Advertisement

Police Activities to Counter Terrorism: What We Know and What We Need to Know

  • Cynthia Lum
  • Maria (Maki) Haberfeld
  • George Fachner
  • Charles Lieberman
Chapter

Abstract

This study seeks to answer the question “What are police doing to counter terrorism?” We use a multistep process to unearth these global tendencies of police responses. First, we review existing studies which have surveyed police agencies about their counterterrorism activities. To supplement this existing research, we then report preliminary findings from three new studies currently underway by the authors and others. We conclude by providing an agenda for future research and action given this exercise. Specifically, the one major lesson that emerges that influences our agenda is: Despite the proliferation and spending on police counterterrorism efforts, very little is known about the nature and effectiveness of police counterterrorism strategies. Clearly, building the knowledge and a research infrastructure to support such knowledge with regard to police counterterrorism strategies is an essential and currently missing component of this research and action arena.

Keywords

Homeland Security Police Agency Intelligence Gathering Interagency Cooperation Rand Study 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. M.Amir and S. Einstein (eds). 2001. Policing, Security and Democracy: Theory and Practice. Huntsville, TX: Office of International Criminal Justice.Google Scholar
  2. A.G. Arnold, G. R. DiPietro, C.W. Mucha, A.M. Sadwski, C.W. Schaffer, R.S. Sigamoney, C.H. Sinex, and W.F. Smith. 2000. Analysis of Communications Effectiveness for First Responders during TOPOFF 2000. Technical Report. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  3. J-P. Brodeur. 1983. High and low policing: Remarks about the policing of political activities. Social Problems 30(5): 507–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. J. Cauley and E.I. Im. 1988. Intervention policy analysis of skyjackings and other terrorist incidents. The American Economic Review 78(2): 27–31.Google Scholar
  5. P. Chalk and W. Rosenau. 2004. Confronting the Enemy Within: Security, Intelligence, the Police, and Counterterrorism in Four Democracies. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  6. R.V.G. Clarke. 1983. Situational crime prevention: Its theoretical basis and practical scope. In: M. Tonry and N. Morris (eds). Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research (Vol. 4). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. R.V.G. Clarke. 1992. Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies. Albany, NY: Harrow and Heston.Google Scholar
  8. R.V.G. Clarke and D.B. Cornish. 1983. Crime Control in Britain: A Review of Policy Research. Albany, NY: State University of Albany Press.Google Scholar
  9. R.V.G. Clarke and G.R. Newman. 2006. Outsmarting the Terrorists. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  10. Council of State Governments and Eastern Kentucky University. 2006. The Impact of Terrorism on State Law Enforcement: Adjusting to New Roles and Changing Conditions. US: National Institute of Justice. http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/216643.pdf
  11. R.D. Crelinsten. 2007. Counterterrorism as global governance: A research inventory. In: M. Ranstorp (ed). Mapping Terrorism Research: State of the Art, Gaps and Future Direction. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. H.J. Davies and G.R. Murphy. 2004. Protecting Your Community from Terrorism: Strategies for Local Law Enforcement Series (Vol. 2). Working With Diverse Communities. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
  13. L.M. Davis, J.K. Riley, G. Ridgeway, J.E. Pace, S.K. Cotton, P. Steinberg, K. Damphousse, and B.L. Smith. 2004. When Terrorism Hits Home: How Prepared are State and Local Law Enforcement? Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  14. J.F. Donnermeyer. 2002. Local preparedness for terrorism: A view from law enforcement. Police Practice and Research 3(4): 347–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. J.E. Eck. 2002. Preventing crime at places. In: L.W Sherman, D.P. Farrington, B.C. Welsh, and D.L. MacKenzie (eds). Evidence-Based Crime Prevention. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. W. Enders and T. Sandler. 1993. The effectiveness of antiterrorism policies: A vector-autoregression-intervention analysis. The American Political Science Review 87(4): 829–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. W. Enders, T. Sandler, and J. Cauley. 1990. UN conventions, terrorism, and retaliation in the fight against terrorism: An econometric evaluation. Terrorism and Political Violence 2(1): 83.Google Scholar
  18. C.C. Fair. 2005. Urban Battle Fields of South Asia: Lessons Learned From Sri Lanka, India, and Pakistan. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  19. M.R. Haberfeld and L. Gideon. 2008. Policing is hard on democracy or democracy is hard on policing? In: M.R. Haberfeld and I. Cerrah (eds). Comparative Policing: The Struggle for Democratization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. M.R. Haberfeld, J. King, and C.A. Lieberman. (in press, 2009). Counter-terrorism response around the world: a comparative perspective. NIJ Final Report.Google Scholar
  21. Independent Commission on Policing in Northern Ireland. 1999. A New Beginning: Policing in Northern Ireland. The report of the independent commission of policing for Northern Ireland. Norwich, UK: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  22. M. Innes. 2006. Policing uncertainty: Countering terror through community intelligence and democratic policing. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 605(1): 222–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. International Association of Chiefs of Police. 2005. Post 9–11 Policing: The Crime Control – Homeland Security Paradigm. US: US Department of Justice. http://www.theiacp.org/pubinfo/finalpost911policing.pdf.
  24. B. Jongman. 2007. Research desiderata in the field of terrorism. In: M. Ranstorp(ed). Mapping Terrorism Research: State of the Art, Gaps and Future Direction. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. S.A. Loyka, D.A. Faggiani, and C. Karchmer. 2005. Protecting Your Community from Terrorism: Strategies for Local Law Enforcement (Vol. 4): The Production and Sharing of Intelligence. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services and the Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
  26. C. Lum. 2005. Tip Line Technologies: Intelligence Gathering and Analysis Systems. Phase I Final Report and Executive Summary. SPAWAR (Department of the Navy)/National Institute of Justice Grant. http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/211677.pdf.
  27. C Lum. 2007. Preferences of police supervisors from twenty-two democratizing countries: Community-oriented policing or zero tolerance? Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  28. C. Lum, L.W. Kennedy, and A. Sherley. 2006a. The Effectiveness of Counterterrorism Strategies: A Campbell Systematic Review. Campbell Collaboration System Reviews. http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/doc-pdf/Lum_Terrorism_Review.pdf
  29. C. Lum, L.W. Kennedy, and A. Sherley. 2006b. Are counter-terrorism strategies effective? The results of the Campbell systematic review on counter-terrorism evaluation research. Journal of Experimental Criminology 2(4): 489–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. C. Lum and C. Koper. (Forthcoming). Is crime prevention relevant to counter-terrorism? In: B. Forst, J. Greene, and J. Lynch (eds). Security and Justice in the Homeland: Criminologists on Terrorism.Google Scholar
  31. S.D. Mastrofski. 2006. Community policing: A sceptical view. In: Police Innovation: Contrasting Perspectives. In: D. Weisburd and A. Braga (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  32. S.D. Mastrofski and R.R. Ritti. 2000. Making sense of community policing: A theoretical perspective. Police Practice and Research 1: 183–210.Google Scholar
  33. C. McCauley. 2007. War versus justice in response to terrorist attacks: Competing frames and their implications. In: B. Bonger, L.M. Brown, L.E. Beutler, J.N. Brekenridge, and P.C. Zimbardo (eds). Psychology of Terrorism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations. 2004. Policing in the Netherlands. The Hague, Netherlands. http://www.politie.nl/Overige/Images/33_85725.pdf.
  35. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks. 2004. The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. [Authorized Paperback Edition published by W.W. Norton and Company].Google Scholar
  36. National Research Council. 2004. Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence. In: W. Skogan and K. Frydl (eds). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  37. M. Norell. 2005. Swedish National Counter Terrorism Policy after ‘Nine-Eleven’: Problems and Challenges. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish Defence Research Agency (Report No: FOI-R-1618-SE). http://www.foa.se/upload/pdf/foi-norell-r-1618.pdf. Google Scholar
  38. C. Norris and G. Armstrong. 1999. The Maximum Surveillance Society: The Rise of CCTV. Oxford, UK: Berg.Google Scholar
  39. J.K. Riley and B. Hoffman. 1995. Domestic Terrorism: A National Assessment of State and Local Preparedness. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR505.pdf. Google Scholar
  40. L.W. Sherman, D. Gottfredson, D.L. MacKenzie, J.E. Eck, P. Reuter, and S. Bushway. 1997. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising: A Report to the United States Congress. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
  41. L.W. Sherman, D.P. Farrington, B.C. Welsh, and D.L. MacKenzie (eds). 2002. Evidence-Based Crime Prevention. London, UK:Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. A. Spencer. 2006. The Problems of Evaluating Counter-Terrorism. Madrid: University of Madrid (UNISCI), Research Unit on International Security and Cooperation; Discussion Papers, No: 12.Google Scholar
  43. F.S Taxman and T. McEwen. 1997. Using geographical tools with interagency work groups to develop and implement crime control strategies. In: D. Weisburd and T. McEwen (eds). Crime Mapping and Crime Prevention: Crime Prevention Studies (Vol. 8). Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  44. F.S. Taxman, J.M. Byrne, and M.H. Thanner. 2002. Evaluating the Implementation and Impact of a Seamless System of Care for Substance Abusing Offenders: The HIDTA Model. Maryland: University of Maryland Centre for Applied Policy Studies Bureau of Governmental Research.Google Scholar
  45. S. Telhami. 2002. The Stakes: America and the Middle East. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
  46. T.R. Tyler. 1990. Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  47. US Department of Homeland Security. 2003a. Top Officials (TOPOFF) Exercise Series (TOPOFF 2) After Action Summary Report. Washington, DC: US Department of Homeland Security. http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/T2_Report_Final_Public.doc.
  48. US Department of Homeland Security. 2003b. Vulnerability Assessment Methodologies Report. Washington, DC: Office of Domestic Preparedness, Department of Homeland Security. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/vamreport.pdf.
  49. US Department of Homeland Security. 2006. Commercial Equipment Direct Assistance Program Equipment Catalogue (CEDAP Catalogue). Washington, DC: US Department of Homeland Security.Google Scholar
  50. US Department of Homeland Security. 2007. Fiscal Year 2007 Commercial Equipment Direct Assistance Program guidance. Washington, DC: US Department of Homeland Security. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/FY07_CEDAP_GUIDANCE.pdf.
  51. US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. 2006. Fusion Centre Guidelines: Developing and Sharing Information and Intelligence in a New Era. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. http://www.iir.com/global/products/fusion_center_guidelines_law_enforcement.pdf.
  52. US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2006. Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS): 2003 Sample Survey of Law Enforcement Agencies [Computer file, ICPSR04411-v1, Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor]. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  53. US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2004. Report to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States: The FBI’s Counterterrorism Program since September 2001. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. http://www.fbi.gov/publications/commission/9–11commissionrep.pdf
  54. US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General. 2005. The Department of Justice’s Terrorism Task Forces. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/plus/e0507/final.pdf.
  55. US House of Representatives. 2004. Effective Strategies against Terrorism: Hearing before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations of the Committee on Government Reform. 108th Congress, 2nd SessionFebruary 3http://www.mipt.org/pdf/Effective-Strategies-Against-Terrorism.pdf
  56. D. Weisburd and J.E. Eck. 2004. What can police do to reduce crime, disorder, and fear? Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 593: 42–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. D. Weisburd, O. Shalev, and M. Amir. 2002. Community policing in Israel: Resistance and change. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management 25(1): 80–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. D.Weisburd, T. Jonathan, S. Perry. (Forthcoming). The Israeli model for policing terrorism: Goals, strategies and open questions. Criminal Justice and behavior Google Scholar
  59. B.C. Welsh and D.P. Farrington. 2003. Effects of closed-circuit television on crime. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 587: 110–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. C.Whitlock. 2004. French push limits in fight on terrorism: Wide prosecutorial powers draw scant public dissent. The Washington Post, 2 November. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A17082–2004Nov1?language = printer (accessed July 12, 2007)
  61. P. Wilkinson. 2007. Research into terrorism studies: Achievements and failures. In: M. Ranstorp (ed). Mapping Terrorism Research: State of the Art, Gaps and Future Direction. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cynthia Lum
    • 1
  • Maria (Maki) Haberfeld
    • 1
  • George Fachner
    • 1
  • Charles Lieberman
    • 1
  1. 1.Administration of Justice DepartmentCenter for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, George Mason UniversityManassasUSA

Personalised recommendations