IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v65y2014i7p1108-1119.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subsidizing to disrupt a terrorism supply chain—a four-player game

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaojun Shan

    (University at Buffalo, State University of New York, NY, USA)

  • Jun Zhuang

    (University at Buffalo, State University of New York, NY, USA)

Abstract

Terrorism with weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) is an urgent threat to homeland security. The process of counter-WMD terrorism often involves multiple government and terrorist group players, which is under-studied in the literature. In this paper, first we consider two subgames: a proliferation game between two terrorist groups or cells (where one handling the black market for profits proliferates to the other one to attack, and this is modelled as a terrorism supply chain) and a subsidization game between two governments (where one potential WMD victim government subsidizes the other host government, who can interfere with terrorist activities). Then we integrate these two subgames to study how the victim government can use the strategy of subsidization to induce the host government to disrupt the terrorism supply chain. To our knowledge, this is the first game-theoretic study for modelling and optimally disrupting a terrorism supply chain in a complex four-player scenario. We find that in the integrated game, when proliferation payment is high or low, the practical terrorist group will proliferate and not proliferate, respectively, regardless of government decisions. In contrast, in the subsidization subgame between the two governments, the decision of subsidization depends on its cost. When proliferation payment is medium, the decision of subsidization depends on not only its cost but also the preparation cost and the attacking cost. Findings from our results would assist in government policymaking.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaojun Shan & Jun Zhuang, 2014. "Subsidizing to disrupt a terrorism supply chain—a four-player game," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(7), pages 1108-1119, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:65:y:2014:i:7:p:1108-1119
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jors/journal/v65/n7/pdf/jors201353a.pdf
    File Function: Link to full text PDF
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jors/journal/v65/n7/full/jors201353a.html
    File Function: Link to full text HTML
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. K Hausken & J Zhuang, 2012. "The timing and deterrence of terrorist attacks due to exogenous dynamics," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 63(6), pages 726-735, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lv, Haitao & Yin, Chao & Cui, Zongmin & Zhan, Qin & Zhou, Hongbo, 2015. "Risk assessment of security systems based on entropy theory and the Neyman–Pearson criterion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 68-77.
    2. Li, Yapeng & Qiao, Shun & Deng, Ye & Wu, Jun, 2019. "Stackelberg game in critical infrastructures from a network science perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 521(C), pages 705-714.
    3. Mathews, Timothy & Paul, Jomon A., 2022. "Natural disasters and their impact on cooperation against a common enemy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(3), pages 1417-1428.
    4. Bagchi, Aniruddha & Paul, Jomon A., 2017. "Espionage and the optimal standard of the Customs-Trade Partnership against Terrorism (C-TPAT) program in maritime security," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(1), pages 89-107.
    5. Sushil Gupta & Martin K. Starr & Reza Zanjirani Farahani & Mahsa Mahboob Ghodsi, 2020. "Prevention of Terrorism–An Assessment of Prior POM Work and Future Potentials," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1789-1815, July.
    6. Afshan Naseem & Shoab Ahmed Khan & Asad Waqar Malik, 2017. "A real-time man-in-loop threat evaluation and resource assignment in defense," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(6), pages 725-738, June.
    7. G. Quijano, Eduardo & Ríos Insua, David & Cano, Javier, 2018. "Critical networked infrastructure protection from adversaries," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 27-36.
    8. Bakker, Craig & Webster, Jennifer B. & Nowak, Kathleen E. & Chatterjee, Samrat & Perkins, Casey J. & Brigantic, Robert, 2020. "Multi-Game Modeling for Counter-Smuggling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    9. Han, Lin & Zhao, Xudong & Chen, Zhilong & Wu, Yipeng & Su, Xiaochao & Zhang, Ning, 2021. "Optimal allocation of defensive resources to defend urban power networks against different types of attackers," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Szidarovszky, Ferenc & Luo, Yi, 2014. "Incorporating risk seeking attitude into defense strategy," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 104-109.
    2. Zhiheng Xu & Jun Zhuang, 2019. "A Study on a Sequential One‐Defender‐N‐Attacker Game," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(6), pages 1414-1432, June.
    3. Peiqiu Guan & Jun Zhuang, 2016. "Modeling Resources Allocation in Attacker‐Defender Games with “Warm Up” CSF," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 776-791, April.
    4. Garret Ridinger & Richard S. John & Michael McBride & Nicholas Scurich, 2016. "Attacker Deterrence and Perceived Risk in a Stackelberg Security Game," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1666-1681, August.
    5. Qingqing Zhai & Rui Peng & Jun Zhuang, 2020. "Defender–Attacker Games with Asymmetric Player Utilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 408-420, February.
    6. Hunt, Kyle & Agarwal, Puneet & Zhuang, Jun, 2022. "On the adoption of new technology to enhance counterterrorism measures: An attacker–defender game with risk preferences," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 218(PB).
    7. Starita, Stefano & Scaparra, Maria Paola, 2016. "Optimizing dynamic investment decisions for railway systems protection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 543-557.
    8. Vineet M. Payyappalli & Jun Zhuang & Victor Richmond R. Jose, 2017. "Deterrence and Risk Preferences in Sequential Attacker–Defender Games with Continuous Efforts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(11), pages 2229-2245, November.
    9. Peiqiu Guan & Jun Zhuang, 2015. "Modeling Public–Private Partnerships in Disaster Management via Centralized and Decentralized Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 173-189, December.
    10. Zhang, Jing & Zhuang, Jun & Jose, Victor Richmond R., 2018. "The role of risk preferences in a multi-target defender-attacker resource allocation game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 95-104.
    11. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2013. "Information Security Investment When Hackers Disseminate Knowledge," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 352-368, December.
    12. Afshan Naseem & Yasir Ahmad, 2020. "Critical Success Factors for Neutralization of Airborne Threats," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, September.
    13. Kjell Hausken & Fei He, 2016. "On the Effectiveness of Security Countermeasures for Critical Infrastructures," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 711-726, April.
    14. Dong, Mingxin & Zhang, Zhen & Liu, Yi & Zhao, Dong Feng & Meng, Yifei & Shi, Jihao, 2023. "Playing Bayesian Stackelberg game model for optimizing the vulnerability level of security incident system in petrochemical plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    15. Song, Yu & Chen, Bo & Hou, Na & Yang, Yi, 2022. "Terrorist attacks and oil prices: A time-varying causal relationship analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    16. Bier, Vicki M. & Kosanoglu, Fuat, 2015. "Target-oriented utility theory for modeling the deterrent effects of counterterrorism," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 35-46.
    17. Peng, R. & Zhai, Q.Q. & Levitin, G., 2016. "Defending a single object against an attacker trying to detect a subset of false targets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 137-147.
    18. Kjell Hausken, 2020. "Additive multi-effort contests," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 89(2), pages 203-248, September.
    19. Xiaojun (Gene) Shan & Jun Zhuang, 2014. "Modeling Credible Retaliation Threats in Deterring the Smuggling of Nuclear Weapons Using Partial Inspection---A Three-Stage Game," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 43-62, March.
    20. Zhang, Jing & Wang, Yan & Zhuang, Jun, 2021. "Modeling multi-target defender-attacker games with quantal response attack strategies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:65:y:2014:i:7:p:1108-1119. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.