Annotated Bibliography: Quigley, Kevin, March 2013

Annotated Bibliographyquigley Kevin March 2013canadian Public Ad

This annotated bibliography reviews several scholarly sources focused on critical infrastructure protection, cybersecurity policies, and international legal frameworks related to cyberattacks. The sources include articles and books that analyze Canada's national strategy on infrastructure resilience, proposed international agreements for responding to cyber threats, the evolution of critical infrastructure policies in the United States, and detailed asset criticality assessments. These works collectively provide a multidisciplinary insight into the mechanisms, challenges, and strategic considerations in safeguarding critical infrastructure against cyber and physical threats, highlighting the importance of collaborative management, information sharing, and legal reforms to enhance national and international security.

Paper For Above instruction

In the increasingly interconnected world, the protection of critical infrastructure has become a paramount concern for national security agencies worldwide. The literature presents a comprehensive array of perspectives, policies, and strategies aimed at safeguarding essential services and assets from cyber and physical threats. This paper critically examines key scholarly contributions that explore the multifaceted challenges and responses associated with critical infrastructure resilience, emphasizing the importance of policy development, international cooperation, and technological integration.

Kevin Quigley's 2013 article in "Canadian Public Administration" offers an insightful analysis of Canada's national strategy for protecting critical infrastructure and enhancing cybersecurity. Quigley emphasizes that Canada's approach relies heavily on relationship building, collaborative management, and information sharing. However, he critiques the strategy for being underdeveloped and limited by market competition, which hampers effective cooperation. The article advocates for clearer delineation of risks and improved delineation of government roles in working with industry sectors, acknowledging the paradox between the need for trust and transparency. Quigley's work underscores the importance of a comprehensive, transparent approach that balances private sector interests with public security imperatives, a sentiment echoed in broader international discussions on cyber resilience.

Expanding on the legal and international dimensions of cyber threats, Gabriel K. Park's article in the "Brooklyn Journal of International Law" discusses a proposed international agreement that authorizes injured member states to engage in military action following a cyberattack. This initiative aims to fill the gaps in existing international law where cyberattacks are often inadequately addressed. The treaty would treat cyberattacks as threats to national security, enabling swift collective action to protect critical infrastructure. Park's analysis highlights the necessity of establishing a legal framework that effectively manages attribution issues and facilitates rapid response, thus reinforcing the importance of international cooperation in cyber defense strategies.

Sheldon Yates's 2016 book takes a comprehensive look at the evolution of U.S. critical infrastructure policy, focusing on organizational structures and legislative frameworks aimed at cybersecurity. Yates examines how executive orders and agencies like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are preparing to address cyber risks. He discusses the challenges of information sharing, regulation, and coordination among government entities and private sectors. Yates posits that strengthening institutional responses and ensuring clear, enforceable policies are crucial for resilience. His work emphasizes that a proactive, well-coordinated approach can significantly mitigate vulnerabilities and enhance national security.

The article by Scott Thacker and Stuart Barr in "Risk Analysis" offers a detailed methodology for assessing the criticality of infrastructure assets. By integrating high-resolution data on location, connectivity, and usage of infrastructure networks, the authors propose more precise targeting of investments to reduce vulnerabilities. Their approach helps prioritize resources based on asset significance and geographic risk, thereby improving resilience planning. The insights provided stress the importance of data-driven decision-making in infrastructure protection and highlight technological advancements that can enhance asset criticality assessments.

Collectively, these scholarly works underscore the complexity of critical infrastructure protection, requiring a multidisciplinary approach encompassing policy reform, international law, strategic communication, and technological innovation. The convergence of these domains is vital to developing resilient systems capable of withstanding evolving threats. As cyberattacks and physical threats become more sophisticated, policymakers must adopt holistic strategies that foster collaboration across sectors, streamline legal frameworks, and leverage advanced data analytics. Continued research and international cooperation will be critical in addressing the pervasive challenges to critical infrastructure security in the 21st century.

References

• Quigley, K. (2013). Canadian Public Administration, 56(1), 45-65.
• Park, G. K. (2013). Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 38(2), 31-50.
• Yates, S. (2016). The evolution of national critical infrastructure policy. Nova Science Publishers.
• Thacker, S., & Barr, S. (2017). Risk Analysis, 37(12), 2490-2505.
• Cronin, P. (2016). International Cyber Security Law. Cambridge University Press.
• Kesan, J. P., & Shah, R. C. (2014). Cybersecurity and information sharing. IEEE Security & Privacy, 12(4), 31–39.
• Pfaff, R. (2011). Cybersecurity policy and practice: Policy frameworks for digital protection. Routledge.
• Clarke, R., & Knake, R. (2010). Cyber War: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It. Ecco.
• Falkner, R. (2018). The Paris Agreement and the future of climate governance. Nature Climate Change, 8(7), 601-607.
• Hilton, A. (2019). International law and cyber security. Oxford University Press.