Some limitations of "risk = threat x vulnerability x consequence" for risk analysis of terrorist attacks

Risk Analysis

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 1749-1761

  Cox Jr , Louis Anthony ^a  

^a Cox Associates ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Game theory; Hierarchical optimization; RAMCAP; Rational opponent; Terrorism risk assessment; Two level optimization

Indexed keywords

GAME THEORY; OPTIMIZATION; PLANNING; PROBABILITY; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; RISK ANALYSIS; RISK MANAGEMENT; RISK PERCEPTION; RISKS; SAFETY FACTOR;

HIERARCHICAL OPTIMIZATION; RAMCAP; RATIONAL OPPONENT; TERRORISM RISK ASSESSMENT; TWO-LEVEL OPTIMIZATION;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

GAME THEORY; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; INFORMATION PROCESSING; OPTIMIZATION; POLICY MAKING; PRIORITIZATION; PROBABILITY; RATIONALIZATION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SECURITY THREAT; TERRORISM; VULNERABILITY;

RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK REDUCTION; SCORING SYSTEM; TERRORISM;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 55349106566     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01142.x     Document Type: Review

References (14)

1. RAMCAP™ Framework. 2006. Available at : http://www.asme-iti.org/ RAMCAP/RAMCAP_Framework_2.cfm.
2. Golany B, Kaplan EH, Marmur A, Rothblum UG. Nature plays with dice - terrorists do not: Allocating resources to counter strategic vs. probabilistic risk. European Journal of Operational Research, 2009 192 : 198 208.
3. Bier VM, Cox LA Jr., Azaiez MN. Why both game theory and reliability theory are important in defending infrastructure against intelligent attacks. Chapter 1 in Bier VM, Azaiez, MN (eds). Game Theoretic Risk Analysis of Security Threats. New York : Springer 2009.
4. National Research Council (NRC). Committee on Methodological Improvements to the Department of Homeland Security's Biological Agent Risk Analysis, Department of Homeland Security Bioterrorism Risk Assessment: A Call for Change. Washington, DC : National Academies Press, 2008. Available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12206#toc.
5. Indusi JP. Terrorist Protection Planning Using a Relative Risk Reduction Approach. Upton, NY : Brookhaven National Laboratory. BNL-71383-2003-CP 2003. Available at http://www.pubs.bnl.gov/documents/25368.pdf.
6. Bertsimas D, Nino-Mora J. Conservation laws, extended polymatroids and multiarmed bandit problems: Polyhedral approach to indexable systems. Mathematics of Operations Research, 1996 21 (2 257 306.
7. Brown G, Carlyle M, Salmeron J, Wood K. Defending critical infrastructure. Interfaces, 2006 36 (6 530 544.
8. Cox LA Jr. A probabilistic risk assessment program for analyzing security risks. In LA Cox, Jr., Ricci PF (eds). New Risks: Issues and Management (pp. 331 340). New York : Plenum, 1990.
9. Denardo EV, Rothblum UG, Van Der Heyden L. Index policies for stochastic search in a forest with an application to R&D project management. Mathematics of Operations Research, 2004 29 (1 162 181.
10. Sethuraman J, Tsitsikilis JN. Stochastic search in a forest revisited. Mathematics of Operations Research, 2007 32 (3 589 593.
11. Cox LA Jr. What's wrong with risk matrices? Risk Analysis, 2008 28 (2 497 512.
12. Infanger G. Dynamic asset allocation strategies using a stochastic dynamic programming approach. In SA Zenios & WT Ziemba (eds). Handbook of Assets and Liability Management, vol. 1. New York : North Holland, 2006. Chapter 5.
13. von Winterfeldt D, O'Sullivan TM. Should we protect commercial airplanes against surface-to-air missile attacks by terrorists? Decision Analysis, 2006 3 (2 63 75.
14. Rosoff H, von Winterfeldt D. A risk and economic analysis of dirty bomb attacks on the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Risk Analysis, 2007 27 (3 533 546.