The Homeland Security Act of 2002, and the subsequent passage of the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006, provided the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA a mandate to provide guidance and protocols designed to enhance areas of collaboration and coordination by and between multiple emergency management public agencies. These agencies directly provided for the inclusion of private sector businesses and industries in the planning and response components of emergency management. The purpose of this qualitative case study was to examine the feasibility of establishing a new public-private partnership that would be responsible for and have the authority and funding to enhance emergency management capabilities. The key component was that this new entity would allow public sector agencies to focus on strategic planning and training priorities, while the private sector filled the resource procurement and deployment function. The research study was a single-case study that examined local, state, and federal elected and appointed officials' attitudes about the proposed entity. The study examined through open-ended interviews with questions that aligned with the specific research questions that focused on collaboration, funding, and fusion center effectiveness. The data was coded and analyzed through multiple queries utilizing NVivo11© software. Major themes that emerged included the dependency on funding for training and equipment for local departments from the state and federal agencies that created a sense of dependency in the conduct their operational capabilities. Recommendations emerging from the study included the creation of a meaningful and definition of homeland security; to revise the operation access to the fusion center, and finally to expand the access of the FEMA Emergency Management Institute to private sector training.

Natural disasters-including hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and floods-caused more than 220,000 deaths worldwide in the first half of 2010 and wreaked havoc on homes, buildings, and the environment. To withstand and recover from natural and human-caused disasters, it is essential that citizens and communities work together to anticipate threats, limit their effects, and rapidly restore functionality after a crisis. Increasing evidence indicates that collaboration between the private and public sectors could improve the ability of a community to prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. Several previous National Research Council reports have identified specific examples of the private and public sectors working cooperatively to reduce the effects of a disaster by implementing building codes, retrofitting buildings, improving community education, or issuing extreme-weather warnings. State and federal governments have acknowledged the importance of collaboration between private and public organizations to develop planning for disaster preparedness and response. Despite growing ad hoc experience across the country, there is currently no comprehensive framework to guide private-public collaboration focused on disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. Building Community Disaster Resilience through Private-Public Collaboration assesses the current state of private-public sector collaboration dedicated to strengthening community resilience, identifies gaps in knowledge and practice, and recommends research that could be targeted for investment. Specifically, the book finds that local-level private-public collaboration is essential to the development of community resilience. Sustainable and effective resilience-focused private-public collaboration is dependent on several basic principles that increase communication among all sectors of the community, incorporate flexibility into collaborative networks, and encourage regular reassessment of collaborative missions, goals, and practices.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and Hurricane Katrina in August 2005, generated a great deal of discussion in public policy and disaster management circles about the importance of increasing national resilience to rebound from catastrophic events. Since the majority of physical and virtual networks that the United States relies upon are owned and operated by the private sector, a consensus has emerged that public-private partnerships (PPPs) are a crucial aspect of an effective resilience strategy. Significant barriers to cooperation persist, however, despite acknowledgment that public–private collaboration for managing disasters would be mutually beneficial. Managing Disasters through Public–Private Partnerships constitutes the first in-depth exploration of PPPs as tools of disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and resilience in the United States. The author assesses the viability of PPPs at the federal level and explains why attempts to develop these partnerships have largely fallen short. The book assesses the recent history and current state of PPPs in the United States, with particular emphasis on the lessons of 9/11 and Katrina, and discusses two of the most significant PPPs in US history, the Federal Reserve System and the War Industries Board from World War I. The author develops two original frameworks to compare different kinds of PPPs and analyzes the critical factors that make them successes or failures, pointing toward ways to improve collaboration in the future. This book should be of interest to researchers and students in public policy, public administration, disaster management, infrastructure protection, and security; practitioners who work on public–private partnerships; and corporate as well as government emergency management professionals and specialists.

Investment in infrastructure can be a driving force of the economic recovery in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of shrinking fiscal space. Public-private partnerships (PPP) bring a promise of efficiency when carefully designed and managed, to avoid creating unnecessary fiscal risks. But fiscal illusions prevent an understanding the sources of fiscal risks, which arise in all infrastructure projects, and that in PPPs present specific characteristics that need to be addressed. PPP contracts are also affected by implicit fiscal risks when they are poorly designed, particularly when a government signs a PPP contract for a project with no financial sustainability. This paper reviews the advantages and inconveniences of PPPs, discusses the fiscal illusions affecting them, identifies a diversity of fiscal risks, and presents the essentials of PPP fiscal risk management.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) on the United States prompted a rethinking of how the United States prepares for disasters. Federal policy documents written since 9/11 have stressed that the private and public sectors share equal responsibility for the security of the nation's critical infrastructure and key assets. Private sector entities have a role in the safety, security, and resilience of the communities in which they operate. Incentivizing the private sector to expend resources on community efforts remains challenging. Disasters in the United States since 9/11 (e.g., Hurricane Katrina in 2005) indicate that the nation has not yet been successful in making its communities resilient to disaster. In this book, the National Research Council assesses the current states of the art and practice in private-public sector collaboration dedicated to strengthening community disaster resilience.

This dissertation, "Public-private-people-partnership (4P) for Disaster Preparedness, Mitigation and Post-disaster Reconstruction" by Junqi, Zhang, 张筠祺, was obtained from The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong) and is being sold pursuant to Creative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License. The content of this dissertation has not been altered in any way. We have altered the formatting in order to facilitate the ease of printing and reading of the dissertation. All rights not granted by the above license are retained by the author. Abstract: Post-disaster reconstruction, critical in restoring the affected community, provides new opportunities to redevelop the disaster affected region for economic growth, future vulnerability reduction and sustainable development as well. However, previous studies reveal that these opportunities have not been fully exploited. Many reconstruction projects have performed poorly due to various political, administrational, social, and policy/regulation-related reasons. To address the spotlighted gaps in post-disaster reconstruction, Public-Private-People Partnership (4P) is proposed and developed to procure more sustainable public infrastructure and to improve the overall performance of disaster management (DM) through integrating preparedness and mitigation into reconstruction processes. Public- Private Partnerships (PPP), which have demonstrated superior performance compared to the traditional approach in many infrastructure projects, are the practical and theoretical foundation of the proposed 4P. The integrated 4th P-'people' refers to major stakeholders who play critical roles in reconstruction, namely Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), local communities, academia, professional groups and media. A 4P framework, comprising of a procurement framework and a partnership framework, was developed based on the consolidated findings from a literature review and empirical data. The procurement framework provides a three-stage procurement process to deliver a typical 4P project, including planning for post-disaster reconstruction procurement, establishing framework agreement and 4P delivery. Through pre-disaster arrangements formally linking potential participants in advance, it enables targeted 4Ps to mobilize faster, while being more efficient and sustainable. The partnership framework provides the corner-stone of establishing sustainable and successful relationships among multiple participants, to ensure smooth execution of 4P projects. Developed on significant findings from previous research on partnerships/relationship management in the construction industry, it describes the partnership structure, role of each major participant and institutional and relational strategies to improve the partnership/relationship. A comprehensive research design enabled collection of the data required to achieve each objective of this research project. The first-round semi-structured interviews were conducted to mainly investigate the feasibility of applying PPP in reconstruction and integrating 'people' into PPP, so as to narrow down the potential scope of the proposed 4P. Findings from the first-round interviews, current practice and pitfalls in the DM cycle especially in reconstruction were examined in the subsequent two parallel sets of questionnaire surveys targeting DM and PPP professionals. The results derived from 14 first-round interviews and 81 responses received in the questionnaires clearly suggest that 4P has great potential to deliver better performance in reconstruction projects of certain types. Nine second-round interviews helped to test and improve the established preliminary 4P framework. In addition, to further probe into the role of 'people', case studies of 'Project Mingde', which comprises of three construction projects including a Sichuan reconstruction project, were implemented. The proposed 4P framework, developed based on the above

Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101 provides guidelines on developing emergency operations plans (EOP). It promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed planning and decision making to help planners examine a hazard or threat and produce integrated, coordinated, and synchronized plans. The goal of CPG 101 is to make the planning process routine across all phases of emergency management and for all homeland security mission areas. This Guide helps planners at all levels of government in their efforts to develop and maintain viable all-hazards, all-threats EOPs. Accomplished properly, planning provides a methodical way to engage the whole community in thinking through the life cycle of a potential crisis, determining required capabilities, and establishing a framework for roles and responsibilities. It shapes how a community envisions and shares a desired outcome, selects effective ways to achieve it, and communicates expected results. Each jurisdiction's plans must reflect what that community will do to address its specific risks with the unique resources it has or can obtain.