IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/coecpo/v25y2007i1p14-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Economics Of Homeland Security Expenditures: Foundational Expected Cost‐Effectiveness Approaches

Author

Listed:
  • SCOTT FARROW

Abstract

While most economists expect some marginal conditions to result from basic expected value models involving government expenditures and homeland security investments, such models are not readily found in the literature. The article presents six basic models that all incorporate uncertainty; they also capture various problems involving technological limits, behavioral interactions, false negatives and false positives, and decision making with uncertainty and irreversibility. Recent reviews of homeland security programs by the U.S. Government Accountability Office are used to illustrate the relevance of the models.(JEL H100)

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Farrow, 2007. "The Economics Of Homeland Security Expenditures: Foundational Expected Cost‐Effectiveness Approaches," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(1), pages 14-26, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:coecpo:v:25:y:2007:i:1:p:14-26
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1465-7287.2006.00029.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2006.00029.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1465-7287.2006.00029.x?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. Kunreuther, Howard & Heal, Geoffrey, 2003. "Interdependent Security," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 26(2-3), pages 231-249, March-May.
    2. Graham, Daniel A, 1981. "Cost-Benefit Analysis under Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 715-725, September.
    3. Kenneth J. Arrow & Robert C. Lind, 1974. "Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 3, pages 54-75, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
    5. L. Eeckhoudt & C. Gollier & H. Schlesinger, 2005. "Economic and financial decisions under risk," Post-Print hal-00325882, HAL.
    6. Farrow, Scott & Morel, Benoit, 2001. "Continuation rights, precautionary principle, and global change," Risk, Decision and Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 145-155, December.
    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. Detlof von Winterfeldt & R. Scott Farrow & Richard S. John & Jonathan Eyer & Adam Z. Rose & Heather Rosoff, 2020. "Assessing the Benefits and Costs of Homeland Security Research: A Risk‐Informed Methodology with Applications for the U.S. Coast Guard," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(3), pages 450-475, March.
    2. Scott Farrow & W. Kip Viscusi, 2013. "Towards principles and standards for the benefit–cost analysis of safety," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 5, pages 172-193, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Kevin Boyle & Sapna Kaul & Ali Hashemi & Xiaoshu Li, 2015. "Applicability of benefit transfers for evaluation of homeland security counterterrorism measures," Chapters, in: Carol Mansfield & V. K. Smith (ed.), Benefit–Cost Analyses for Security Policies, chapter 10, pages 225-253, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Chen Wang & Vicki M. Bier, 2016. "Quantifying Adversary Capabilities to Inform Defensive Resource Allocation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 756-775, April.
    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. Anthony M. Barrett, 2010. "Cost Effectiveness of On-Site Chlorine Generation for Chlorine Truck Attack Prevention," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 366-377, December.
    7. Yang Jiao & Zijun Luo, 2019. "A model of terrorism and counterterrorism with location choices," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 301-313, June.
    8. Opher Baron & Oded Berman & Arieh Gavious, 2018. "A Game Between a Terrorist and a Passive Defender," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 27(3), pages 433-457, March.
    9. Timothy Mathews & Anton D. Lowenberg, 2012. "The Interdependence Between Homeland Security Efforts of a State and a Terrorist’s Choice of Attack," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(2), pages 195-218, April.
    10. Farrow Scott & Shapiro Stuart, 2009. "The Benefit-Cost Analysis of Security Focused Regulations," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, April.
    11. 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).
    12. Scott Farrow, 2015. "A comparison of key benefit estimation issues for natural hazards and terrorism: ex ante/ex post valuation and endogenous risk," Chapters, in: Carol Mansfield & V. K. Smith (ed.), Benefit–Cost Analyses for Security Policies, chapter 6, pages 140-154, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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. Riddel, Mary C. & Shaw, W. Douglass, 2006. "A Theoretically-Consistent Empirical Non-Expected Utility Model of Ambiguity: Nuclear Waste Mortality Risk and Yucca Mountain," Pre-Prints 23964, Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    2. Mark D. Agee & Thomas D. Crocker, 2002. "On Techniques to Value the Impact of Environmental Hazards on Children's Health," NCEE Working Paper Series 200208, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Sep 2002.
    3. Scott Farrow & W. Kip Viscusi, 2013. "Towards principles and standards for the benefit–cost analysis of safety," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 5, pages 172-193, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Peiqiu Guan & Jing Zhang & Vineet M. Payyappalli & Jun Zhuang, 2018. "Modeling and Validating Public–Private Partnerships in Disaster Management," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 55-71, June.
    5. John Merrifield, 1997. "Sensitivity Analysis In Benefit Cost Analysis: A Key To Increased Use And Acceptance," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(3), pages 82-92, July.
    6. Anne van Aaken & Janis Antonovics & Susan Rose-Ackerman, 2016. "The Limits of Cost/Benefit Analysis When Disasters Loom," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7, pages 56-66, May.
    7. Scott Farrow, 2015. "A comparison of key benefit estimation issues for natural hazards and terrorism: ex ante/ex post valuation and endogenous risk," Chapters, in: Carol Mansfield & V. K. Smith (ed.), Benefit–Cost Analyses for Security Policies, chapter 6, pages 140-154, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Fisher, Anthony & Hanemann, W., 1986. "Information and the Dynamics of Environmental Protection: The Concept of the Critical Period," CUDARE Working Papers 198351, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    9. Cocioc, Paul, 2017. "On the attitude to risk and the decision-making behavior," MPRA Paper 83609, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2017.
    10. Mary Riddel & W. Shaw, 2006. "A theoretically-consistent empirical model of non-expected utility: An application to nuclear-waste transport," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 131-150, March.
    11. M. Menegatti, 2003. "Public Investment and Different Sources of Uncertainty," Economics Department Working Papers 2003-EP02, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    12. Shaw, W. Douglass & Woodward, Richard T., 2008. "Why environmental and resource economists should care about non-expected utility models," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 66-89, January.
    13. Plisson, Manuel, 2009. "Assurabilité et développement de l'assurance dépendance," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/5064 edited by Lorenzi, Jean-Hervé.
    14. Claxton, Karl, 1999. "The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 341-364, June.
    15. Thomas F. Crossley & Hamish W. Low, 2011. "Is The Elasticity Of Intertemporal Substitution Constant?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 87-105, February.
    16. Eduardo Fernández-Arias & Ricardo Hausmann & Ugo Panizza, 2020. "Smart Development Banks," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 395-420, June.
    17. Dionne, G. & Doherty, N., 1991. "Adverse Selection In Insurance Markets: A Selective Survey," Cahiers de recherche 9105, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    18. Gordon Cordina, 2004. "Economic Vulnerability And Economic Growth: Some Results From A Neo-Classical Growth Modelling Approach," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 29(2), pages 21-39, December.
    19. 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.
    20. Aase, Knut K., 2023. "Optimal spending of a wealth fund in the discrete time life cycle model," Discussion Papers 2023/7, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.

    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:bla:coecpo:v:25:y:2007:i:1:p:14-26. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    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.