IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diweos/diweos55.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effective Counterterrorism: What Have We Learned so Far?

Author

Listed:
  • Eric van Um
  • Daniela Pisoiu

Abstract

The fight against terrorism, in particular of Islamist nature, has become a focus area of foreign and security policies in Western countries and around the world. This substantial effort is however only to a limited extent matched by adequate evaluations as to its actual success. This paper offers an overview of the counterterrorism effectiveness literature in terms of main areas of interest, conceptualisation and operationalisation difficulties as well as methodological considerations regarding the types of methods used, validity and reliability evaluations. It discusses the different understandings of causality and proposes a working definition of counterterrorism effectiveness. We find that a main focus of the literature lies on the impact component of effectiveness, often in the sense of a reduction of terrorist attacks in general or a reduction of certain methods of terrorism such as suicide attacks. Our model article "What Happened to Suicide Bombings in Israel? Insights from a Terror Stock Model" by Kaplan et al. (2005) illustrates the above-mentioned issues and reflects the mainstream approach in this field. The article uses econometric methods to determine the impact-effectiveness of counter-terrorism and reflects the problematique associated with attempts to infer a causal relationship between counterterrorism policies and the occurrence of terrorism.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric van Um & Daniela Pisoiu, 2011. "Effective Counterterrorism: What Have We Learned so Far?," Economics of Security Working Paper Series 55, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diweos:diweos55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.386651.de/diw_econsec0055.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Asaf Zussman & Noam Zussman, 2006. "Assassinations: Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Israeli Counterterrorism Policy Using Stock Market Data," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, pages 193-206.
    2. Landes, William M, 1978. "An Economic Study of U.S. Aircraft Hijacking, 1961-1976," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 1-31, April.
    3. Carlos Pestana Barros, 2003. "An intervention analysis of terrorism: The spanish eta case," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, pages 401-412.
    4. Konstantinos Drakos & Nicholas Giannakopoulos, 2009. "An econometric analysis of counterterrorism effectiveness: the impact on life and property losses," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 135-151, April.
    5. David A. Jaeger & M. Daniele Paserman, 2007. "The Shape of Things to Come? Assessing the Effectiveness of Suicide Attacks and Targeted Killings," Working Papers 54, Department of Economics, College of William and Mary.
    6. Todd Sandler & Daniel G. Arce & Walter Enders, 2011. "An Evaluation of Interpol's Cooperative-Based Counterterrorism Linkages," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 79-110.
    7. Efraim Benmelech & Claude Berrebi & Esteban Klor, 2010. "Counter-Suicide-Terrorism: Evidence from House Demolitions," NBER Working Papers 16493, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Teun van Dongen, 2009. "Break it Down: An Alternative Approach to Measuring Effectiveness in Counterterrorism," Economics of Security Working Paper Series 23, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Counterterrorism; effectiveness; causality; quantitative and qualitative research methods;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:diw:diweos:diweos55. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    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 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.