IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v187y2011i1p5-2210.1007-s10479-010-0793-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Stackelberg game model for resource allocation in cargo container security

Author

Listed:
  • Niyazi Bakır

Abstract

This paper presents a game theoretic model that analyzes resource allocation strategies against an adaptive adversary to secure cargo container transportation. The defender allocates security resources that could interdict an unauthorized weapon insertion inside a container. The attacker observes the defender’s security strategy and chooses a site to insert the weapon. The attacker’s goal is to maximize the probability that the weapon reaches its target. The basic model includes a single container route. The results in the basic model suggest that in equilibrium the defender should maintain an equal level of physical security at each site on the cargo container’s route. Furthermore, the equilibrium levels of resources to interdict the weapon overseas increase as a function of the attacker’s capability to detonate the weapon remotely at a domestic seaport. Investment in domestic seaport security is highly sensitive to the attacker’s remote detonation capability as well. The general model that includes multiple container routes suggests that there is a trade-off between the security of foreign seaports and the physical security of sites including container transfer facilities, container yards, warehouses and truck rest areas. The defender has the flexibility to shift resources between non-intrusive inspections at foreign seaports and physical security of other sites on the container route. The equilibrium is also sensitive to the cost effectiveness of security investments. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Niyazi Bakır, 2011. "A Stackelberg game model for resource allocation in cargo container security," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 5-22, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:187:y:2011:i:1:p:5-22:10.1007/s10479-010-0793-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-010-0793-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-010-0793-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-010-0793-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Niyazi Onur Bakır, 2008. "A Decision Tree Model for Evaluating Countermeasures to Secure Cargo at United States Southwestern Ports of Entry," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 230-248, December.
    2. Vicki Bier & Santiago Oliveros & Larry Samuelson, 2007. "Choosing What to Protect: Strategic Defensive Allocation against an Unknown Attacker," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 9(4), pages 563-587, August.
    3. Vicki M. Bier & Naraphorn Haphuriwat & Jaime Menoyo & Rae Zimmerman & Alison M. Culpen, 2008. "Optimal Resource Allocation for Defense of Targets Based on Differing Measures of Attractiveness," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3), pages 763-770, June.
    4. Golany, Boaz & Kaplan, Edward H. & Marmur, Abraham & Rothblum, Uriel G., 2009. "Nature plays with dice - terrorists do not: Allocating resources to counter strategic versus probabilistic risks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(1), pages 198-208, January.
    5. Jun Zhuang & Vicki M. Bier, 2007. "Balancing Terrorism and Natural Disasters---Defensive Strategy with Endogenous Attacker Effort," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 976-991, October.
    6. Lawrence M. Wein & Alex H. Wilkins & Manas Baveja & Stephen E. Flynn, 2006. "Preventing the Importation of Illicit Nuclear Materials in Shipping Containers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1377-1393, October.
    7. Powell, Robert, 2007. "Defending against Terrorist Attacks with Limited Resources," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(3), pages 527-541, August.
    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. Yael Deutsch & Boaz Golany, 2016. "Multiple agents finitely repeated inspection game with dismissals," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 237(1), pages 7-26, February.
    2. Cameron MacKenzie & Hiba Baroud & Kash Barker, 2016. "Static and dynamic resource allocation models for recovery of interdependent systems: application to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 103-129, January.
    3. Pourakbar, M. & Zuidwijk, R.A., 2018. "The role of customs in securing containerized global supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 331-340.
    4. Perea, Federico & Puerto, Justo, 2013. "Revisiting a game theoretic framework for the robust railway network design against intentional attacks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(2), pages 286-292.
    5. Mohammad Ebrahim Nikoofal & Morteza Pourakbar & Mehmet Gumus, 2023. "Securing containerized supply chain through public and private partnership," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(7), pages 2341-2361, July.
    6. Talarico, Luca & Reniers, Genserik & Sörensen, Kenneth & Springael, Johan, 2015. "MISTRAL: A game-theoretical model to allocate security measures in a multi-modal chemical transportation network with adaptive adversaries," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 105-114.
    7. 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.
    8. Yael Deutsch & Boaz Golany, 2016. "Multiple agents finitely repeated inspection game with dismissals," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 237(1), pages 7-26, February.
    9. Anthony Rossiter & Susan M Hester, 2017. "Designing Biosecurity Inspection Regimes to Account for Stakeholder Incentives: An Inspection Game Approach," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(301), pages 277-301, June.
    10. Cameron A. MacKenzie & Hiba Baroud & Kash Barker, 2016. "Static and dynamic resource allocation models for recovery of interdependent systems: application to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 236(1), pages 103-129, January.
    11. Nagurney, Anna & Shukla, Shivani & Nagurney, Ladimer S. & Saberi, Sara, 2018. "A game theory model for freight service provision security investments for high-value cargo," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 21-28.
    12. Yanling Chang & Alan Erera & Chelsea White, 2015. "A leader–follower partially observed, multiobjective Markov game," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 103-128, December.

    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. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Jun Zhuang, 2012. "Robust Allocation of a Defensive Budget Considering an Attacker's Private Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 930-943, May.
    2. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Mehmet Gümüs, 2015. "On the value of terrorist’s private information in a government’s defensive resource allocation problem," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(6), pages 533-555, June.
    3. Mohammad Ebrahim Nikoofal & Morteza Pourakbar & Mehmet Gumus, 2023. "Securing containerized supply chain through public and private partnership," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(7), pages 2341-2361, July.
    4. Haphuriwat, N. & Bier, V.M., 2011. "Trade-offs between target hardening and overarching protection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 320-328, August.
    5. Mohsen Golalikhani & Jun Zhuang, 2011. "Modeling Arbitrary Layers of Continuous‐Level Defenses in Facing with Strategic Attackers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 533-547, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2018. "Modeling cumulative defensive resource allocation against a strategic attacker in a multi-period multi-target sequential game," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 12-26.
    8. Nikoofal, Mohammad E. & Zhuang, Jun, 2015. "On the value of exposure and secrecy of defense system: First-mover advantage vs. robustness," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 320-330.
    9. Zhang, Jing & Zhuang, Jun, 2019. "Modeling a multi-target attacker-defender game with multiple attack types," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 465-475.
    10. Kjell Hausken & Jun Zhuang, 2011. "Governments' and Terrorists' Defense and Attack in a T -Period Game," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 46-70, March.
    11. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2013. "Hybrid defensive resource allocations in the face of partially strategic attackers in a sequential defender–attacker game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 262-272.
    12. B. Golany & N. Goldberg & U. Rothblum, 2015. "Allocating multiple defensive resources in a zero-sum game setting," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 225(1), pages 91-109, February.
    13. 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.
    14. Edouard Kujawski, 2015. "Accounting for Terrorist Behavior in Allocating Defensive Counterterrorism Resources," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 365-376, July.
    15. 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).
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Abhra Roy & Jomon Paul, 2013. "Terrorism deterrence in a two country framework: strategic interactions between R&D, defense and pre-emption," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 399-432, December.
    19. Sumitra Sri Bhashyam & Gilberto Montibeller, 2016. "In the Opponent's Shoes: Increasing the Behavioral Validity of Attackers’ Judgments in Counterterrorism Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 666-680, April.
    20. Kjell Hausken, 2014. "Choosing what to protect when attacker resources and asset valuations are uncertain," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 24(3), pages 23-44.

    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:spr:annopr:v:187:y:2011:i:1:p:5-22:10.1007/s10479-010-0793-z. 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.springer.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.