In anticipation of GSX, we sat down with presenters of upcoming sessions in order to get a better understanding of the topics at hand. This week we are featuring, “Understanding and Assessing Climate Risk for Emergency and Security Managers,” presented by Rawlings Miller, Vice President of Climate Advisory and Resiliency at TRC Companies, Inc., and Larry Fitzgerald, CPP, PSP, Director of Security and Emergency Management Services at TRC Companies, Inc. Read on for what they had to say and don’t forget to register for GSX 2024!
Q: How did you become interested in your topic?
RM: Early in my career, I became increasingly concerned about climate risk through my doctorate work in climate modeling and science. There was a clear signal that society was going to be impacted, and we were not prepared for this as a country. Decades ago, I jumped at the chance to be one of the early pioneers in supporting government, communities, and agencies in understanding and reducing their climate risk. For example, when climate change was declared a national threat, I served as a climate risk subject matter expert for the federal government to support the integration of climate risk into critical infrastructure assessments. This work continues to expand and now is at the forefront of engagement with emergency and security professionals. What keeps this topic interesting is that this field is ever evolving, it’s very innovative, challenging, and quantitative.
Q: Tell us about your presentation and why security professionals should have this topic on their radar.
LF: This presentation will lay out the climate side of the considerations that are often overlooked by traditional security frameworks which tend to focus on historical and current primarily man-made (or intentional) threats. Climate can amplify or introduce additional threats to physical facilities and systems, as well as lead to social unrest and environmental disruption/migration. For security risk management to be effective, risks from man-made threats as well as climate/physical threats need to be considered in a holistic manner as part of the threatscape. Whether a facility is closed by a storm surge, or a terrorist event matters little once the facility is damaged or compromised. Organizations need to recognize and prepare for facilities being taken offline by any number of means, including climate threats. For organizations to be prepared and protected from future conditions, it is imperative security professionals consider climate within their risk management activities.
Q: What advice would you give security professionals interested in this topic?
RM: At the onset, realize that integrating climate risk into security management can be a little daunting as its based-on scenario-analyses with associated uncertainties for future conditions. However, security professionals already work with challenging risk models such as terrorism, crime, and cyber-security, so integrating climate risk is just another dimension of risk planning. In addition, for success, climate risk analysis should not use a cookie cutter approach but be tailored to a given organization. The climate community has built a large collection of best practices that continue to grow and can be tapped by professionals, but also be aware there are many examples out there that do not represent best practices. So be discerning in reviews and expect to do a little research in getting smart on this topic. It’s also important to recognize that this topic requires engagement across the organization and is most successful with leadership support. For example, our analyses are informed by stakeholders that understand the assets, systems, and operations providing insight in our development of damage/disruption functions, prioritizing physical and operational risks and locations, and advancing mitigation strategies for implementation. In sum, preparing for climate risk could seem challenging for those used to traditional security management, but in reality, security professionals are already well-versed in tackling other complex risks and need to consider climate risk as they are on the frontlines of these impacts.
Q: How do you see this issue evolving in the next 2-5 years?
LF: I am a trained geologist that was introduced to ASIS through my father. He was a member several decades ago and was awarded a Lifetime CPP in 1998. The risks he was addressing in the 1970s, 80s and 90s looked somewhat different than the risks we are dealing with today. Terrorism, cyber-crime, identity -theft, and the like were not front of mind in his day. As a geologist I have seen landslides sever waterlines and render facilities uninhabitable. I have seen floods devastate entire communities. I have also seen the aftermath of events such as Active Shooter/Active Aggressor and terrorism firsthand. As a security professional (and a CPP and PSP- thanks dad for pushing me) I am used to evolving risks and staying current on what threats are to be considered. I think there is an awakening that is starting to happen that will accelerate in the next 2-5 years that will bring climate risk more into the forefront of consideration when organizations are relocating or onshoring operations or moving critical facilities around the globe. FEMA declares disasters around the US about 3 times per month, which is more than double of what it was when my father was working. I do not see the upward trends leveling off anytime soon. Labor costs may become a secondary consideration to the total risk costs when considering moving a critical operation from Facility A to Facility B, or vice versa. We have helped some clients look at risk in a broader context and use that as a justification to relocate mission critical facilities across town or harden them in place.
Q: Why do you attend GSX?
RM: Security space overlaps directly with climate risk analyses. Climate risk assessments across an organization integrates hazard mitigation documents, policies, and procedures as well as includes critical engagement of security professionals. This conference is an opportunity to keep a pulse on security topics relevant to my field.
LF: Multiple perspectives with new ways of thinking and innovating are important to me. Although I only attend GSX about every 3 or 4 years, I find it engaging and energizing to work with colleagues and clients on understanding newer technologies, newer approaches, best practices and the like.