IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v39y2019i7p1582-1596.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

AbSRiM: An Agent‐Based Security Risk Management Approach for Airport Operations

Author

Listed:
  • Stef Janssen
  • Alexei Sharpanskykh
  • Richard Curran

Abstract

Security risk management is essential for ensuring effective airport operations. This article introduces AbSRiM, a novel agent‐based modeling and simulation approach to perform security risk management for airport operations that uses formal sociotechnical models that include temporal and spatial aspects. The approach contains four main steps: scope selection, agent‐based model definition, risk assessment, and risk mitigation. The approach is based on traditional security risk management methodologies, but uses agent‐based modeling and Monte Carlo simulation at its core. Agent‐based modeling is used to model threat scenarios, and Monte Carlo simulations are then performed with this model to estimate security risks. The use of the AbSRiM approach is demonstrated with an illustrative case study. This case study includes a threat scenario in which an adversary attacks an airport terminal with an improvised explosive device. The approach provides a promising way to include important elements, such as human aspects and spatiotemporal aspects, in the assessment of risk. More research is still needed to better identify the strengths and weaknesses of the AbSRiM approach in different case studies, but results demonstrate the feasibility of the approach and its potential.

Suggested Citation

  • Stef Janssen & Alexei Sharpanskykh & Richard Curran, 2019. "AbSRiM: An Agent‐Based Security Risk Management Approach for Airport Operations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1582-1596, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:39:y:2019:i:7:p:1582-1596
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.13278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13278
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.13278?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerald G. Brown & Louis Anthony (Tony) Cox, Jr., 2011. "How Probabilistic Risk Assessment Can Mislead Terrorism Risk Analysts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(2), pages 196-204, February.
    2. Guikema, Seth D. & Aven, Terje, 2010. "Assessing risk from intelligent attacks: A perspective on approaches," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(5), pages 478-483.
    3. Knol, Arthur & Sharpanskykh, Alexei & Janssen, Stef, 2019. "Analyzing airport security checkpoint performance using cognitive agent models," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 39-50.
    4. Richard Bookstaber & Mark Paddrik & Brian Tivnan, 2018. "An agent-based model for financial vulnerability," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 13(2), pages 433-466, July.
    5. Robinson Lisa A & Hammitt James K. & Aldy Joseph E. & Krupnick Alan & Baxter Jennifer, 2010. "Valuing the Risk of Death from Terrorist Attacks," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, February.
    6. McKelvey Richard D. & Palfrey Thomas R., 1995. "Quantal Response Equilibria for Normal Form Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 6-38, July.
    7. Christine A. Fossett & Dale Harrison & Harry Weintrob & Saul I. Gass, 1991. "An Assessment Procedure for Simulation Models: A Case Study," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 710-723, October.
    8. Jun Zhuang & Vicki Bier & Seth Guikema, 2016. "Introductions to Adversary Behavior: Validating the Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 650-652, April.
    9. Laobing Zhang & Genserik Reniers, 2016. "A Game‐Theoretical Model to Improve Process Plant Protection from Terrorist Attacks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(12), pages 2285-2297, December.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Brian Heath & Raymond Hill & Frank Ciarallo, 2009. "A Survey of Agent-Based Modeling Practices (January 1998 to July 2008)," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(4), pages 1-9.
    12. Cooke, Roger M. & Goossens, Louis L.H.J., 2008. "TU Delft expert judgment data base," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(5), pages 657-674.
    13. Aven, Terje, 2007. "A unified framework for risk and vulnerability analysis covering both safety and security," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(6), pages 745-754.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dogucan Mazicioglu & Jason R. W. Merrick, 2018. "Behavioral Modeling of Adversaries with Multiple Objectives in Counterterrorism," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 962-977, May.
    2. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    3. Erhao Xie, 2019. "Monetary Payoff and Utility Function in Adaptive Learning Models," Staff Working Papers 19-50, Bank of Canada.
    4. Jonathan E. Alevy & Michael S. Haigh & John List, 2006. "Information Cascades: Evidence from An Experiment with Financial Market Professionals," NBER Working Papers 12767, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Teck-Hua Ho & Juanjuan Zhang, 2008. "Designing Pricing Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Framing of the Fixed Fee Matter?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 686-700, April.
    6. Jonathan E. Alevy & Michael S. Haigh & John A. List, 2007. "Information Cascades: Evidence from a Field Experiment with Financial Market Professionals," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(1), pages 151-180, February.
    7. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    8. Giacomo Rubbini, 2023. "Mechanism Design without Rational Expectations," Papers 2305.07472, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    9. Aguirregabiria, Victor & Xie, Erhao, 2016. "Identification of Biased Beliefs in Games of Incomplete Information Using Experimental Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 11275, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Szech, Nora, 2023. "Designing contests between heterogeneous contestants: An experimental study of tie-breaks and bid-caps in all-pay auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    11. Kim, Duk Gyoo & Lim, Wooyoung, 2024. "Multilateral bargaining over the division of losses," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 59-76.
    12. 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).
    13. Xie, Erhao, 2021. "Empirical properties and identification of adaptive learning models in behavioral game theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 798-821.
    14. Chan, Kenneth S. & Godby, Rob & Mestelman, Stuart & Andrew Muller, R., 2002. "Crowding-out voluntary contributions to public goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 305-317, July.
    15. Nagel, Rosemarie & Bühren, Christoph & Frank, Björn, 2017. "Inspired and inspiring: Hervé Moulin and the discovery of the beauty contest game," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 191-207.
    16. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    17. Charles A. Holt, 2003. "Economic Science: An Experimental Approach for Teaching and Research," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(4), pages 754-771, April.
    18. Noah Lim & Teck-Hua Ho, 2007. "Designing Price Contracts for Boundedly Rational Customers: Does the Number of Blocks Matter?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 312-326, 05-06.
    19. Bnaya Dreyfuss & Ori Heffetz & Matthew Rabin, 2019. "Expectations-Based Loss Aversion May Help Explain Seemingly Dominated Choices in Strategy-Proof Mechanisms," NBER Working Papers 26394, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Kotakorpi, Kaisa & Nurminen, Tuomas & Miettinen, Topi & Metsälampi, Satu, 2024. "Bearing the burden — Implications of tax reporting institutions on evasion and incidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 81-134.

    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:wly:riskan:v:39:y:2019:i:7:p:1582-1596. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.