GIS and Homeland Security Education: Creating a Better Tomorrow in our Classrooms Today

  • David H. McIntyre
  • Andrew G. Klein
Part of the The GeoJournal Library book series (GEJL, volume 94)


The future stacks up to be a very dangerous place. To meet homeland security challenges, integrated solutions that cross discipline boundaries and incorporate new technologies like Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are required. Constructing an integrated homeland security curriculum in our classrooms today can help to shape a safer future. Developing such a curriculum that successfully incorporates the full potential of geospatial solutions including Geographic Information Systems (GIS) requires efforts on the part of GIS experts. These professionals must learn the challenges and the components of the solutions, and find ways to incorporate their expertise into those solutions and then convince experts in other disciplines who remain skeptical of unproven programs and unfamiliar technologies, of the potential benefits of integrating GIS into homeland security education.


CBERNN threats (chemical, biological, explosive, radiological, nuclear and natural) critical infrastructure geographic information systems graduate education national scenarios taxonomy for homeland security 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander, D. (2002). Principles of emergency planning and management. (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  2. Burns, G. (2007). A case study of social vulnerability mapping: Issues of scale and aggregation. M.S. thesis, College Station, TX: Texas A&M University.Google Scholar
  3. Bush, G.W. (2003). National strategy for physical protection of critical infrastructure and key assets [Electronic version]. Retrieved from
  4. Committee on Planning for Catastrophe: A Blueprint for Improving Geospatial Data, Tools, and Infrastructure, National Research Council. (2007). Successful response starts with a map: Improving geospatial support for disaster management [Electronic version]. (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press). Retrieved
  5. Cutter, S., Mitchell, J. & Scott, S. (1997). Handbook for conducting a GIS based hazard assessment at the county level. (South Carolina: Hazards Research Lab, Department of Geography, University of South Carolina).Google Scholar
  6. Cutter, S., Mitchell, J. & Scott, S. (2000). Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: A case study of Georgetown County, South Carolina. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90(4), 713–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Martinez, L. (2000). Global infectious disease surveillance. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 4(4), 222–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mayfield, M. (2007). Interview. Homeland security inside & out 6 June 2007 [Electronic version]. Retrieved from
  9. Meade, C. & Molander, R. (2006). Considering the effects of a catastrophic terrorist attack [Electronic version]. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Center for Terrorism and Risk Management Policy. Retrieved from
  10. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. (2004). Final report of the national commission on terrorist attacks upon the United States (Authorized Edition). (New York: W. W. Norton).Google Scholar
  11. Peters, R. (2002). Beyond terror. (Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books).Google Scholar
  12. Tierney, K., Lindell, M. & R. Perry. (2001). Facing the unexpected: Disaster preparedness and response in the United States. (Washington DC: Joseph Henry Press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • David H. McIntyre
    • 1
  • Andrew G. Klein
    • 1
  1. 1.Texas A&M UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations