Break down and analyze the July 2007 report issued by the Dept. of Homeland Security: ‘Strategy to Enhance International Supply Chain Security’. Focus on, assess and evaluate five of its ten sections – Purpose, Scope, Guiding Principles, Considerations, Methodology Roles, Strategic Element, Response and Recover, and Training/Exercise Requirements. Please note that the length of this paper is over 130 pages. If there is a problem accessing the link please Google search the report.
This paper should be at least 1000 words with 3-5 additional references. APA fomat should be using including a separate title and reference page. Appropriate references should be cited.
In terms of purpose, the strategy was passed to first and foremost give purpose to the Safe Port Act. The Act required that a strategic plan be formulated in order to enhance the security of the international supply chain. This law also wanted the strategy to capture easily how processes of international trade can resume even when there is a security breach and the trade is affected. Essentially, in as far as adhering to the law is concerned, the formulation of the strategy gives the Safe Port Act purpose as it ensures that this law does not exist in vain.
Purposes in either policy, legislation or strategies are usually akin to the desired outcome. The strategy at hand has numerous objectives. Well as much as many seem good there are some which are worth evaluating. Before getting into the specific objectives, it is noteworthy that the objectives have nothing that embraces technology(Cole, Stevenson, and Aitken 2019). This is worrisome considering that it was adopted at a time when technology was just starting to develop. It is also worrisome currently considering that technology is at the core of various societal activities. Objective number three is to the effect that the US in ensuring the security of goods and the general status of ports, will also better the standards of trade at the international level. In terms of evaluation, this part seems a bigger objective and one that is unlikely to be achieved. Not all countries can be at par with the US in terms of providing mechanisms to ensure security at the port. Thus this is an objective that should be revised. The revision should capture the fact that the US is dealing with many other countries with nit so strong capacities.
The strategy is meant only to act within a scope that directly benefits the US. In essence, all the security protocols and deployment that may take place are only for the goods that are coming from a foreign country to the US. This means that the gods must have their final destination at the US. Otherwise, the goods will not be protected in the event that there is any sort of breach. This is a very selfish move from any point that one wants to view it from. The reason for this is that sometimes countries may want to rely on a port of another country to simply enhance the movement of goods. Thus, in as far as a country may rely on the US pot for the movement of goods, the goods will not be protected(Jajja, Chatha, and Farooq 2018). This is something that ideally goes against the objective that had been discussed in the foregoing section. The question that one asks is just how does one promote the growth of international standards in as far as the security of goods is concerned when it only has mechanisms that protect goods being shipped to her own country and no other country. The law should be amended to enhance a working partnership of all the countries, in fact, if all the countries that are near the US such as Mexico and Canada work hand in hand with the US, then there is a likelihood that the region can achieve so much in as far as securing the supply chain is concerned. Doing things that only benefit at the individual level does not encourage international cooperation and relations in general.
The guiding principles are also crafted in the manner that they out the US at the center. This is seen from the fact that the guiding principles are more or less like a reiteration of the scope. It emphasizes the fact that the whole strategy is to secure the gods that come from another country to the US. This still impacts on the whole notion of cooperation and collegiality of the countries. Indeed one can argue that the US has no obligation to protect or apply the strategy to goods that belong to other countries. This is an argument that would still hold water as at the international field, each country is sovereign and no country should be obligated to another. A country is only obligated to its citizens.
The other thing that forms the guiding principles is the employment of technology. Well, one would think that this strategy does not in any way embrace technology, only until one gets to the section on the guiding principles. The technology is such that the goods being transported must be noted first. The technology is then used to ensure that the goods are protected from the beginning of the journey till the end(Urciuoli and Hintsa 2017). All the important information concerning the goods are noted before they are loaded. This is a good way of protecting the goods so that when they get to the final destination they can be checked and if there is anything that does not add up, then the investigation can be launched. The idea of technology in this regard goes hand in hand with the concept of sharing information as the US insists that all information must be given out before the goods are loaded. This is indeed a creative way that the strategy captures in the guiding principles. It is meant to make the security very tight.
Considerations and Assumptions
There are numerous assumptions that have been made on the assumption part. One of them is that the strategy assumes that trade will always operate as smoothly as possible. This is a very ambitious assumption in my view. The coronavirus pandemic has proven to the world that all normal activities in the world can be brought to a standstill in the event that a noble pandemic occurs. 2020 as a year has also proven to be the worst with many countries going through an economic depression. The impact that this will have is that it will reduce trade and business in general(Jajja, Chatha, and Farooq 2018). The drafters of this plan indeed never envisaged that such a time like the year 20202 would come and that even the movement of people and goods would be affected. This year should serve as a lesson to many who are tasked with writing and developing strategies that influence how things in society are done. Just when the year began there was a trend on Twitter that the world would go to a third world war. This is based on how countries like Iran and North Korea strive to build nuclear weapons. In essence, assuming that everything and especially trade would move without any interruption was not a very good move. Sometimes the US is dealing with countries that are torn between violence such as those in Africa. Will such kind of an atmosphere sill necessitate for the operations of trade at the optimum level? The answer is no and such also needs to be amended. The other assumptions are largely good.
Strategy Development Methodology
The development of the strategy as brought out from the strategy itself shows that it embraced various actors in society. This is because its development process involved the idea and works of people from the technology realm, the private sector who offered reviews, the maritime realm, and many more others. This is a good move. In a way, it shows the ideals of unity in all things. It is worthy to note that the president at that time, President Bush was also involved in a large way in this strategy(Cole, Stevenson, and Aitken 2019). This is something that the many countries that look up to America should emulate. In places where there is no democracy that aspect where the society can work together irrespective of the realm that one belongs to, misses. This is a good thing that the US illustrated and many countries could truly learn from such kinds of actions. The other fact that the strategy was reviewed by the Homeland Security Department for the second time was also key. This shows that the government had confidence in that institution and generally most institutions. Giving Homeland such a heavy and very good task was a good thing. It would be bad if fir instance the chance was given to agencies like the FBI or CIA. This is because these agencies are usually all over and thus what was illustrated here is a change for the better.
Cole, Rosanna, Mark Stevenson, and James Aitken. 2019. “Blockchain Technology: Implications for Operations and Supply Chain Management.” Supply Chain Management.
Jajja, Muhammad Shakeel Sadiq, Kamran Ali Chatha, and Sami Farooq. 2018. “Impact of Supply Chain Risk on Agility Performance: Mediating Role of Supply Chain Integration.” International Journal of Production Economics.
Urciuoli, Luca, and Juha Hintsa. 2017. “Adapting Supply Chain Management Strategies to Security–an Analysis of Existing Gaps and Recommendations for Improvement.” International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications.