Skip to main content

Strategic Deterrence of Terrorist Attacks

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Operations Research Proceedings 2014

Part of the book series: Operations Research Proceedings ((ORP))

  • 1844 Accesses

Abstract

Protection against terrorist threats has become an integral part of organisational and national security strategies. But research on adversarial risks is still dominated by approaches which focus too much on historical frequencies and which do not sufficiently account for the terrorists motives and the strategic component of the interaction. In this paper we model the classical risk analysis approach using a specific variant of adaptive play and compare it with a direct implementation approach. We find that the latter allows for a more purposeful use of security measures as defenders avoid to get caught in a “hare-tortoise-trap”. We specify the conditions under which the direct implementation outperforms adaptive play in the sense that it lowers the cost of defence at a given rate of deterrence. We analyse the robustness of our results and discuss the implications and requirements for practical application.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

References

  1. Anthony Jr. Cox, L.: Game theory and risk analysis. Risk Anal. 29(8), 1062–1068 (2009b)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anthony Jr. Cox, L.: Improving risk-based decision making for terrorism applications. Risk Anal. 29(3), 336–341 (2009a)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown, G.W.: Iterative solution of games by fictious play. In: Koopmans, T.C. (ed.) Activity analysis of production and allocation, pp. 374–376. Wiley, New York (1951)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Crawford, Vincent P.: Learning behavior and mixed-strategy Nash equilibria. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 6(1), 69–78 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Deisler, Paul F.: A perspective: risk analysis as a tool for reducing the risks of terrorism. Risk Anal. 22(3), 405–413 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dillon, Robin L., Liebe, Robert M., Bestafka, Thomas: Risk-based decision making for terrorism applications. Risk Anal. 29(3), 321–335 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Meng, S., Wiens, M., Schultmann, F.: A game theoretic approach to assess adversarial risks. In: Brebbia, C.A. (ed.) Risk Anal. IX. WIT Transactions on Information and Communication Technologies, vol. 47, pp. 141–152. WIT Press, Southampton (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcus Wiens .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wiens, M., Meng, S., Schultmann, F. (2016). Strategic Deterrence of Terrorist Attacks. In: Lübbecke, M., Koster, A., Letmathe, P., Madlener, R., Peis, B., Walther, G. (eds) Operations Research Proceedings 2014. Operations Research Proceedings. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28697-6_86

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics