English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

National security implications (The White House, 2015; CNA, 2014) of global climate change currently radiate throughout the U.S. government. These implications are critically acute for three federal departments most responsible for U.S. national security: the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of State (DoS), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). However, the effect on these federal departments is understudied and poorly specified. This research intends to rectify the dearth of academic studies. Comparative analysis (Collier, 1993) of the institutional cultures and leadership of the DoD, DoS, and DHS was conducted determining how these agencies are responding to multiple vulnerabilities created by climate change (The White House, 2013a). Research revealed significant differences in how the DoD, DoS, and DHS are responding. The analysis discovered the DoD has institutionalized, or “mainstreamed” (Leggett, 2015, p. 16) planning for climate change and planning is driven mainly through hierarchical cultural organizations. The DoD bureaucratic leadership is multi-faceted with some transactional, transformational, and charismatic leadership elements. The DoS has also mainstreamed adaptation planning to a lesser extent and planning is driven primarily by an ad-hoc culture with a top-down/bottom-up, charismatic/transformational leadership emphasis. In contrast, the DHS has been unable to mainstream planning into their organizational culture due to the presence of several internal clans. The DHS bureaucratic leadership is somewhat chaotic with little top-down, transformational, or entrepreneurial direction. Overall, the knowledge gained from this comparative analysis provides valuable insights into how governmental institutions adapt to a multi-faceted national security threat.

Global Climate Change and National Security: Institutional Culture and Leadership Within Three Federal Departments