Faced by various external threats as well as the risk of multi-infrastructural collapse, urban infrastructures have become a key priority in the academic and policy debates on critical infrastructure protection. However, preventing various infrastructural failures from happening, and preparing for them in case they do, entails unusual governance complexities: often, the urban governance of CIs overarches different, often fragmented, policy domains and territories, and institutionally unbundled utility (sub-)domains. Preventing infrastructural breakdowns and preparing for them is not usually based on experience from past events, but on destructive scenarios of cascading failures, and involves considerable uncertainty and contestations among local decision-makers. In many cases, generally accepted institutions, procedural norms, and organizational capacities that could guide urban policy-making, the practices of utility companies and local crisis management are still missing. This panel includes theoretical and empirical contributions that address the “wicked” governance challenges involved in protecting urban infrastructures and in making them more resilient.
Andreas Huck (Technische Universität Darmstadt):
Governing Urban Infrastructure Resilience: Institutional Barriers and Opportunities
Scholars in the field of risk and crisis management agree on the need for collaboration between a wide range of stakeholders who shape urban infrastructure resilience. However, major challenges seem to exist with regard to collaboration between different policy fields, infrastructure domains, governance levels, and private and public actors. We draw on both quantitative and qualitative analyses of German, Dutch, and New Zealand cases to analyse how cities and their crisis management agencies approach the challenge of building connectivity, what kind of institutional barriers and opportunities exist, and to what degree institutional connectivity can contribute to urban infrastructure resilience.
Mark de Bruijne (Delft University of Technology):
(Dutch) Challenges in (Urban) Infrastructure Renewal: How To Design to Manage Infrastructure Interdependencies?
Like many other European countries, the Netherlands is increasingly confronted with a massive challenge in (urban) infrastructure renewal. Throughout the Netherlands post-WW II infrastructures are reaching their end-of-life. Especially in urban environments, infrastructure managers face challenges by having to innovate and replace their ageing assets to facilitate new societal requirements and changing use(rs) while at the same time taking into account cross-infrastructural requirements for design as well as efficient operations and maintenance. This presentation explores these challenges in more detail. Some examples will be provided of good and bad experiences. As part of a broader research program, the presentation will outline a research project which is specifically designed to help infrastructure managers address these questions. The research is embedded in a larger collaborative effort between critical infrastructure managers, which seeks to prepare the Netherlands to face these challenges.
Eva Stock (Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK), Bonn):
Critical Infrastructure Protection: Integrated Risk Management as an Approach to Address Governance Complexities and Cooperation in Civil Protection in Germany
The risk management of critical infrastructure operators (CIO) and emergency management organisations (EMO) should go hand in hand to establish comprehensive emergency planning for civil protection. EMO and CIO implement instruments of risk and crisis management, however with a different perspective: EMO focus on protecting the population, whereas CIO concentrate on protecting staff and maintaining their operational processes. For an effective emergency planning, it is necessary to integrate the risk management processes of EMO and CIO. In practice however, governance on a regional and local level is complex: In risk management cooperation among CIO, EMO and public administration could be intensified and harmonised and should not be considered as a challenge.
To address this gap, the German Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) developed the approach of an Integrated Risk Management (IRM), which combines the perspectives of EMO and CIO in the process of risk management implementation. In the context of the BMBF funded research project CIRMin, BBK aims to find out what kind of information should be exchanged between CIO and EMO and how to facilitate communication and cooperation among the actors as this is the key for a smooth and successful implementation of risk management. Consequently, this presentation demonstrates how to use IRM to address governance complexities and cooperation in critical infrastructure protection on the regional and local level in order to enhance resilience to critical infrastructure failure.