Quantitative and qualitative differences worth considering in approaching critical infrastructures resilience

Abstract

Abstract. Through the implicit connections between risk, safety, protection and, last but not least, resiliency, that need to be managed, critical infrastructures have become a subject of increasing interest both for specialists and for academics. Based on this premise, this article analyzes in terms of operational performance several internationally used solutions for assessing resilience, having in view the desire to choose the best in order to be presented in some specialized disciplines of the postgraduate curricula that are annually presented in the educational offer of the Land Forces Academy. The authors also present their own vision on approaching the resilience of critical infrastructures so that it can harmoniously be integrated into the security plans of the holders or operators of such special assets.

Reviewing qualitative research approaches in the context of critical infrastructure resilience

“…The selection of the most adequate strategy becomes a multi-dimensional problem, as investigated through multicriteria decision-making techniques such as the AHP. At a higher abstraction level, the results obtained through a pool of experts from the Romanian Land Forces Academy suggested that the best strategy to increase the resilience of a CI refers to human resources, relying on an intensive training system of employees, in order to empower them within the system (Badea et al 2017 ). Similarly, another research focused on the analytic network process (ANP), a variant of AHP, to prioritise factors affecting port resilience involving 11 experts including government officials, planners, and scholars.…”