Improving Mission Assurance Assessments for Resilience of Military Installations
Publication: Natural Hazards Review
Volume 22, Issue 4
Abstract
It is critical to improve the resilience of military installations and their complex infrastructure systems to strengthen response to the uncertainty and threat driven by the increasing frequency and severity of natural and human-made disasters. This research addresses a considerable gap in the existing Department of Defense (DOD) Mission Assurance Framework between the infrastructure assessment process and resilience considerations, and integrates a resilience matrix that converts qualitative assessment data into a quantifiable and interactive resilience decision support tool. The integration of the resilience matrix provides a quantitative visual tool to communicate the impact of decisions made using the tradespace analysis. This methodology provides a framework to improve the selection of projects that enhance the resilience of military infrastructure systems and assist decision makers in understanding how a single project may influence the resilience of multiple systems. The results of this research, which were built for a specific installation, are broadly applicable and can support engineers in the design and/or management of infrastructure systems to improve resilience in an efficient manner.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
The Mission Assurance Assessment benchmark category metrics that support the findings of this study are confidential in nature and may be provided only with restrictions (US Government For Official Use Only). The benchmark category assessments, priority weights, and cost data were generated randomly and appear in the published article. The Excel model that supports the findings of this study is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Annie Savage, Eric Doro, and Sergeant First Class Ryan Swanson from the US Army Africa staff for providing important information and insights into the DOD Mission Assurance Assessment process and for their reviews of the MARM model and manuscript.
References
Alberts, D. S., and R. E. Hayes. 2005. Power to the edge: Command and control in the information age. Washington, DC: Dept. of Defense Command and Control Research Program.
Aven, T., and S. Thekdi. 2018. “The importance of resilience-based strategies in risk analysis, and vice versa.” In IRGC resource guide on resilience (vol. 2): Domains of resilience for complex interconnected systems, edited by B. D. Trump, M.-V. Florin, and I. Linkov. Lausanne, CH: EPFL Inernational Risk Governence Center.
Committee on Increasing National Resilience to Hazards and Disasters. 2012. Disaster resilience: A national imperative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Congressional Research Service. 2019. Military construction: Authorities, process, and frequently asked questions. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
DOD (Department of Defense). 2016. Directive 3100.10 space policy. Washington, DC: DOD.
DOD (Department of Defense). 2017a. DOD manual 3020.45, defense critical infrastructure program (DCIP): DOD mission-based critical asset identification process (CAIP). Washington, DC: DOD.
DOD (Department of Defense) 2017b. “Army techniques publication No. 3-37.10, Base camps. Washington, DC: DOD.
DOD (Department of Defense). 2018a. DOD mission assurance assessment benchmarks. Washington, DC: DOD.
DOD (Department of Defense). 2018b. Mission assurance (MA) construct. Washington, DC: DOD.
DOD (Department of Defense). 2018c. 2018 national defense strategy summary. Washington, DC: DOD.
Ewing, P. L., Jr., W. Tarantino, and G. S. Parnell. 2006. “Use of decision analysis in the Army Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 military value analysis.” Decis. Anal. 3 (1): 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.1060.0062.
Fox-Lent, C., M. E. Bates, and I. Linkov. 2015. “A matrix approach to community resilience assessment: An illustrative case at Rockaway Peninsula.” Environ. Syst. Decis. 35 (2): 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-015-9555-4.
Hagen, J., F. Morgan, J. Heim, and M. Carroll. 2017. The foundations of operational resilience—Assessing the ability to operate in an anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) environment: The analytical framework, lexicon, and characteristics of the operational resilience analysis model (ORAM). Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
Linkov, I., et al. 2018. “Tiered approach to resilience assessment.” Risk Anal. 38 (9): 1772–1780. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12991.
Lostumbo, M. J., et al. 2013. Overseas basing of US military forces: An assessment of relative costs and strategic benefits. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
Ramachandran, V., S. K. Long, T. Shoberg, S. Corns, and H. J. Carlo. 2015. “Framework for modeling urban restoration resilience time in the aftermath of an extreme event.” Nat. Hazards Rev. 16 (4): 04015005. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000184.
Shapiro, A. 2019. “Tyndall Air Force Base still faces challenges in recovering from Hurricane Michael.” Accessed April 12, 2020. https://www.npr.org/2019/05/31/728754872/tyndall-air-force-base-still-faces-challenges-in-recovering-from-hurricane-michael.
Sitterle, V. B., D. F. Freeman, S. R. Goerger, and T. R. Ender. 2015. “Systems engineering resiliency: Guiding tradespace exploration within an Engineered Resilient Ssystems context.” Procedia Comput. Sci. 44 (Dec): 649–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.03.013.
Wilt, B., S. Long, and T. Shoberg. 2016. “Defining resilience: A preliminary integrative literature review.” In Proc., 2016 Int. Annual Conf. of the American Society for Engineering Management, 1–11. Huntsville, AL: American Society for Engineering Management.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Natural Hazards Review
Volume 22 • Issue 4 • November 2021
Copyright
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jun 11, 2020
Accepted: Feb 11, 2021
Published online: Jul 5, 2021
Published in print: Nov 1, 2021
Discussion open until: Dec 5, 2021
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
- Yumeng Tang, Shuang Li, Changhai Zhai, A belief rule-base approach to the assessment and improvement of seismic resilience of high-speed railway station buildings, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107680, 165, (107680), (2023).