A risk and cost–benefit analysis of police counter-terrorism operations at Australian airports

Abstract

Recent events have highlighted the vulnerabilities of airports and aircraft to terrorist attack, and has led to an increased police presence at many airports. Airport policing is designed to protect airport terminals and aircraft from terrorist attack. This paper assesses the risks and cost-effectiveness of Australian Federal Police (AFP) airport counter-terrorism (CT) policing at Australian airports. The risk reduction of AFP policing, losses from a successful attack, threat likelihood, and cost of AFP policing are quantified. The benefit-to-cost ratio is then calculated for various threat probabilities. A 'break-even' analysis calculates the minimum threat probability or risk reduction needed for AFP airport CT policing to be cost-effective. Airport CT policing begins to become cost-effective if it reduces risk by approximately 25 percent and if the probability of one attack at any airport in Australia exceeds 5 percent per year. These conditions do not seem prevail, but it does not follow that zero spending on airport CT policing is the preferred policy option. Moreover, the co-benefits of airport CT policing-such as reduction in crime and reassurance to the traveling public-may be considerable, and could dramatically improving the cost-effectiveness of the measure.

Multiagency programs with police as a partner for reducing radicalisation to violence

“…Stewart and Mueller (2013, 2014) undertook a CBA of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) airport counterterrorism policing in 2014 across Australia. These counterterrorism activities include Joint Airport Investigation Teams (comprising the AFP, state/territory police and customs/border force to target serious/organised crime in the aviation network), Joint Airport Intelligence Groups, which exist to provide dedicated intelligence support, police aviation liaison officers, airport police commanders, airport uniformed officers, and counterterrorism and first response teams (Stewart & Mueller, 2013). The study examined the cost‐effectiveness of the $90 million AFP airport counterterrorism policing budget in Australia (cost in 2014) against different probabilities of risk reduction (benefit) relating to a terrorist attack.…”

Responsible policy analysis in aviation security with an evaluation of PreCheck

“…For a full literature review of probabilistic terrorism risk assessment see Stewart and Mueller 2013a). See also Stewart and Mueller 2008, 2013b, 2014a.…”

“…We have also assessed the risks and cost-effectiveness of Australian Federal Police counterterrorism policing at Australian airports (Stewart and Mueller, 2014a). Such policing is costeffective if it reduces risk by approximately 25% and if the probability of an otherwise successful attack at any airport in Australia exceeds 5% per yearda rate that is not being observed.…”

The cost disease blues–do the police suffer from Baumol's cost disease?

“…Digital forensics combined with biometric data will probably change CI as we know it (see Ross et al , 2020). All of these technologies, among many others, can be expected to have positive effects on the productivity of the police (see Thanassoulis, 1995; Carrington et al , 1997; Drake and Simper, 2000, 2005; Agrawall et al , 2003; Gorman and Ruggiero, 2008; Elvik et al , 2009; Asmild et al , 2012; Custers, 2012; Stewart and Mueller, 2014; Lum et al , 2017; Willis and Toronjo, 2019; Ross et al , 2020).…”