Intelligent Enterprise

Better Insight for Business Decisions

RSS
Webcasts
Digital Library
Subscribe
Home

September 1, 2003

Shared Risk, Shared Rewards

Why is homeland security driving IT innovation? The risks of terrorism endanger both public and private sectors, and privacy concerns must still be satisfied. But potential rewards through collaborative ventures are coming clear

by Seth Grimes

Could the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001 have been prevented if the United States government authorities had only communicated?

The would-be terrorists crossed paths with several government agencies, each working in isolation. If the agencies had exchanged information, a successful attack would certainly have been less likely, but lack of timely interchange wasn't the only impediment to prevention. In retrospect, it's clear that the government neither analyzed the data it already possessed nor interpreted the results of its analysis adequately. Overcoming these shortcomings — in data collection, information interchange and integration, and in analytic and interpretive capabilities — is a homeland-security imperative.

The United States' economy and society, and those of its close allies, aren't centrally managed. The infrastructure — including key transportation, communications, and industrial components — is regulated, but not run, by a central government. Therefore, the U. S. government can't accomplish its security goals alone. Instead, government works with academia and the private sector to produce and implement technological innovations. Government programs seed and nurture growth: Think of the Internet, created by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). However, as was the case with the Internet, market forces are what cause the private sector to recognize the commercial potential of such innovations and bring technology to life. Successful homeland security can result only from a partnership between government and the private sector, with the contribution of each rooted in their respective strengths.

Asymmetric Threats

Following President Bush's directive, the U.S. Congress responded to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks by creating a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and gave it a primary mission of preventing domestic terrorism and managing terrorist threats. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 brought 22 agencies into the new DHS with the hope that the consolidation will enable more effective coordination. The Act requires that the agencies continue pursuing related but diverse goals of overseeing and ensuring the safety of the country's transportation and commerce infrastructures. The Act also explicitly recognizes a link between drug trafficking and terrorism. Finally, it assigns primary responsibility for investigating and prosecuting terrorist acts to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.

The federal government's "War on Drugs" for years has worked with local, state, and foreign governments to monitor communications, transportation, trade, and financial transactions. The "War on Terror" will employ similar tactics and use a similar intergovernmental network. With both wars, the government perceives the threat as "asymmetric." In a post-Cold War world, the United States is no longer defending against armies like its own. Rather, it must confront loosely organized networks that exploit society's openness. In general, Americans travel freely. Companies and individuals trade and perform financial transactions in accord with minimal regulations and barriers. But if elements of everyday life are targeted, in the government's view these activities must be monitored in a coordinated fashion in the name of effective defense.

The government's information-centric strategy is in character with 21st century Americans' unprecedented faith in technology. Reliance on the capabilities and good intentions of traditional institutions is waning, to be supplanted by confidence in machines that can create technological and scientific solutions to societal problems. Cameras and sensors are gaining seemingly unlimited capabilities to monitor trouble spots and collect data. Computerized algorithms hold the promise of overcoming human deficiencies in analytic objectivity and infallibility. Computers obviously offer immense number-crunching speed and capacity. In this new century, we seek to apply information technology — that is, large-scale data collection, integration, and analysis — to one of society's most pressing problems: identifying and assessing threats.

Public Management, Private Innovation

Traditionally, the U. S. government has looked to private suppliers for IT goods and services: homeland security efforts keep with this tradition. According to Darryl Moody, vice president for Homeland Security and Intelligence at BearingPoint, a business consulting firm, "the homeland security problem is so massive that the government can't rely on its own resources. The government needs experienced innovators who have insight into issues ... and experience with practical problems."

Moody emphasizes the importance of existing government-private sector relationships. Indeed, billions of dollars appropriated for homeland security efforts have been channeled almost exclusively into established research and operational programs. It can therefore be difficult for smaller, innovative companies and research teams to gain visibility; Moody says companies like his, experienced with the government's risk aversion and complex procurement requirements, "get unsolicited appeals from technology vendors in biometrics, data mining, and so forth." BearingPoint tries to match them with existing initiatives.

Government agencies including DARPA, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have also reached out to technology researchers and providers. Many agencies participate in the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. Some government agencies employ proxies such as In-Q-Tel, a venture-capital fund chartered by the Central Intelligence Agency. In-Q-Tel CEO Gilman Louie believes that "an education process is needed to teach industry what's needed beyond the obvious," meaning technologies for "common interoperability and for applications like tracking, monitoring, and authorization."