U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

The Effectiveness of Counter-Terrorism Strategies: Campbell Systematic Review Summary

NCJ Number
306546
Journal
Campbell Systematic Reviews Volume: 2 Issue: 1 Dated: 16 January 2006 Pages: 1-50
Author(s)
Cynthia Lum; Leslie W. Kennedy; Alison J. Sherley
Date Published
2006
Length
50 pages
Annotation

The authors report on an examination of available research literature that evidence suggests that there is little scientific knowledge about the effectiveness of most counter-terrorism interventions, and additionally, it appears that some interventions either failed or increased the likelihood of terrorism and terrorism-related harms.

Abstract

The objective of this Campbell systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of counter-terrorism strategies from the available social scientific research literature using systematic review methods. From over 20,000 studies that the authors located on terrorism, they found only seven which contained moderately rigorous evaluations of counterterrorism programs. The authors conclude that there is little scientific knowledge about the effectiveness of most counter-terrorism interventions. Further, from the evidence we were able to locate, it appears that some evaluated interventions either didn't work or sometimes increased the likelihood of terrorism and terrorism-related harm. The findings of this review dramatically emphasize the need for government leaders, policy makers, researchers, and funding agencies to include and insist on evaluations of the effectiveness of these programs in their agendas. These agendas would include identifying ways to overcome methodological and data challenges often associated with terrorism research, increasing funding to evaluate existing programs through methodologically rigorous evaluation designs, and paying attention to existing evaluations of programs when implementing them. Further, programs should be assessed to establish if they cause more harm than good or if they create unanticipated consequences. Publisher Abstract Provided