This workstream acknowledges the extent to which what a client asks for and what their supply chain can do depends strongly on incentives emerging from standards setting bodies, public policy including regulation, as well as from insurance and the finance industries, and the views of the public.

We are framing this work from the perspective of those whose job it is to plan, design, deliver, operate and maintain critical infrastructure, and the barriers they experience in trying to do so using a resilience lens. This framework is a simple three-box model: we need to know what to do (see Work stream 1); we need to know what resilience is worth and to whom (and, how do we know); and we need to be able to scale up application of new ways of doing and new ways of valuing resilience.

Understanding how the different actors involved in critical infrastructure would respond to those three questions will inform future work in collaboration with those whose job is (or should be) to incentivise resilience.


Ibbi Almufti





 Jack Hogan

What is resilience worth?

We will identify the opportunities and incentives that are driving resilience investments to help individuals identify, realise, bring into reality, and sustain the potential resilience value of projects.

We will discover gaps and provide clear steps from diagnosing problems (in resilience identification and valuation) to piloting and wide-scale adoption of resilience economics in practice.


  • We plan to award grants to partners who are actively working in the area of facilitating resilience value identification and capture, in ways that are called for in practice.
  • We will identify industry-specific incentives for leveraging resilience-enhancing investments and opportunities for scaling these incentives.
  • We will map the resilience value-chain for each of these industries, and the various different actors along each industry.
  • We will identify pinch points or roadblocks preventing the economics of resilience from benefiting stakeholders and the decisions that most critically erode possible resilience-enhancing investments.
  • We will compile the research outputs into a series of primers aimed at the various industries represented by the stakeholders that are interviewed.
  • It is essential to leverage work already happening and expertise relevant to incentivizing and operationalizing resilience-enhancing investments.
  • We will work principally with known partners already active in the areas of focus and with their networks.


  • We aim to publish a series of Primers aimed at specific industries.
  • We will aim to share what we learn with a wider audience through a variety of routes.


Rob Turk





Halley McCann




Mainstreaming critical infrastructure resilience through regulatory and standards bodies

Once we understand how to incentivise critical infrastructure resilience we will need to ‘scale it up’ and make it mainstream. This is likely to be a combination of ‘carrots’ such as resilience credits, best practice guidance etc. and ‘sticks’ which may be codes or regulation.

We will need to have convincingly demonstrated the value (and to whom) through our activity on ‘What is resilience worth?’ to create the demand for mainstreaming.


We will award grants, to partners who are actively working in the area of mainstreaming resilience through codes, standards, resilience credits etc., thereby leveraging other financial and intellectual resources.


We propose to publish several individual research papers contributing to an event planned for 2019.