IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v31y2011i9p1470-1487.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland Security Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Ralph L. Keeney
  • Detlof von Winterfeldt

Abstract

One of the most challenging tasks of homeland security policymakers is to allocate their limited resources to reduce terrorism risks cost effectively. To accomplish this task, it is useful to develop a comprehensive set of homeland security objectives, metrics to measure each objective, a utility function, and value tradeoffs relevant for making homeland security investments. Together, these elements form a homeland security value model. This article develops a homeland security value model based on literature reviews, a survey, and experience with building value models. The purposes of the article are to motivate the use of a value model for homeland security decision making and to illustrate its use to assess terrorism risks, assess the benefits of countermeasures, and develop a severity index for terrorism attacks.

Suggested Citation

  • Ralph L. Keeney & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2011. "A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland Security Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(9), pages 1470-1487, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:9:p:1470-1487
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01597.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01597.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01597.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. Peter C. Fishburn, 1965. "Independence in Utility Theory with Whole Product Sets," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 28-45, February.
    2. Detlof Von Winterfeldt & Thomas Eppel & John Adams & Raymond Neutra & Vincent DelPizzo, 2004. "Managing Potential Health Risks from Electric Powerlines: A Decision Analysis Caught in Controversy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1487-1502, December.
    3. Detlof von Winterfeldt & Terrence M. O'Sullivan, 2006. "Should We Protect Commercial Airplanes Against Surface-to-Air Missile Attacks by Terrorists?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 63-75, June.
    4. Cagliuso Sr. Nicholas V, 2005. "The Risks of Terrorism," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-7, June.
    5. Samuel D. Bond & Kurt A. Carlson & Ralph L. Keeney, 2010. "Improving the Generation of Decision Objectives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 238-255, September.
    6. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, September.
    7. Vicki M. Bier & Detlof Von Winterfeldt, 2007. "Meeting the Challenges of Terrorism Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 503-504, June.
    8. Samuel D. Bond & Kurt A. Carlson & Ralph L. Keeney, 2008. "Generating Objectives: Can Decision Makers Articulate What They Want?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(1), pages 56-70, January.
    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. William N. Caballero & Roi Naveiro & David Ríos Insua, 2022. "Modeling Ethical and Operational Preferences in Automated Driving Systems," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 21-43, March.
    2. Sumitra Sri Bhashyam & Gilberto Montibeller, 2016. "In the Opponent's Shoes: Increasing the Behavioral Validity of Attackers’ Judgments in Counterterrorism Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 666-680, April.
    3. Xiaojun (Gene) Shan & Jun Zhuang, 2014. "Modeling Credible Retaliation Threats in Deterring the Smuggling of Nuclear Weapons Using Partial Inspection---A Three-Stage Game," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 43-62, March.
    4. Rivelino R. De Icaza & Gregory S. Parnell & Edward A. Pohl, 2019. "Gulf Coast Port Selection Using Multiple-Objective Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 87-104, June.
    5. Kenneth C. Fletcher & Ali E. Abbas, 2018. "A Value Measure for Public‐Sector Enterprise Risk Management: A TSA Case Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 991-1008, May.
    6. Vineet M. Payyappalli & Jun Zhuang & Victor Richmond R. Jose, 2017. "Deterrence and Risk Preferences in Sequential Attacker–Defender Games with Continuous Efforts," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(11), pages 2229-2245, November.
    7. Valentina Ferretti & Gilberto Montibeller, 2019. "An Integrated Framework for Environmental Multi‐Impact Spatial Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(1), pages 257-273, January.
    8. Olive Emil Wetter & Valentino Wüthrich, 2015. "“What is dear to you?” Survey of beliefs regarding protection of critical infrastructure against terrorism," Defense & Security Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 185-198, September.
    9. William N. Caballero & Ethan Gharst & David Banks & Jeffery D. Weir, 2023. "Multipolar Security Cooperation Planning: A Multiobjective, Adversarial-Risk-Analysis Approach," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 16-39, March.
    10. Aitor Couce-Vieira & David Rios Insua & Alex Kosgodagan, 2020. "Assessing and Forecasting Cybersecurity Impacts," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 356-374, December.
    11. Roponen, Juho & Ríos Insua, David & Salo, Ahti, 2020. "Adversarial risk analysis under partial information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(1), pages 306-316.
    12. 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.
    13. Gilberto Montibeller & L. Alberto Franco & Ashley Carreras, 2020. "A Risk Analysis Framework for Prioritizing and Managing Biosecurity Threats," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(11), pages 2462-2477, November.
    14. Jay Simon & Eva Regnier & Laura Whitney, 2014. "A Value-Focused Approach to Energy Transformation in the United States Department of Defense," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 117-132, June.
    15. González-Ortega, Jorge & Ríos Insua, David & Cano, Javier, 2019. "Adversarial risk analysis for bi-agent influence diagrams: An algorithmic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1085-1096.
    16. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.
    17. 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).
    18. Robin L. Dillon & Genevieve Lester & Richard S. John & Catherine H. Tinsley, 2012. "Differentiating Conflicts in Beliefs Versus Value Tradeoffs in the Domestic Intelligence Policy Debate," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 713-728, April.

    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. Ralph L. Keeney, 2007. "Modeling Values for Anti‐Terrorism Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 585-596, June.
    2. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    3. Marttunen, Mika & Haag, Fridolin & Belton, Valerie & Mustajoki, Jyri & Lienert, Judit, 2019. "Methods to inform the development of concise objectives hierarchies in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 604-620.
    4. Scholten, Lisa & Schuwirth, Nele & Reichert, Peter & Lienert, Judit, 2015. "Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – An application to water supply infrastructure planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 243-260.
    5. Ed Cook & Jason R. W. Merrick, 2023. "Technology Implementation at Capital One," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 178-191, May.
    6. Robin Gregory & Ralph L. Keeney, 2017. "A Practical Approach to Address Uncertainty in Stakeholder Deliberations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 487-501, March.
    7. Cairns, George & Goodwin, Paul & Wright, George, 2016. "A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1050-1062.
    8. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.
    9. 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.
    10. Johannes Siebert & Ralph L. Keeney, 2015. "Creating More and Better Alternatives for Decisions Using Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1144-1158, October.
    11. Beccacece, F. & Borgonovo, E., 2011. "Functional ANOVA, ultramodularity and monotonicity: Applications in multiattribute utility theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(2), pages 326-335, April.
    12. Sumitra Sri Bhashyam & Gilberto Montibeller, 2012. "Modeling State-Dependent Priorities of Malicious Agents," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 172-185, June.
    13. Wolfgang Kürsten, 2002. "„Unternehmensbewertung unter Unsicherheit“, oder: Theoriedefizit einer künstlichen Diskussion über Sicherheitsäquivalent- und Risikozuschlagsmethode," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 128-144, March.
    14. Sumitra Sri Bhashyam & Gilberto Montibeller, 2016. "In the Opponent's Shoes: Increasing the Behavioral Validity of Attackers’ Judgments in Counterterrorism Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 666-680, April.
    15. Haag, Fridolin & Zürcher, Sara & Lienert, Judit, 2019. "Enhancing the elicitation of diverse decision objectives for public planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(3), pages 912-928.
    16. Sara J. M. Abdeen & Florian Methling & Rüdiger Nitzsch, 2024. "Incomplete Objectives in Decision Making: How Omitting Objectives Affects Identifying the Most Promising Alternative," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 1-13, December.
    17. Josef Schosser & Markus Grottke, 2013. "Nutzengestützte Unternehmensbewertung: Ein Abriss der jüngeren Literatur," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 65(4), pages 306-341, June.
    18. Tavana, Madjid & Di Caprio, Debora, 2016. "Modeling synergies in multi-criteria supplier selection and order allocation: An application to commodity tradingAuthor-Name: Sodenkamp, Mariya A," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 859-874.
    19. Peter P. Wakker & Sylvia J. T. Jansen & Anne M. Stiggelbout, 2004. "Anchor Levels as a New Tool for the Theory and Measurement of Multiattribute Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 217-234, December.
    20. Ralph L. Keeney, 2012. "Value-Focused Brainstorming," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 303-313, December.

    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:31:y:2011:i:9:p:1470-1487. 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.