CONNECTIONS BETWEEN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROTECTION OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Transcription

1 Management and Economics 327 CONNECTIONS BETWEEN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROTECTION OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE Dorel BADEA * dorel.badea@yahoo.com Rasa SMALIUKIEN ** Olga BUCOVE CHI *** olga.bucovetchi@upb.ro Dumitru IANCU * dorin_dan@yahoo.com * Nicolae B lcescu Land Forces Academy, Sibiu, Romania ** The General Jonas Žemaitis Military Academy of Lithuania *** University Politehnica of Bucharest, Romania ABSTRACT The article brings into focus the theoretical analysis of the issues contained in two modern and current concepts of the practice and, equally, of scientific research, with their complex societal effects, medium and long term. Using milestones specific to the fundamental research, points of convergence and directions on how to improve the quality of the two approaches are highlighted, which have as finality one of the integrating dimensions of security, the human one. KEYWORDS: sustainable development, critical infrastructure, complexity 1. Conceptual Delimitations The development of society determines and simultaneously entails the investigation of concepts and solutions little thought out in earlier stages of progress, having the capability to later serve, after defining their own methodological apparatus and operational validation, as true paradigms. The first concept analysed in this article is based upon the concept of sustainability, designating in most cases, a characteristic of a process or a state that can be maintained at a certain level indefinitely. It is widely recognized in the literature that as a result of the emergence of the Limits on Growth report and the Final declaration on

2 328 Management and Economics the Environment, mankind has begun to realize more and more intensely the problems caused by environmental pollution, the use in increasing amounts of renewable and non-renewable natural resources, and last but not least, the increasing exploitation of existing reserves and irreversible changes to nature. In an operational approach, beyond the pattern of definitions, sustainable development is the one that provides a framework through which communities can use resources in an efficient way, create efficient infrastructures, protect and improve the quality of life, create new activities to strengthen the economy, finally helping to create healthy communities that can support both this generation and the next one. We have thereby a complex issue involving matching means of investigation, aspect emphasized by Bryan G. Norton [1] as follows: understanding sustainability as a concept requires the integration of scientific models into evaluative projections of how to live so as to protect the values and aspirations of the relevant community. In the transition to the second concept it is also useful to recall that in defining sustainable development, as internationally accepted, and also mentioned in structuring the objectives of the National Strategy, four pillars were considered: the economic pillar, the social pillar, the environmental pillar and the culturaleducational one. The second concept proposed for analysis brings into focus the concept of criticality, as a state of maximum endanger and exposure to risks, associated with organizational structures that ensure the functionality of a region in a given timeframe (preferably, as lengthy as possible): structures specific to the information and communications technology; the financial and banking system; the physical structures for the distribution of resources (transport, water supply systems etc.); power systems, including those for the production and transport of electricity, oil and natural gas; human activities vital support services (health, civil protection, police, military). This idea is reflected, of course, in the way of defining critical infrastructure in Europe, frequently cited by experts: those physical and information technology facilities, networks, services and assets which, if disrupted or destroyed, would have a serious impact on the health, safety, security or economic well-being of citizens or the effective functioning of governments in the Member States [2]. To have a somewhat symmetrical approach to the first concept, for the protection of critical infrastructure, both in terms of causes and effects, analyses can be performed taking into account at least the following perspectives: the technical one, at systemic level; the business perspective; the national security perspective; the legislative perspective. In terms of the specific methodology in specialist publications [3] it is emphasized that determining the functioning of critical sectors, which are the parameters influencing some sectors, how important are specific sectors for the economy and who are the major players, including the identification of basic functions, value chains, the dependence on information technology and communications in every critical sector, is a prerequisite for the subsequent analysis of interdependencies. 2. Guidelines for Creating a Theoretical Model for the Investigation of the Issue The idea of analysing this topic is treated less in specialized approaches, some basic guidelines (in terms of complementarity of the two concepts) being presented below. In Italy, on the website of the National Organization for Critical Infrastructure Management the correlation is highlighted, noting that: The security, the sustainable development and the quality of life of the industrialized countries depend on the continuous and efficient functioning of a set of infrastructures that for their vital importance are referred to as Critical Infrastructures. Among such infrastructures some are worth mentioning: the transports (airlines, ferries, railways, highways, etc.); the energy networks for production, transport

3 Management and Economics 329 and distribution, (gas pipelines, gas storage facilities, electric trunks, electric transformers, energy generation plants, fuel distribution etc.); financial and bank networks; water and food distribution; ICT networks (internet, radio, TV networks, cabled broadcast; satellite communications, etc.); the health system, government and military networks, emergency networks, etc. [4]. Authors Koren Kanadanian and Constance Haan, address the two topics related to the concept of conflict and postcrisis, sustainability being an indicator of the severity of the crisis (Figure no. 1) Figure no. 1 Including the idea of sustainability in crisis management [5] At Northeastern University there are Interesting research initiatives on sustainability and the security of critical infrastructure, arguing that: Critical Infrastructure Sustainability and Security will promote the development of fundamental engineering to embed resilience into the design strategies, standards and regulatory frameworks of critical infrastructure systems through predictive understanding of climate and security hazards with geospatial Big Data and computational solutions. It will develop a framework for establishing translational solutions in collaboration with academic partners, industry leaders and start-ups, as well as national laboratories and federal agencies. [...] The theme of the proposed initiative fits within the university thrusts in sustainability, security, along with health and with Big Data solutions. While the impacts are not limited to urban or coastal areas, the nature of the threats and change are likely to have disproportionate consequences on urban and populated regions, and for certain kind of threats, on coastal communities [6]. Perhaps the most representative example in this respect is the matrix resilience-sustainability (Figure no. 2), drafted by Peter C. Evans, Peter Fox-Penner in 2014, according to which the situation in the dark green quadrant is the best, having maximum values for both resilience (it may be considered a high relevance indicator in the field of critical infrastructure protection) and the environmental protection component (it may be considered an indicator of sustainable development). Figure no. 2 The resilience-sustainability matrix of an infrastructure [7]

4 330 Management and Economics A brief commentary on resilience is required here. Although there are different approaches which highlight in different ways the ability of the entire system to selforganize, but also to preserve much of the structure and function even if it changes its field of stability (following the operation of disturbance), given the type of this research, we prefer an approach of maximum generality. Thus, Pike A. and his collaborators [8] believe that resilience in itself has an intrinsic spatial character. For these authors resilience is the differentiated and discriminatory ability of territories, regions etc. to cope, manage uncertain, sudden situations, emphasizing that resilience is unevenly distributed from one region to another. We preferred the allocation of the concept for critical infrastructure protection, because, compared with the other option of awarding, in this case we are dealing with much more measurable processes on different sections of time, leading to greater utility in explaining and applying technically, systemically and operationally the capacity of a certain component to avoid blocking in the state. Given the issues analysed and identified in the preceding paragraphs, we propose a theoretical model for the investigation of the issue based on the complexity-criticality-continuity trinomial, as shown in Figure no. 3. Figure no. 3 The 3C conceptual model of the critical infrastructure protection sustainable development interaction Two bodies (funnels) are imagined and represented fretted (on the inside, critical infrastructure protection, on the outside, sustainable development), based on the dimensions (values) of the three characteristics mentioned (number of interactions between components, negative consequences, time), which contribute to achieving human security (Not all the outputs of the processes subsumed under the two concepts produce added value in terms of human security). 3. Conclusions Critical infrastructure protection can be considered, based on the arguments put forward in the article, a precondition for achieving sustainable development, given that some of the critical infrastructure sectors contribute to achieving sustainable development goals. The most important points of convergence of the two concepts are: they involve complex interdependencies of systems of systems; they involve, often, cascading effects, and hence resulting the difficulty to completely (100 %) achieving the aims declared by different ways of defining; the possibilities for solving the concrete issue subsumed under each concept involve the use of modelling and simulation and, subsequently, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity, within a framework provided by specific strategies. Given the aforementioned aspects, the authors propose completing the definition of the sustainability science by including the notions of criticality, continuity and complexity, a possible working version being: the sustainability science combines theory and practice, local and global perspectives of the North and South, criticality, continuity and complexity, along with disciplines in the fields of social sciences, natural sciences, engineering and medicine. It is clear that since these are systems with nonlinear behaviour, bearing reduced anticipation properties, scientific advances are slow, the smallest knowledge contribution

5 Management and Economics 331 that such an approach can bring being sufficient to start a long and winding road of knowledge. Any new approach represents an added value to knowledge and the study of complexity brings new interpretation insights [9]. As a final remark, in full agreement with the statements in the abstract, we believe that an integrator of both concepts addressed in the article, is that of Business Continuity Management, used increasingly more in theory and research and development projects, defined as follows: Holistic management process that identifies potential threats to an organization and the impacts to business operations that those threats, if realized, might cause and which provides a framework for building organizational resilience with the capability for an effective response that safeguards the interests of its key stakeholders, business, reputation and brand [10]. REFERENCES 1. Clark Miller, Daniel Sarewitz, Andrew Light, Science, Technology, and Sustainability: Building a Research Agenda, National Science Foundation Supported Workshop Sept. 8-9, 2008 available at 2. Communication from the Commission of 12 December 2006 on a European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection 3. Mircea Andra iu, The Evolution of Studies on Critical Informational Infrastructure Protection (PCII), presentation available at critice_2010_sinteza %20and%20Post-crisis%20Sustainable%20Redevelopmen.pdf A. Pike, S. Dawley, J. Tomeney, Resilience, Adaptation and Adaptability, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, vol. 3(1), (2010): S. Manson, D. O Sullivan, Complexity Theory in the Study of Space and Place. Environment and Planning A, vol. 38(4), (2006): BS :2007, available at Sustainability-through-BCM.pdf