovernmental organisations, several UN and international organizations, and stakeholder groups.
The Forum was kicked off with a statement by Ms. Mami Mizutori, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction, who exhorted the participants to “think big and out of the box”. Opening remarks were made by the Australian Government:
"This forum is an important opportunity to take stock of how we're progressing against our Sendai commitments and to work together to accelerate this process," said Ms. Rebecca Bryant, Assistant Secretary at the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, adding:
"Australia is firmly committed to working with countries to further enhance our region's resilience to disasters and to learn from each other's experience."
Of importance to the APMCDRR is building the disaster resilience of small island developing states in the Pacific. These countries are often the most vulnerable countries to extreme weather events, and still have to mobilize resources to counter a global pandemic.
Speaking on both aspects, the Honorable Dr. Ifereimi Waqainabete, Minister of Health and Medical Services in Fiji, said:
“Our coordinates cannot change... we need to understand as a nation that we are prone to disasters. We are prone to cyclones, droughts and other extreme weather events, almost every year,” emphasizing that “as leaders in our own right, we must continue to make better decisions in building resilience to ensure that the devastating impacts of disasters are mitigated and reduced.”
To make the right decisions, countries need to strengthen their data collection systems and understanding of risk, which in turn contributes to the development of sound national and local disaster risk reduction strategies.
On that front, UNDRR noted that the region was making progress in reporting on several Sendai Framework indicators, as 67% of countries in Asia-Pacific have reported some data as of October 2020.
However, challenges remain around the collection of data that is disaggregated by sex, age and disability, which hinders the effectiveness of planning to ensure no one is left behind.
Moreover, countries continue to face challenges in adopting integrated approaches that combine climate change adaptation with disaster risk reduction and expanding their risk governance mechanisms to other sectors.
As the availability of funding is often a hindrance to the implementation of risk reduction strategies, UNDRR presented recommendations on how countries could finance risk prevention.
Green investment offers a particularly effective way to fund climate change adaptation and risk reduction measures, as is highlighted in a report that was launched by UNDRR at the APP-DRR, titled ‘Ecosystem-Based Disaster Risk Reduction: Implementing Nature-based Solutions for Resilience.’
However, as a result of the downturn in economic activity caused by the COVID-19 crisis, it might be necessary for governments to increase their support for green investments as part of their recovery efforts.
“Financially constrained firms have weaker environmental performance and COVID-19 could be detrimental to environmental investments. Going forward, there will be a need for some forms of public support to encourage green recovery,” said Dr. Hiroko Oura from the International Monetary Fund.
The APP-DRR was also an opportunity for countries and stakeholder groups to voice their priorities and concerns. These reflections were posted on the event page and will help inform planning for APMCDRR.

Latest issue of World Security Report has arrived

The Winter 2020-21 issue of World Security Report for the latest industry views and news, is now available to download.
In the Winter 20-21 issue of World Security Report:
- Priority of Protecting Digital Critical Infrastructure Will Grow in 2021, by Chuck Brooks
- A view of Facility Industrial Control System Security, by Ron Martin
- The Need for Higher Level Strategic Approaches to Cyber Security, by Bonnie Butler
- Critical Infrastructure Protection Starts at the Perimeter
- Effective Security Options for Healthcare Facilities
- African Terror Groups ‘Rebrand’ as Islamic State
- IACIPP Association News
- Industry news
Download your copy today at www.cip-association.org/WSR

ENISA publish report for cyberecurity measures in Railway Transport Sector

Representing 472 billion passenger-kilometres, 216,000 km of active railways3 and 430 billion tonne-kilometres for freight transport, the railway sector plays an important and fast-growing role. Railway infrastructure and systems are key assets, crucial to developing and protecting the European Union.
The railway sector enables goods and passengers to be transported within countries and across borders, and is key to the development of the European Union. The main players within this sector are the railway undertakings (RU), in charge of providing services for the transport of goods and/or passengers by rail; and the infrastructure managers (IM), in charge of establishing, managing and maintaining railway infrastructure and fixed installation, including traffic management, control-command and signalling, but also station operation and train power supply. Both are in the scope of the NIS Directive, and their identification as operator of essential service (OES) respects the transposition of laws to the majority of member states.
Challenges
The study also identifies the main challenges faced by the sector to enforce the NIS Directive:
- Railway stakeholders must strike a balance between operational requirements, business competitiveness and cybersecurity, while the sector is undergoing digital transformation which increases the need for cybersecurity.
- Railway stakeholders depend on suppliers with disparate technical standards and cybersecurity capabilities, especially for operational technology.
- OT systems for railways have been based on systems that were at a point in time secure according to the state-of-the art but due to the long lifetime of systems they eventually become outdated or obsolete. This makes it difficult to keep them up-to-date with current cybersecurity requirements. Furthermore, these systems are usually spread across the network (stations, track, etc.), making it difficult to comprehensively control cybersecurity.
- Railway operators report issues of low cybersecurity awareness and differences in culture, especially among safety and operations personnel.
- Existing rail specific regulation doesn’t include cybersecurity provisions. OES often have to comply with non-harmonized cybersecurity requirements deriving from different regulations.
ERTMS is also covered in this study as a separate infrastructure due to its special requirements and its cross-European nature.

SAFECOM and NCSWIC Address Communications Dependencies on Non-Agency Infrastructure

The world of emergency communications can be astoundingly complex, especially as additional capabilities and services become necessary to successfully deploy, maintain, and protect communications systems. Many agencies rely on multiple third-party entities to provide these capabilities, including provisioning of critical system infrastructure, cybersecurity, and other services. For example, agencies readily rely on commercial vendors for subscriber units or on commercial utilities for power supply. An agency and its contracted non-agency entities alike are vulnerable to events that threaten the uptime, continuity of services, operations, or resiliency of communications. Regardless of how unpredictable these events may be, agencies can take steps to be prepared when those disruptive events occur.
Using the depth of experience among their members, SAFECOM and the National Council of Statewide Interoperability Coordinators (NCSWIC) have published a white paper―Public Safety Communications Dependencies on Non-Agency Infrastructure and Services—outlining several techniques to prepare throughout the communications system lifecycle for challenges associated with such dependencies, as shown in the graphic.
Given the potential for disruptive events impacting non-agency partners, public safety stakeholders—including system administrators, public administration officials and decision makers, and other communications personnel—might benefit from understanding the potential complications or obstacles they may face when depending on outside sources for infrastructure or services.
To learn more about this document and other helpful resources, visit cisa.gov/safecom/technology
Author: Ted Lawson, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Joint SAFECOM and NCSWIC Technology Policy Committee Federal Lead

How UN collaboration is shaping the concept of 'Circular Cities'

“Extending a lifespan or increasing utilization over that lifespan,” says Okan Geray, Strategic Planning Advisor for Smart Dubai. “These are the two key elements of circularity – create another life, or a life delivering more value.”
Applying this thinking to the workings of a city reveals a broad scope of opportunity to achieve ‘Circular Cities’, explains Geray.
Geray leads the Thematic Group on Circular Cities within the United for Smart Sustainable Cities Initiative (U4SSC), an initiative supported by 17 United Nations partners with the aim of achieving Sustainable Development Goal 11: ‘Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’.
“The guide is a world first. Outlining the wealth of opportunity to build circularity into cities, the guide presents a more holistic view of circularity than the now well-established idea of Circular Economy,” says Geray.
“The resulting concept of Circular Cities offers a new way of thinking about not only economic aspects of cities but also their social and environmental dimensions.”
< Download the 'Guide to Circular Cities' free of charge >
Guiding cities from evaluation to action
The Guide provides a ‘circular city implementation framework’ for cities to define the best course of action to improve circularity.
It outlines a four-step methodology for cities to assess opportunities for circularity, prioritize the opportunities capable of delivering the most value, catalyze associated circular actions, and evaluate the impacts of these actions.
“The first stage is all about baselining, almost a checklist for cities to take stock of where they stand today and where they aim to go,” explains Geray.
The Guide begins by mapping all of the ‘assets and products’ found in a city to provide a high-level categorization of opportunities for circularity.
It proceeds by highlighting the ‘circular actions’ that cities could apply to these assets and products, actions including sharing, recycling, refurbishing, re-using, replacing, and digitizing.
It highlights the ‘outputs’ resulting from circular actions, outputs such as more energy-efficient buildings, a longer lifespan for water resources, or more inclusive uses of public spaces.
The Guide also highlights the wide range of ‘enablers’ that cities can apply to catalyze these actions.
“These enablers are potential policy tools to stimulate circular actions,” says Geray. “These enablers might include, among others, Key Performance Indicators, R&D programmes, public-private partnerships, training and capacity building, and financial incentives for circular actions.”
1 6 7 8 9 10