IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v211y2013i1p399-43210.1007-s10479-013-1431-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Terrorism deterrence in a two country framework: strategic interactions between R&D, defense and pre-emption

Author

Listed:
  • Abhra Roy
  • Jomon Paul

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze the equilibrium responses (in terms of defense, R&D and preemption) to a potential terrorist attack in a two-country framework (Home and Foreign) using a multi-stage game with imperfect information. We highlight three different types of strategic interactions: (a) how the choice of defense, R&D and pre-emption affects the choice of the same in the other country (strategic interdependence across countries); (b) the strategic interaction between the instruments of terrorism deterrence, namely, defense, R&D and pre-emption in a given country and (c) the strategic interaction between the terrorist and the defender. Our main results are as follows: (i) defense effort in Home is a strategic complement to the defense effort in Foreign. (ii) Even without R&D sharing between countries, we find that R&D effort in one country is a strategic substitute to that in the other; (iii) similar results hold for pre-emption because of its public good nature; (iv) for a given country, defense and R&D efforts may be strategic substitutes or complements depending on the magnitude of the ratio of weighted expected damage between Foreign and Home; (v) R&D and pre-emption may be strategic substitutes or complements depending on the magnitude of the elasticity of damage and (vi) an increase in the likelihood of the terrorist being weak reduces defense effort, may increase or decrease R&D depending on the magnitude of elasticity of damage but increases pre-emptive effort in both countries. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:211:y:2013:i:1:p:399-432:10.1007/s10479-013-1431-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-013-1431-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-013-1431-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-013-1431-3?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. 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. Stergios Skaperdas, 1996. "Contest success functions (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(2), pages 283-290.
    3. Sandler, Todd & Enders, Walter, 2004. "An economic perspective on transnational terrorism," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 301-316, June.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Geoffrey Heal & Howard Kunreuther, 2004. "Interdependent Security: A General Model," NBER Working Papers 10706, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Jack Hirshleifer, 2000. "The Macrotechnology of Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 44(6), pages 773-792, December.
    8. Subhayu Bandyopadhyay & Todd Sandler, 2011. "The Interplay Between Preemptive and Defensive Counterterrorism Measures: A Two‐stage Game," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 78(311), pages 546-564, July.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Vicki Bier & Kjell Hausken, 2011. "Endogenizing the sticks and carrots: modeling possible perverse effects of counterterrorism measures," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 39-59, June.
    12. Kjell Hausken & Vicki M. Bier & Jun Zhuang, 2009. "Defending Against Terrorism, Natural Disaster, and All Hazards," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Vicki M. M. Bier & M. Naceur Azaiez (ed.), Game Theoretic Risk Analysis of Security Threats, chapter 4, pages 65-97, Springer.
    13. Todd Sandler & Kevin Siqueira, 2006. "Global terrorism: deterrence versus pre‐emption," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 1370-1387, November.
    14. Avinash Dixit, 2008. "Strategic Behavior in Contests," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 431-438, Springer.
    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. Sushil Gupta & Martin K. Starr & Reza Zanjirani Farahani & Mahsa Mahboob Ghodsi, 2020. "Prevention of Terrorism–An Assessment of Prior POM Work and Future Potentials," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1789-1815, July.
    2. Abd El-Monem A. Megahed, 2019. "The Stackelberg differential game for counter-terrorism," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 207-220, January.

    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. Sushil Gupta & Martin K. Starr & Reza Zanjirani Farahani & Mahsa Mahboob Ghodsi, 2020. "Prevention of Terrorism–An Assessment of Prior POM Work and Future Potentials," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1789-1815, July.
    2. Abdolmajid Yolmeh & Melike Baykal-Gürsoy, 2019. "Two-Stage Invest–Defend Game: Balancing Strategic and Operational Decisions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 46-66, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    5. 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.
    6. Liang, Liang & Chen, Jingxian & Siqueira, Kevin, 2020. "Revenge or continued attack and defense in defender–attacker conflicts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1180-1190.
    7. 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.
    8. Qingqing Zhai & Rui Peng & Jun Zhuang, 2020. "Defender–Attacker Games with Asymmetric Player Utilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(2), pages 408-420, February.
    9. 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).
    10. Xing Gao & Weijun Zhong & Shue Mei, 2013. "Information Security Investment When Hackers Disseminate Knowledge," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 352-368, December.
    11. Di Wu & Xiangbin Yan & Rui Peng & Shaomin Wu, 2020. "Optimal defence-attack strategies between one defender and two attackers," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 71(11), pages 1830-1846, November.
    12. Bandyopadhyay, Subhayu & Sandler, Todd, 2023. "Politically influenced counterterrorism policy and welfare efficiency," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    13. Hausken, Kjell, 2024. "Fifty Years of Operations Research in Defense," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 355-368.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Bandyopadhyay, Subhayu & Sandler, Todd, 2021. "Counterterrorism policy: Spillovers, regime solidity, and corner solutions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 811-827.
    18. Peiqiu Guan & Meilin He & Jun Zhuang & Stephen C. Hora, 2017. "Modeling a Multitarget Attacker–Defender Game with Budget Constraints," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 87-107, June.
    19. Zhiheng Xu & Jun Zhuang, 2019. "A Study on a Sequential One‐Defender‐N‐Attacker Game," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(6), pages 1414-1432, June.
    20. Wu, Di & Xiao, Hui & Peng, Rui, 2018. "Object defense with preventive strike and false targets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 76-80.

    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:spr:annopr:v:211:y:2013:i:1:p:399-432:10.1007/s10479-013-1431-3. 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.