Back
Response to the UK Government's National Resilience Framework
webCredibility Rating
3/5
Good(3)Good quality. Reputable source with community review or editorial standards, but less rigorous than peer-reviewed venues.
Rating inherited from publication venue: Long-Term Resilience
This response from Long-Term Resilience to the UK's National Resilience Framework represents an effort to incorporate long-term and catastrophic risk thinking—including AI-related risks—into official UK government resilience and emergency preparedness policy.
Metadata
Importance: 42/100policy briefcommentary
Summary
A formal response from the Long-Term Resilience organization critiquing and engaging with the UK Government's National Resilience Framework, likely advocating for stronger consideration of catastrophic and existential risks in national resilience planning. The response presumably highlights gaps in how the framework addresses low-probability, high-consequence threats and suggests improvements aligned with long-term risk thinking.
Key Points
- •Engages with the UK Government's official National Resilience Framework from a long-termist risk perspective
- •Likely advocates for incorporating catastrophic and existential risk considerations into national resilience policy
- •Highlights potential gaps between conventional emergency planning and long-tail risk preparedness
- •Represents civil society input into UK government resilience and preparedness policy processes
- •Connects broader AI safety and global catastrophic risk concerns to national-level governance frameworks
Cited by 1 page
| Page | Type | Quality |
|---|---|---|
| Centre for Long-Term Resilience | Organization | 63.0 |
Cached Content Preview
HTTP 200Fetched Apr 9, 20268 KB
Response to the UK Government’s National Resilience Framework - CLTR
Home
AI
Biosecurity
Risk Management
Publications
News
About
Team
Funding
Work With Us
Date: Dec 21, 2021
Response to the UK Government’s National Resilience Framework
James Ginns and Sophie Dannreuther
Topic/Area:
Risk Management
On Monday, the UK Government published its Resilience Framework , long-awaited by resilience experts across all sectors. It is a welcome first step to enhance the UK’s preparedness and ability to prevent major risks.
The Framework follows on from the Integrated Review ’s commitment in 2021 to build the UK’s resilience to “low probability, catastrophic-impact events”. [1] Initially envisaged by then Cabinet Office Minister Penny Mordaunt in July 2021 as a fully fledged strategy which would signify a “fundamental step change” [2] in UK resilience, acknowledging the need to “develop our understanding of questions about the prospects of humanity against AI, hostile acts and natural disasters at a scale not seen before.” [3]
Overview:
There is much to commend. The Framework sets out a vision for UK resilience which is already in train and looks out to 2030. In Whitehall, it introduces a Head of Resilience, a Resilience Directorate and a new resilience sub-committee of the National Security Council. It commits to reinvigorating the National Exercising Programme and building a new National Resilience Academy. In Parliament, there will be an annual statement on resilience.
The Framework also promises clear ownership of all risks, including complex and catastrophic risks. If done thoroughly, with external expert input, this would represent a major improvement in our national resilience. Furthermore, the National Security Risk Assessment, the Government’s analysis of the UK’s greatest threats, has been overhauled. It will look further ahead than previously, moving from a 2-year to 5-year time horizon for some risks.
It isn’t yet clear whether funding will be readily available to cement the UK’s role as a resilience world leader, but there are two initial promising signs. Firstly, the Framework rightly acknowledges that investing adequately in crisis prevention is more cost effective than merely responding to them. Secondly, it commits HMG to a “coordinated approach to [its] investment in resilience”, [4] and will track current and future levels of investment across departments on resilience.
Six areas identified for further work:
At the same time, we have identified six areas where further work is needed over the course of 2023 and beyond to ensure an acceptable level of national and global resilience:
1. Risk governance
There remains insufficient separation between risk ownership, oversight and assurance in Government. This will change if Government
... (truncated, 8 KB total)Resource ID:
892cafb4d7fce16a | Stable ID: sid_7gsx9jigwh