Article

Decentralize, adapt and cooperate.

Institute of the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85716, USA.
Nature (Impact Factor: 42.35). 05/2010; 465(7296):292-3. DOI: 10.1038/465292a
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Humankind faces a wide range of threats to its security and safety, from terrorist groups and cybercriminals to disease pandemics and climate change. All these threats share one characteristic: they are constantly changing. Decision-makers can never be sure whether the next tropical storm will be as violent as the last, or whether Taliban insurgents will use a roadside improvised explosive device or a suicide bomber for their next attack. Therefore, many of our security systems — those that are resistant to change, or that try to eliminate all risk — are doomed. Firewalls have failed to protect computers from hackers for 40 years; screening airline passengers for liquids didn't prevent Umar Abdulmutallab from taking a powdered incendiary onto a plane; and so cumbersome is the military procurement cycle that heavy armoured vehicles designed to repel improvised explosive attacks were deployed in Iraq a full three years after soldiers had identified the need.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
124 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The contemporary global community is increasingly interdependent and confronted with systemic risks posed by the actions and interactions of actors existing beneath the level of formal institutions, often operating outside effective governance structures. Frequently, these actors are human agents, such as rogue traders or aggressive financial innovators, terrorists, groups of dissidents, or unauthorized sources of sensitive or secret information about government or private sector activities. In other instances, influential "actors" take the form of climate change, communications technologies, or socioeconomic globalization. Although these individual forces may be small relative to state governments or international institutions, or may operate on long time scales, the changes they catalyze can pose significant challenges to the analysis and practice of international relations through the operation of complex feedbacks and interactions of individual agents and interconnected systems. We call these challenges "femtorisks," and emphasize their importance for two reasons. First, in isolation, they may be inconsequential and semiautonomous; but when embedded in complex adaptive systems, characterized by individual agents able to change, learn from experience, and pursue their own agendas, the strategic interaction between actors can propel systems down paths of increasing, even global, instability. Second, because their influence stems from complex interactions at interfaces of multiple systems (e.g., social, financial, political, technological, ecological, etc.), femtorisks challenge standard approaches to risk assessment, as higher-order consequences cascade across the boundaries of socially constructed complex systems. We argue that new approaches to assessing and managing systemic risk in international relations are required, inspired by principles of evolutionary theory and development of resilient ecological systems.
    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 11/2014; · 9.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Some guiding principles in risk management are derived from the immune system and animal behavior.
    Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory 12/2013; · 0.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this article, we analyze biological evolutionary systems to develop a framework for applying lessons of natural adaptability to security concerns in society. Biological systems do not waste resources attempting to predict future states of an inherently unpredictable and risk filled environment. Rather, biological organisms utilize adaptability to respond efficiently to a wide range of potential challenges, not just those that are known or anticipated. Adaptability is a powerful, but often misused concept. Typically, dimensionless claims about adaptability, such as, “insurgents are more adaptable than us” are made without clear benchmarks against which to measure adaptability. Our framework for adaptability, which was developed over the course of several multi-disciplinary working groups of life scientists and security practitioners focused on what we can learn about security from biological systems, can be applied broadly to societal approaches to improving security. Here we outline the “rules of engagement” for natural adaptable systems, which state that evolutionary systems do not predict, plan, or perfect the development of biological organisms. Given these constraints, we then outline four nearly universal features of adaptable biological organisms: They are organized semi-autonomously with little central control They learn from success They use information to mitigate uncertainty They extend their natural adaptability by engaging in a diverse range of symbiotic partnerships For each of these attributes we identify how they work in nature and how we have failed to apply them in our responses to security concerns. Finally, we describe a pathway by which adaptable strategies can be incorporated into security analysis, planning and implementation.
    Security Informatics. 01/2012; 1(1).

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
48 Downloads
Available from
May 30, 2014