The U.S. national security system faces a range of management challenges. A leaner, more focused national security decisionmaking system can help the United States succeed in a period of tumultuous change.
Increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the National Security Council is necessary as the country contends with many more state and nonstate actors, around-the-clock public scrutiny, and exploding nontraditional threats.
The Department of Homeland Security manages a diverse set of risks: terrorism, natural disasters, and major accidents. It is committed to using risk assessment to inform decisions and priorities. But assessing homeland security risks is challenging, in part due to the nature of the risks.
The research aimed to identify priorities for further attention by policymakers and researchers looking at the effectiveness of post-release supervision of terrorist offenders under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA).
To inform the debate on whether the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) should be continued or allowed to expire, RAND prepared policy briefs on three topics of central concern to policymakers: national security perspectives, the impact on federal spending, and the impact on workers' compensation markets.
With the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act set to expire this year, Congress is currently revisiting a crucial question: What is the appropriate government role in terrorism insurance markets? As the debate unfolds on Capitol Hill, policymakers should consider three key research findings.
In this June 2014 Congressional Briefing, RAND experts presented findings from their recent work on the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) and discuss the different outcomes if TRIA were to be reauthorized, modified, or allowed to expire.
Without TRIA in place, employers perceived to be at high risk for terrorism might have to obtain workers' compensation coverage in markets of last resort, known as residual markets, which could charge higher premiums.
The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act will expire soon and Congress is considering the appropriate government role in terrorism insurance markets. In a terrorist attack with losses up to $50 billion, the federal government would spend more helping to cover losses than if it had continued to support a national terrorism risk insurance program.
The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act will expire at the end of this year and Congress is considering the appropriate government role in terrorism insurance markets. In a terrorist attack with losses up to $50 billion, the federal government would spend more helping to cover losses than if it had continued to support a national terrorism risk insurance program.
The current terrorism risk insurance act will expire in 2014 and Congress again is considering the appropriate government role in terrorism insurance markets. If the act expires and the take-up rate for terrorism insurance falls, then the U.S. would be less resilient to future terrorist attacks.
Managing homeland security risks involves balancing concerns about numerous types of accidents, disasters, and terrorist attacks. This research presents individuals' relative concerns about homeland security hazards and the attributes which influence those concerns.
The Transportation Security Administration's RMAT has enabled a more sophisticated understanding of terrorism risks to the air transportation system, but TSA should not treat RMAT results as credible estimates. Rather, the results can help to inform the components of terrorism risk and possible influences of system changes on that risk.