In the previous chapter, we have seen that social and economic activities depend more and more on large-scale services, that many of the industries providing these services tend to face increasing vulnerability to disasters, and the very competitive pressures that give rise to higher risks also reduce incentives for firms to invest in measures to mitigate those risks. At the same time, the nature of risks has evolved, not only with the threat of international terrorism but with population growth and concentration, giving rise to more devastating consequences from natural disasters as well.

In that global new world, all elements of society – firms, industries, individual citizens, governments at all levels – are both subject to expanded risk and also bear growing responsibility for its mitigation. Against this background, the absence of a clear consensus regarding which groups are accountable for addressing these threats, and what authority and resources they can be expected to mobilize, together contribute to the seeds of disaster.

Part II of this book addresses how the debate is currently framed between the responsibilities and capabilities of the public and private sectors in the United States. We first must appreciate that the debate has not yet been truly joined. The U.S. federal government's perspective seems to be based on seriously unrealistic assumptions about the capabilities and motivations of the private managers of critical infrastructure facilities and services.