Journal of Quantitative Criminology

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 77–101 | Cite as

Patterns of Onset and Decline Among Terrorist Organizations

Original Paper

Abstract

Despite considerable speculation among terrorism researchers regarding the conditions leading to organizational desistance from terrorism, quantitative analysis of terrorism frequently focuses on terrorist attacks as the unit of analysis, resulting in a near complete absence of analyses of terrorist organizations themselves. Moreover, research on organizations that engage in terrorism has generally been limited to case studies of individual organizations. Toward a more general understanding of what conditions predict organizational desistance from terrorism, this study uses newly available data from the Global Terrorism Database to analyze the terrorist activity of 557 organizations that were active for at least 365 days between 1970 and 2008. Much like research on conventional crime, prior research on terrorism has focused almost exclusively on the onset of criminal behavior and has neglected determinants of declining activity. Here I use group-based trajectory models to investigate patterns of decline in organization-level terrorist activity. In particular I examine how patterns of onset relate to patterns of decline among these organizations. I first estimate the trajectory models for the organizations’ frequency of attacks, and then calculate the annual ratio of attacks to attacks-at-peak for each organization in order to isolate patterns of decline, independent of the magnitude of activity. I then repeat the trajectory analysis to determine if the relative shape of the organizational trajectory has significance beyond the overall frequency of attacks. I find that the speed and magnitude of an organization’s emergence are correlated with its longevity such that those organizations characterized by rapid onset are two to three times more likely than those characterized by moderate onset to reach moderate or high levels of attacks per year. Likewise, as the rate and overall volume of attacks at onset increase, so does the likelihood that the group will follow a persistent pattern of decline. I conclude with a discussion of the implications of patterns of decline among terrorist organizations for research and policy.

Keywords

Terrorist organizations Trajectory Desistance Onset 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author is grateful to Erica Chenoweth, Joshua Freilich, Gary LaFree, three anonymous reviewers, and the participants of the 2010 special issue symposium held at John Jay College of Criminal Justice for thoughtful comments on earlier drafts of this article. Support for this research was provided by the Science and Technology Directorate of the US Department of Homeland Security (grant number 2008ST061ST0004) and the National Science Foundation (grant number SES0826886) through the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START).

References

  1. Blomberg SB, Engel RC, Sawyer R (2010) On the duration and sustainability of transnational terrorist organizations. J Conflict Resolut 54:303–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Crenshaw M (1991) How terrorism declines. Terrorism Political Violence 3:69–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cronin AK (2006) How al-Qaida ends: the decline and demise of terrorist groups. Int Secur 1:7–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cronin AK (2009) How terrorism ends: understanding the decline and demise of terrorist Campaigns. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  5. Farrington DP, West DJ (1993) Criminal, penal, and life histories of chronic offenders: risk and protective factors and early identification. Crim Behav Mental Health 3:492–523Google Scholar
  6. Gibbs S (2005) Colombia plans new rebel meeting. BBC News. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk
  7. Horgan J, Bjorgo T (2009) Leaving terrorism behind: individual and collective disengagement. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Jones SG, Libicki MC (2008) How terrorist groups end: lessons for Countering al Qa’ida. RAND, Santa MonicaGoogle Scholar
  9. LaFree G, Dugan L (2007) Introducing the global terrorism database. Terrorism Political Violence 19:181–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. LaFree G, Miller E (2008) Desistance from terrorism: what can we learn from criminology? Dyn Asymmetr Conflict 1:203–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. LaFree G, Yang S, Crenshaw M (2009) Trajectories of terrorism: attack patterns of foreign groups that have targeted the United States, 1970–2004. Criminol Public Policy 8:445–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. LaFree G, Morris NA, Dugan L (2010) Cross-national patterns of terrorism: comparing trajectories for total, attributed, and fatal attacks, 1970–2006. Br J Criminol 50:622–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Laub JH, Sampson RJ (2001) Understanding desistance from crime. Crime Justice 28:1–69Google Scholar
  14. Laub JH, Nagin DS, Sampson RJ (1998) Trajectories of change in criminal offending: good marriages and the desistance process. Am Sociol Rev 63:225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McCauley C (2008) Group desistance from terrorism: a dynamic perspective. Dyn Asymmetr Conflict 1:269–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McCord J, Conway KP (2002) Patterns of juvenile delinquency and co-offending. In: Waring E, Weisburd D (eds) Crime and social organization. Transaction, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
  17. McGloin JM, Piquero AR (2010) On the relationship between co-offending network redundancy and offending versatility. J Res Crime Delinquency 47:63–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Merkl PH (1995) West German left-wing terrorism. In: Crenshaw M (ed) Terrorism in context. The Pennsylvania State University, University ParkGoogle Scholar
  19. Minder R (2011) ETA’s talk of cease-fire is rejected by government; statement doesn’t say arms would be handed over, as Madrid demands. The International Herald Tribune, p 3. Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com
  20. Nagin DS (2005) Group-based modeling of development. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Nagin DS, Land KC (1993) Age, criminal careers, and population heterogeneity: specification and estimation of a nonparametric, mixed Poisson model. Criminology 31:327–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nagin DS, Paternoster R (1991) On the relationship of past to future participation in delinquency. Criminology 29:163–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nagin DS, Farrington DP, Moffitt TE (1995) Life-course trajectories of different types of offenders. Criminology 33:111–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) (2010a) Global Terrorism Database [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd
  25. National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) (2010b) Global Terrorism Database: GTD Variables & Inclusion Criteria. Retrieved from http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd
  26. Oppenheimer A (1987) Contra armies will merge; new coalition is approved. The Miami Herald, p. 23. Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com
  27. Reiss AJ (1988) Co-offending and criminal careers. Crime Justice 10:117–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reiss AJ, Farrington DP (1991) Advancing knowledge about co-offending: results from a prospective longitudinal survey of London males. J Crim Law Criminol 82:360–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ross JI, Gurr TR (1989) Why terrorism subsides: a comparative study of Canada and the United States. Compar Politics 21:405–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Silke A (2003) Retaliating against terrorism. In: Silke A (ed) Terrorists, victims, and society: psychological perspectives on terrorism and its consequences. Wiley, West SussexGoogle Scholar
  31. United States Institute of Peace (USIP) (1999) How terrorism ends (Special report no. 48). United States Institute of Peace, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  32. Weisburd D, Bushway S, Lum C, Yang S (2004) Trajectories of crime at places: a longitudinal study of street segments in the city of Seattle. Criminology 42:283–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wolfgang ME, Figlio RM, Sellin T (1972) Delinquency in a Birth Cohort. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Criminology and Criminal JusticeUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations