Crisis Management in the Intelligence Community
Last month, outgoing Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper issued new guidance on how the U.S. intelligence community should pivot in response to a crisis.
A “crisis” is defined here as “An event or situation, as determined by the DNI, that threatens U.S. national security interests and requires an expedited shift in national intelligence posture, priorities, and/or emphasis.”
The new guidance explains how that shift in intelligence posture is to be executed.
See Intelligence Community Crisis Management, Intelligence Community Policy Guidance 900.2, December 23, 2016.
This rule gives agencies significantly more authority over certain career policy roles. Whether that authority improves accountability or creates new risks depends almost entirely on how agencies interrupt and apply it.
Our environmental system was built for 1970s-era pollution control, but today it needs stable, integrated, multi-level governance that can make tradeoffs, share and use evidence, and deliver infrastructure while demonstrating that improved trust and participation are essential to future progress.
Durable and legitimate climate action requires a government capable of clearly weighting, explaining, and managing cost tradeoffs to the widest away of audiences, which in turn requires strong technocratic competency.
FAS is launching the Center for Regulatory Ingenuity (CRI) to build a new, transpartisan vision of government that works – that has the capacity to achieve ambitious goals while adeptly responding to people’s basic needs.