Document Actions
Business, Homeland Security, and America's Future
Homeland Security Requires Both Public, Private Investment, Expert Says
Apr. 20, 2005 – Homeland security is not about responding to 9/11 – it is an enduring mission that requires a sustainable approach involving both the public and private sector, said a national homeland security expert Tuesday night at Texas A&M University.
Ruth David, a current member of the President's Homeland Security Advisory Council and the CEO of ANSER, Inc., the contracted think tank for the Department of Homeland Security, told an audience at the Bush Presidential Library that long-term national security requires systemic change in not only policies, but also in the way the private sector and individual citizens think and operate.
“Homeland security is a national mission, not a federal mission, meaning it requires the active participation of stakeholders at the federal, state, local, and private sector levels,” David said. “This is a mission that touches our citizens – every citizen – in a very personal way.”
David talked about the interaction between homeland security issues and business and economic forces.
“One of the things that occurred in the aftermath of 9/11, for example, was a change in behavior of many of our citizens that had a huge ripple effect on our economy,” David said, citing significant effects on aviation and tourism industries. She also indicated that the private sector is an integral part of homeland security strategy going forward.
“We have to figure out how to forge new relationships between the public and private sector. We have to figure out the economic incentives and the systems that link all of this together. I do see some signs of progress in those areas, but I think there is a long way to go.”
David also discussed the concept of dual-benefit, a term coined by ANSER to describe synergistic strategies that address security issues while also helping businesses satisfy their economic objectives.
“This mission does not stand on its own. It is operated in tandem with other activities and other missions. We saw the opportunity and the need to integrate those activities and to design approaches that benefited both as opposed to only enhancing security; to look for solutions that benefit daily activities (of business) and enhance security.
“My argument is that we need to focus on strategies that speed the motion the good and slow down the motion of the bad. This is the concept of dual benefit. How do you devise use of information at borders, for example, in a way that it speeds commerce but increases your odds of detecting something bad that’s coming in?”
When asked about specific ways the private sector might be proactive in homeland security strategy, David mentioned potential changes in the insurance industry, suggesting that policies might be written to provide incentives for companies that deal with certain security issues.
David also addressed the delicate balance of international relations – both economic and political – in the homeland security mission.
“We have to be very sensitive. This is about securing our nation and its citizens against the threat of terrorism, but it’s not about walling us off from the world. National policies have international implications. We live in a global economy. We have a highly mobile population. We rely on other nations for trade, travel, and commerce, so we have to be careful with how we deal with strategies around homeland security.”
David’s lecture was sponsored by the Texas A&M Integrative Center for Homeland Security and the Mays Business School.
- Norvell