Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cyber-Physical Systems Governance: A Framework for (Meta)CyberSecurity Design

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Security by Design

Abstract

This chapter discusses a framework for improving security of cyber-physical systems through purposeful design, execution, and evolution of metasystem functions. State actors (i.e., government agencies), non-state actors (i.e., for-profit and non-profit organizations), and their systems operate under highly emergent and complex conditions. Under these conditions, system performance is not always deducible from the constituent systems. Moreover, such systems are often interdependent and dynamically interacting with other systems such that the state of each system is influenced by and is influencing states of the interconnected systems. In these conditions, leaving a system to develop through processes of ‘accretion’ (ad hoc evolution of a system) or ‘self-organization’ (totally unconstrained evolution of a system) might increase the probability of missing performance expectations. In contrast, ‘purposeful design’ is an invitation for a more determined engagement in system development to increase the probability of producing expected and desired performance. In this chapter, emerging research in Complex System Governance (CSG) is suggested as an emerging field to direct more purposeful design for systems. Specifically, a CSG enabled framework for security design focused on Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) is provided. The framework, grounded in Systems Theory and Management Cybernetics, emphasizes more holistic design for integration, coordination, communication, and control for development of CPS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See for example, http://www.swissre.com/; http://globalriskinsights.com/; https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2017.

  2. 2.

    Security is taken in its broadest sense to include protection and deterrence, defense, developing international action and influence for cyber systems and interdependent systems in the cyberspace against cyber-threats—internal and external to the system of interest.

  3. 3.

    Cyber security is typically concerned with the protection of internet connected systems (to include hardware, software and associated infrastructure), the data on them, and the services they provide, from unauthorized access, harm or misuse [1]. In this case, there is no distinction between issues (i.e., risks, threats, and vulnerabilities) at the system level and the metasystem level. MetaCyberSecurity attempts to address system and metasystemic issues recognizing that a system (including CPS-related systems) does not operate in isolation. This approach enables the consideration of internal and external system risks and vulnerabilities regardless of cause—malicious, technical, or natural.

References

  1. HM Government (2016) National cyber security strategy 2016–2021, p 84. UK Cabinet Office, London. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-cyber-security-strategy-2016-to-2021

  2. Clinton WJ (1996) Executive order 13010: critical infrastructure protection. Fed Reg 61(138):37345–37350

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gheorghe AV, Masera M, Weijnen MPC, De Vries JL (eds) (2006) Critical infrastructures at risk: securing the European electric power system (vel 9). Springer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  4. Linden EV (ed) (2007) Focus on terrorism, 9th edn. Nova Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rasmussen J, Batstone R (1989) Why do complex organisational systems fail? World Bank environmental working paper, No. 20

    Google Scholar 

  6. Keating CB, Katina PF (2015) Editorial: foundational perspectives for the emerging complex system governance field. Int J Syst Syst Eng 6(1/2):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  7. European Southern Observatory (2008) Science with the VLTI. European Southern Observatory. Retrieved from http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/paranal/telescopes/vlti/science.html

  8. Masters H (2010) Transcript of the accretion of galaxies and stars. Prezi. Retrieved from https://prezi.com/fg0fw5pyu8nk/the-accretion-of-galaxies-and-stars/

  9. Ashby WR (1962) Principles of the self-organizing system. In: von Foerster H, Zopf G (eds) Principles of self-organization. Pergamon Press, New York, NY, pp 255–278

    Google Scholar 

  10. ASCE (2009) Guiding principles for the nation’s critical infrastructure. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  11. Price JWH (1998) Simplified risk assessment. Eng Manag J 10(1):19–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gibson JE, Scherer WT, Gibson WF (2007) How to do systems analysis. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. INCOSE (2011) Systems engineering handbook: a guide for system life cycle processes and activities, (3.2 ed). In: Cecilia H (ed) INCOSE, San Diego, CA

    Google Scholar 

  14. Weiss JW, Anderson D (2003) CIOs and IT professionals as change agents, risk and stakeholder managers: a field study. In: Proceedings of the 36th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2003.1174639

  15. Holton GA (2004) Defining risk. Financ Anal J 60(6):19–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Knight FH (1921) Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Hart, Schaffner & Marx; Houghton Mifflin Co, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  17. Song C (2005) A methodological framework for vulnerability assessment for critical infrastructure systems, hierarchical holographic vulnerability assessment (HHVA), Thesis. ETH Zürich, Zürich. Retrieved from https://www1.ethz.ch/lsa/education/arb/old/archive/da_song_05

  18. Katina PF, Pinto CA, Bradley JM, Hester PT (2014) Interdependency-induced risk with applications to healthcare. Int J Crit Infrastruct Prot 7(1):12–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2014.01.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Vamanu BI, Gheorghe AV, Katina PF (2016) Critical infrastructures: risk and vulnerability assessment in transportation of dangerous goods—transportation by road and rail, vol 31. Springer, Cham, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  20. Einarsson S, Rausand M (1998) An approach to vulnerability analysis of complex industrial systems. Risk Anal 18(5):535–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Holmgren A, Molin S, Thedéen T (2001) Vulnerability of complex infrastructure; power system and supporting digital communication system. Presented at the 5th international conference on technology, policy, and innovation, LEMMA Publishers, Utrecht, the Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  22. Turner BL, Kasperson RE, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW, Christensen L, Eckley N, Kasperson JX, Luers A, Martello ML, Polsky C, Pulsipher A, Schiller A (2003) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8074–8079. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231335100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tokgoz BE, Gheorghe AV (2013) Resilience quantification and its application to a residential building subject to hurricane winds. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 4(3):105–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-013-0012-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sussman JM (2005) Perspectives on intelligent transportation systems. Springer, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  25. Katina PF (2015) Systems theory-based construct for identifying metasystem pathologies for complex system governance (Ph.D.). Old Dominion University, Virginia, United States

    Google Scholar 

  26. Guckenheimer J, Ottino JM (2008) Foundations for complex systems research in the physical sciences and engineering, p 21. Northwestern University: National Science Foundation, Evanston, IL

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hammond D (2002) Exploring the genealogy of systems thinking. Sys Res Behav Sci 19(5):429–439. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Laszlo E (1996) The systems view of the world: a holistic vision for our time. Hampton Press, Cresskill, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  29. Bertalanffy L (1968) General system theory: foundations, developments, applications. George Braziller, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ackoff R (1999) Re-creating the corporation: a design of organizations for the 21st century. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  31. Arbesman S (2016) Overcomplicated: technology at the limits of comprehension. Current, New York

    Google Scholar 

  32. Bateson G (1972) Steps to an ecology of mind. Jason Aronson Inc, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bostrom N (2014) Superintelligence: paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  34. Capra F (1996) The web of life: a new scientific understanding of living systems. Anchor Books, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  35. Casti J (2012) X-Events: complexity overload and the collapse of everything. William Morrow, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  36. Checkland PB (1999) Systems thinking, systems practice. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  37. Churchman CW (1971) The design of inquiring systems. Basic Books, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  38. Flood RL, Carson ER (1993) Dealing with complexity: an introduction to the theory and application of systems science. Plenum Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. François CO (ed) (2004) International encyclopedia of systems and cybernetics. Walter de Gruyter, München, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  40. Klir GJ (ed) (1972) Trends in general systems theory, 1st edn. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  41. Martin J (2006) The meaning of the 21st century: a vital blueprint for ensuring our future. Riverhead Books, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  42. Simon HA (1973) The organization of complex systems. In: Pattee HH (ed) Hierarchy theory: the challenges of complex systems. George Braziller, New York, NY, pp 1–27

    Google Scholar 

  43. Skyttner L (2005) General systems theory: problems, perspectives, practice, 2nd edn. World Scientific Publishing Co., Pte. Ltd., Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  44. Taleb NN (2010) The black swan: the impact of the highly improbable. Random House Trade Paperbacks Edition, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  45. von Bertalanffy L (1972) The history and status of general systems theory. Acad Manag J 15(4):407–426. https://doi.org/10.2307/255139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Warfield JN (1999) Twenty laws of complexity: science applicable in organizations. Sys Res Behav Sci 16(1):3–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Adams KM, Hester PT, Bradley JM, Meyers TJ, Keating CB (2014) Systems theory as the foundation for understanding systems. Sys Eng 17(1):112–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Gaines BR (1977) Progress in general systems research. In: Klir GJ (ed) Applied general systems research: recent development and trends. Plenum Press, New York, NY, pp 3–28

    Google Scholar 

  49. Monod J (1974) On chance and necessity. In: Ayala FJ, Dobzhansky T (eds) Studies in the philosophy of biology. Macmillan Press, London, UK, pp 357–375

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  50. Clemson B (1984) Cybernetics: a new management tool. Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, UK

    Google Scholar 

  51. Katina PF (2015) Emerging systems theory–based pathologies for governance of complex systems. Int J Sys Sys Eng 6(1/2):144–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Stichweh R (2011) Systems theory. In: Badie B, Berg-Schlosser D, Morlino L (eds) International encyclopedia of political science, vol 8. SAGE, New York, NY, pp 2579–2588

    Google Scholar 

  53. Strijbos S (2010) Systems thinking. In: Frodeman R, Klein JT, Mitcham C (eds) The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press, USA, New York, NY, pp 453–470

    Google Scholar 

  54. Weinberg GM (1975) An introduction to general systems thinking. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  55. Whitney K, Bradley JM, Baugh DE, Chesterman CW (2015) Systems theory as a foundation for governance of complex systems. Int J Sys Sys Eng 6(1–2):15–32. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSE.2015.068805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Jackson MC (2003) Systems thinking: creative holism for managers. Wiley, Chichester, UK

    Google Scholar 

  57. Katina PF, Calida BY (2017) Complex system analysis for engineering of systemic failures. In: Hopkins M (ed) Systems engineering: concepts, tools and applications. Nova Science Publishers, New York, NY, pp 105–132

    Google Scholar 

  58. Jackson MC (1991) Systems methodology for the management sciences. Plenum Press, New York, NY

    Book  Google Scholar 

  59. Crownover MWB (2005) Complex system contextual framework (CSCF): a grounded-theory construction for the articulation of system context in addressing complex systems problems. Dissertation, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, United States

    Google Scholar 

  60. Katina PF, Keating CB, Gheorghe AV, Masera M (2017) Complex system governance for critical cyber-physical systems. Int J Crit Infrastruct 13(2/3):168–183. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCIS.2017.088230

  61. Katina PF, Keating CB, Gheorghe AV (2016) Cyber-physical systems: complex system governance as an integrating construct. In: Yang H, Kong Z, & Sarder MD (eds) Proceedings of the 2016 industrial and systems engineering research conference. IISE, Anaheim, CA

    Google Scholar 

  62. US Congress (2001) Uniting and strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to intercept and obstruct terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001 (No. 147) (p. 115 Stat. 271–402). Washington, DC: 107th Congress. Retrieved from http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ56/content-detail.html

  63. Alur R (2015) Principles of cyber-physical systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  64. Khaitan SK, McCalley JD (2015) Design techniques and applications of cyberphysical systems: a survey. IEEE Syst J 9(2):350–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Adepu S, Mathur A (2016) Generalized attacker and attack models for cyber physical systems, pp 283–292. IEEE, Atlanta, GA, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC.2016.122

  66. European Parliament (2016) Ethical aspects of cyber-physical systems: scientific foresight study (No. PE 563.501). European Parliament, Brussels. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_STU(2016)563501

  67. Kwon C, Liu W, Hwang I (2013) Security analysis for cyber-physical systems against stealthy deception attacks. In: 2013 American control conference, pp. 3344–3349. Washington, DC, USA. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACC.2013.6580348

  68. Conti JP (2010) The day the samba stopped. Eng Technol 5(4):46–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Richards G (2008) Hackers vs slackers. Eng Technol 3(19):40–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. North American Electric Reliability Council (2003) SQL Slammer worm: lessons learned for consideration by the electricity sector. North American Electric Reliability Council, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  71. Farwell JP, Rohozinski R (2011) Stuxnet and the future of Cyber War. Survival 53(1):23–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2011.555586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Slay J, Miller M (2007) Lessons learned from the Maroochy Water Breach. In: Goetz E, Shenoi S (eds) Critical infrastructure protection, vol 253. Springer, US, Boston, MA, pp 73–82

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  73. Pasqualetti F, Dörfler F, Bullo F (2013) Attack detection and identification in cyber-physical systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 58(11):2715–2729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Masys AJ (ed) (2015) Disaster management: enabling resilience. Springer, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  75. Johnson C (2016) Why we cannot (yet) ensure the cyber-security of safety-critical systems. In: SCSC 24th annual symposium, Brighton, UK. Retrieved from http://scsc.org.uk/e378

  76. Ali S, Qaisar SB, Saeed H, Khan MF, Naeem M, Anpalagan A (2015) Network challenges for cyber physical systems with tiny wireless devices: a case study on reliable pipeline condition monitoring. Sensors 15(4):7172–7205. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150407172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Baugh D (2015) Environmental scanning implications in the governance of complex systems. Int J Sys Sys Eng 6(1–2):127–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Katina PF, Calida BY (2017) Complex system governance: implications and research directions [White paper]. Submitted to the Committee on a decadal survey of social and behavioral sciences for applications to National Security, The national academies of sciences, engineering, and medicine. Retrieved from Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/dbasse/bbcss/dbasse_178412

  79. Keating CB, Ireland V (2016) Editorial: complex systems governance - issues and applications. Int J Sys Sys Eng, 7(1/2/3):1–21

    Google Scholar 

  80. Keating CB, Katina PF (2016) Complex system governance development: a first generation methodology. Int J Sys Sys Eng, 7(1/2/3): 43–74. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSE.2016.076127

  81. Keating CB, Katina PF, Bradley JM (2014) Complex system governance: concept, challenges, and emerging research. Int J Sys Sys Eng 5(3):263–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Keating CB, Katina PF, Bradley JM (2016) Complex system governance: failure mode effects and criticality analysis application. In: Yang H, Kong Z, Sarder M (eds) Presented at the Proceedings of the 2016 industrial and systems engineering research conference, ISERC, Anaheim, CA

    Google Scholar 

  83. Warfield JN (1976) Societal systems: planning, policy and complexity. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  84. Hieronymi A (2013) Understanding systems science: a visual and integrative approach. Sys Res Behav Sci 30(5):580–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Burrell G, Morgan G (1979) Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. Ashgate Publishing, Burlington, VT

    Google Scholar 

  86. Katina PF, Keating CB, Jaradat RM (2014) System requirements engineering in complex situations. Requirements Eng 19(1):45–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Katina PF (2016) Metasystem pathologies (M-Path) method: phases and procedures. J Manag Dev 35(10):1287–1301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Mobus GE, Kalton MC (2015) Principles of systems science. Springer, New York, NY

    Book  Google Scholar 

  89. Wiener N (1948) Cybernetics: or control and communication in the animal and the machine. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  90. Beer S (1979) The heart of the enterprise. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  91. Beer S (1984) The viable system model: its provenance, development, methodology and pathology. J Oper Res Soc 35(1):7–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Beer S (1985) Diagnosing the system for organizations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  93. Espejo R, Harnden R (eds) (1989) The viable systems model: interpretations and applications of Stafford Beers’ VSM. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  94. Keating CB, Morin M (2001) An approach for systems analysis of patient care operations. J Nurs Adm 31(7–8):355–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Keating CB, Bradley JM (2015) Complex system governance reference model. Int J Sys Sys Eng 6(1–2):33–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Carter B (2015) A metasystem perspective and implications for governance. Int J Sys Sys Eng 6(1/2):90–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Djavanshir GR, Khorramshahgol R, Novitzki J (2009) Critical characteristics of metasystems: toward defining metasystems’ governance mechanism. IT Prof 11(3):46–49. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITP.2009.45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Palmer KD (2000) Meta-systems engineering. In: Proceedings of the tenth annual international symposium of the international council on systems engineering. INCOSE, Las Vegas. Retrieved from http://www.archonic.net/MSE04.PDF

  99. Mason RO, Mitroff II (1981) Challenging strategic planning assumptions: theory, cases, and techniques. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  100. Schneider V, Kenis P (1996) Verteilte kontrolle: institutionelle steuerung in modernen gesellschaften. In: Kenis P, Schneider V (eds) Organisation und netzwerk: institutionelle steuerung in wirtschaft und politik (pp. 9–43). Frankfurt: Germany: Frankfurt/Main

    Google Scholar 

  101. Schneider V, Bauer JM (2007) Governance: prospects of complexity theory in revisiting systems theory. In: Annual meeting of the midwest political science association, pp 1–36, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from https://www.msu.edu/~bauerj/complexity/schneider.pdf

  102. Katina PF, Bradley JM (2016) Towards a systems theory-based curriculum for complex systems governance. ASEE Conferences, New Orleans, LA. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.27069

  103. Bradley JM, Katina PF, Keating CB (2016) Complex system governance for acquisition. In: Green J, Snider K (eds) Proceedings of the thirteenth annual acquisition research symposium, pp 196–214. NPS, Monterey, California

    Google Scholar 

  104. Keating CB, Bradley JM, Katina PF, Jaradat RM (2017) A systems theoretic-based framework to discover pathologies in Acquisition System Governance. In: Proceedings of the fourteenth annual acquisition research symposium, pp 352–376, Monterey, California: NPS

    Google Scholar 

  105. Pyne JC, Keating CB, Katina PF (2016) Enhancing utility manager’s capability for dealing with complex issues. Proc Water Environ Fed 2016(8):4207–4232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Davidz HL (2017) Systems engineering pathology: leveraging science to characterize dysfunction. In: Annual INOSE international workshop, INCOSE, Los Angeles. Retrieved from www.incose.org/IW2017

  107. Katina PF (2016) Systems theory as a foundation for discovery of pathologies for complex system problem formulation. In: Masys AJ (ed) Applications of systems thinking and soft operations research in managing complexity. Springer, Geneva, Switzerland, pp 227–267

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  108. Keating CB, Katina PF (2012) Prevalence of pathologies in systems of systems. Int J Sys Sys Eng 3(3/4):243–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Troncale L (2013) Systems processes and pathologies: creating an integrated framework for systems science. INCOSE Int Symposium 23(1):1330–1353. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2013.tb03091.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Fiol CM, Lyles MA (1985) Organizational learning. Acad Manag Rev 10(4):803–813. https://doi.org/10.2307/258048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Ansell C, Gash A (2008) Collaborative governance in theory and practice. J Public Adm Res Theor 18(4):543–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Dunsire A (1990) Holistic governance. Public Policy Adm 5(1):4–19

    Google Scholar 

  113. Kooiman J (2003) Governing as governance. SAGE Publications Ltd, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  114. Willke H (2007) Smart governance: governing the global knowledge society. Campus Verlag GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  115. The World Bank (2017) World development report 2017: governance and the law (No. 112303). The World Bank, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/book/10.1596/978-1-4648-0950-7

  116. Jessop B (2003) Governance and metagovernance: on reflexivity, requisite variety, and requisite irony. In: Bang HP (ed) Governance, as social and political communication. Manchester University Press, Manchester, England, pp 142–172

    Google Scholar 

  117. Rhodes RAW (2007) Understanding governance: ten years on. Organ Stud 28(8):1243–1264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607076586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Brennan NM, Solomon J (2008) Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview. Acc, Auditing Accountability J 21(7):885–906. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570810907401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Lynn L, Heinrich C, Hill C (2000) Studying governance and public management: challenges and prospects. J Public Adm Res Theor 10(2):233–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Bovaird T (2005) Public governance: balancing stakeholder power in a network society. Int Rev Admin Sci 71(2):217–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Keohane R, Nye J (eds) (2000) Governance in a globalizing world. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  122. Keohane R, Nye J (1989) Power and interdependence. Harper Collins, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  123. Krahmann E (2003) Conceptualizing security governance. Cooperation Conflict 38(1):5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836703038001001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Kooiman J (2000) Societal governance: levels, models and orders of social-political interaction. In: Pierre J (ed) Debating governance: authority, steering and democracy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp 138–166

    Google Scholar 

  125. Biermann F, Betsill MM, Gupta J, Kanie N, Lebel L, Liverman D et al (2009) Earth system governance: people, places and the planet. Science and implementation plan of the earth system governance project (No. Earth System Governance Report 1, IHDP Report 20). The Earth System Governance Project, Bonn, IHDP

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Centers for System of Systems Engineering, Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

    Polinpapilinho F. Katina & Charles B. Keating

  2. Division of Natural Sciences and Engineering, University of South Carolina – Upstate, Spartanburg, SC, USA

    Polinpapilinho F. Katina

Authors
  1. Polinpapilinho F. Katina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Charles B. Keating
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Polinpapilinho F. Katina .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Global Disaster Management, Humanitarian Assistance and Homeland Security, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA

    Anthony J. Masys

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Katina, P.F., Keating, C.B. (2018). Cyber-Physical Systems Governance: A Framework for (Meta)CyberSecurity Design. In: Masys, A. (eds) Security by Design. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78021-4_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78021-4_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78020-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78021-4

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation