IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v28y2008i5p1445-1456.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptive Management: A Paradigm for Remediation of Public Facilities Following a Terrorist Attack

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey J. Whicker
  • David R. Janecky
  • Ted B. Doerr

Abstract

Terrorist actions are aimed at maximizing harm (health, psychological, economical, and political) through the combined physical impacts of the act and fear. Immediate and effective response to a terrorist act is critical to limit human and environmental harm, effectively restore facility function, and maintain public confidence. Though there have been terrorist attacks in public facilities that we have learned from, overall our experiences in restoration of public facilities following a terrorist attack are limited. Restoration of public facilities following a release of a hazardous material is inherently far more complex than in industrial settings and has many unique technical, economic, social, and political challenges. For example, there may be a great need to quickly restore the facility to full operation and allow public access even though it was not designed for easy or rapid restoration, and critical information is needed for quantitative risk assessment and effective restoration must be anticipated to be incomplete and uncertain. Whereas present planning documents have substantial linearity in their organization, the “adaptive management” paradigm provides a constructive parallel paradigm for restoration of public facilities that anticipates and plans for uncertainty, inefficiencies, and stakeholder participation. Adaptive management grew out of the need to manage and restore natural resources in highly complex and changing environments with limited knowledge about causal relationships and responses to restoration actions. Similarities between natural resource management and restoration of a public facility after a terrorist attack suggest that integration of adaptive management principles explicitly into restoration processes will result in substantially enhanced and flexible responses necessary to meet the uncertainties of potential terrorist attacks.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey J. Whicker & David R. Janecky & Ted B. Doerr, 2008. "Adaptive Management: A Paradigm for Remediation of Public Facilities Following a Terrorist Attack," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1445-1456, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:28:y:2008:i:5:p:1445-1456
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01102.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01102.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01102.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ellen Raber & Joy M. Hirabayashi & Saverio P. Mancieri & Alfred L. Jin & Karen J. Folks & Tina M. Carlsen & Pete Estacio, 2002. "Chemical and Biological Agent Incident Response and Decision Process for Civilian and Public Sector Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 195-202, April.
    2. Thomas C. Beierle, 2002. "The Quality of Stakeholder‐Based Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 739-749, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mary Fox & Christopher Zuidema & Bridget Bauman & Thomas Burke & Mary Sheehan, 2019. "Integrating Public Health into Climate Change Policy and Planning: State of Practice Update," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Michael A. Hamilton & Tao Hong & Elizabeth Casman & Patrick L. Gurian, 2015. "Risk‐Based Decision Making for Reoccupation of Contaminated Areas Following a Wide‐Area Anthrax Release," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1348-1363, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amanda P. Rehr & Mitchell J. Small & Paul S. Fischbeck & Patricia Bradley & William S. Fisher, 2014. "The role of scientific studies in building consensus in environmental decision making: a coral reef example," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 60-87, March.
    2. Céline Bérard, 2013. "Les démarches participatives en matière de politiques publiques : le cas de la propriété intellectuelle des innovations biotechnologiques," Post-Print halshs-00987945, HAL.
    3. Jennifer Garard & Larissa Koch & Martin Kowarsch, 2018. "Elements of success in multi-stakeholder deliberation platforms," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Florian Kretschmer & Georg Neugebauer & Gernot Stoeglehner & Thomas Ertl, 2018. "Participation as a Key Aspect for Establishing Wastewater as a Source of Renewable Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, November.
    5. Bartkowski, Bartosz & Droste, Nils & Ließ, Mareike & Sidemo-Holm, William & Weller, Ulrich & Brady, Mark V., 2021. "Payments by modelled results: A novel design for agri-environmental schemes," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Everingham, Jo-Anne & Rolfe, John & Lechner, Alex Mark & Kinnear, Susan & Akbar, Delwar, 2018. "A proposal for engaging a stakeholder panel in planning post-mining land uses in Australia’s coal-rich tropical savannahs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 397-406.
    7. Margaret H. Kurth & Sabrina Larkin & Jeffrey M. Keisler & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis: use in government agencies," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 134-143, June.
    8. Karen Bickerstaff & Gordon Walker, 2005. "Shared Visions, Unholy Alliances: Power, Governance and Deliberative Processes in Local Transport Planning," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 42(12), pages 2123-2144, November.
    9. Wang, Jue & Aenis, Thomas & Hofmann-Souki, Susanne, 2018. "Triangulation in participation: Dynamic approaches for science-practice interaction in land-use decision making in rural China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 364-371.
    10. Irene Pluchinotta & Akin O. Kazakçi & Raffaele Giordano & Alexis Tsoukiàs, 2019. "Design Theory for Generating Alternatives in Public Decision Making Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 341-375, April.
    11. Ortiz-Riomalo, Juan Felipe & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin & Engel, Stefanie, 2022. "Fostering co-operation through participation in natural resource management. An integrative review," EconStor Preprints 253261, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    12. Christopher W. Karvetski & James H. Lambert, 2012. "Evaluating deep uncertainties in strategic priority‐setting with an application to facility energy investments," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 483-493, December.
    13. Saes, Beatriz Macchione & Muradian, Roldan, 2021. "What misguides environmental risk perceptions in corporations? Explaining the failure of Vale to prevent the two largest mining disasters in Brazil," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    14. Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, 2007. "Does Concern‐Driven Risk Management Provide a Viable Alternative to QRA?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 27-43, February.
    15. Xiaoyu Liu & Jahan Ara Peerally & Claudia De Fuentes & David Ince & Harrie Vredenburg, 2022. "Who Makes or Breaks Energy Policymaking in the Caribbean Small Island Jurisdictions? A Study of Stakeholders’ Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, February.
    16. Lukas C. Brun & G. Jason Jolley, 2011. "Increasing Stakeholder Participation in Industry Cluster Identification," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 25(3), pages 211-220, August.
    17. Di Lucia, Lorenzo & Usai, Domenico & Woods, Jeremy, 2018. "Designing landscapes for sustainable outcomes – The case of advanced biofuels," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 434-446.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:28:y:2008:i:5:p:1445-1456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.