Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure is the central topic of this scientific publication.
Abstract
Natural disasters increasingly threaten the safety of mankind. Not only that, in past decades there has been an obvious increase in the number of natural disasters, but it is also present an increase in their destructiveness. This results in a higher loss of life, material and non-material damage. In addition, compromising critical infrastructure prevents or limits the implementation of vital state functions (governance, health, education, energy, economic, social, and general security functions), which is further reflected in the safety of states and citizens. Despite the technological development of mankind, societies are increasingly threatened. It is clear that the disasters and their impact on people and critical infrastructure cannot be prevented, but mechanisms for prediction and early warning of disasters can be improved that the resilience and capacity for faster and more efficient revitalization of endangered values and goods can be increased. Besides the degree of destruction, the response strategy in an emergency situation will depend on the type of disaster, but also on the kind of critical infrastructure and specific goods and values that are threatened. In this regard, the paper gives an overview of the scope and the content of (still undetermined) concept of critical infrastructure, the term and the phenomenology of natural disasters, the consequences of geophysical, hydrological and meteorological disasters on critical infrastructure and critical infrastructure protection capabilities against natural disasters. Key words: safety, critical infrastructure, natural disasters, the consequences of threats to critical infrastructure by natural disasters, protection of critical infrastructure from natural disasters.
Conclusions
The protection of critical infrastructure is recognized as the foundation of maintaining the functionality of the community in emergency situations such as natural disasters. The main goal of protecting critical infrastructure from the impact of natural disasters is to maintain the continuity of its operation (Hromada & Lucas, 2012). Reducing the impact of natural disasters on people and critical infrastructure includes interventions to prevent or reduce the possibility of physical threats and social disruption (Zhou et al., 2010). There are two dominant types of reducing the impact of natural disasters. Structural reduction involves the design, construction, maintenance, and renovation of physical structures and infrastructures to resist the physical forces and impacts of natural disasters. Non-structural reduction includes efforts to reduce the exposure of the human population, physical structures, and infrastructures to danger. Non-structural reduction approaches include legally adopted town planning measures that take into account the possible impact of disasters; regulating development in high-risk areas such as sloping fields prone to landslides and coastal zones targeted by storm waves, and, in some cases, the purchase and relocation of communities or parts of communities, which is a measure now used for areas that have experienced repeated flood losses (COPO, 2007, p. 123; Preet, 2006). Examining the attributes and determinants of the resilience of facilities and critical infrastructure, researchers at the Multidisciplinary Centre for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER) at the University at Buffalo, USA, have developed an R4 resilience framework: robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, and rapidity (Tierney & Bruneau, 2007). The first component of this framework refers to the ability of the system, system elements, and other units of analysis to withstand a given magnitude of disaster without significant degradation or loss of function. Robustness reflects the inherent strength of the system. The lack of robustness may cause system failure, as happened with the breaking of the dike in New Orleans in 2005 after Hurricane Katrina. The second R4 component, redundancy, refers to the extent to which elements of the system are sustainable (i.e., able to meet functional requirements if there is significant impairment of functionality). Redundancy provides alternative options, choices, and substitutions. The lack of these components prevents the proper response to natural disasters. A significant number of people in New Orleans were not able to evacuate in accordance with the mandatory evacuation before landslides during Hurricane Katrina because public transport was unavailable (Harrington et al., 2005). The component resourcefulness is associated with the capacity to diagnose the problem, prioritize, and adequately mobilize resources for rapid recovery from the impact of natural disasters. The last R4 component is rapidity, referring to the capacity to meet priorities and timely rehabilitate consequences and revitalize endangered values (Mileti, 1999). In order to reduce the possibility of food shortages in areas affected by floods, it is necessary to plan food storage on high ground. Thus, the vulnerability of the system can be reduced by reducing dependence on one source of production or services; increasing levels of portability to maximize the utilization of resources and the innovation of efficient and flexible systems that can withstand major disasters and reduce the need for reconstruction costs (COPO, 2007). Warning against putting “all eggs in one basket” may be well applied here because the system is less vulnerable when its resources of critical infrastructure are versatile and widely distributed (Bimal, 2011).
How to cite
Reference – Mijalković, S., Cvetković, V. (2013). Vulnerability of Critical Infrastructure by Natural Disasters. Belgrade, zbornik radova – National Critical Infrastructure Protection, Regional Perspective, 2013, 91-102.
