SAGE Journal Articles

Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

INTRODUCTION TO THE ARTICLES

The study of homeland security is a challenging field of study that requires experts, students, and members of society to understand the underlying reasons for the creation of homeland security systems, as well as the configuration of these systems.  Those who examine homeland security must necessarily study data and theories grounded from a variety of disciplines, including political science, public administration, and the administration of justice.

Federal, state, and local authorities are perennially challenged by the problem of designing homeland security systems which reflect threats emanating from the current terrorist environment.  These challenges are not new, and have historically posed very serious policy questions for all sectors of society.  Unfortunately, these are challenges that are not easily resolved, and which will continue to be at the center of domestic policy.. The possibility of political violence is an unresolved problem, and exists across the nation.  There are no ideal political, national, or social solutions that guarantee immunity from the possibility of being touched by terrorist violence. 

The purpose of this online resource is to stimulate critical discussion about the attributes of homeland security systems and terrorist environments.  This resource is organized into thematic parts which correspond to the textbook’s chapters.  Articles have been selected from reputable scholarly journals, and additional articles are recommended for further study.

TEN CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

  • Does a central cause exist which explains the creation of homeland security environments?
     
  • Is it possible to accurately predict the likelihood of terrorist violence?
     
  • What are the policy implications of research that indicates an association between homeland security measures and civil liberty challenges?
     
  • Do homeland security measures effectively reduce the incidence of terrorism?
     
  • Are particular levels of authority within the homeland security enterprise more effective in managing terrorist environments?
     
  • Are innovations such as target hardening effective?
     
  • How popular is the current homeland security enterprise?  What explains different public opinions in different regions?
     
  • What are some of the challenges faced by reformers who sincerely seek to reduce the extent of the homeland security enterprise in order to preserve civil liberty?
     
  • How important are international legal institutions and conventions for preventing terrorist violence?
     
  • Has enough research been conducted on the sociological and psychological impact of a pervasive homeland security environment?
     

CHAPTER 11.  Critical Resources: Preparedness and Planning

Berenskoetter evaluates the U.S.-European security relationship by comparing centrally security documents produced by the transatlantic partners.  Bunn and Wier evaluate the important question of the feasibility of nuclear weapon construction by terrorists.  Coaffee, O’Hare, and Hawkesworth discusses urban preparedness and proposes a “spectrum of visible security.”  Charles Curtis addresses the question of whether demand for WMDs can be reduced.    A longitudinal historical dataset on domestic terrorism in Europe is presented and discussed by Jan Oskar Engene.  Iqbal and Zorn examine the political consequences of assassinations of heads of state.  Monahan and Palmer discuss the political and public issues governing data-sharing “fusion centers” established by DHS.  Continuing the thread of discussion on nuclear terrorism, Simon Saradzhyan offers a case study of potential nuclear terrorism in Russia, and in her article Lynne Snowden explores the potentiality that violent extremists will attempt to develop or otherwise obtain nuclear weapons.

Berenskoetter, Felix Sebastian.  “Mapping the Mind Gap: A Comparison of US and European Security Strategies.”  In Security Dialogue, vol. 36, (March 2005).

Engene, Jan Oskar.  “Five Decades of Terrorism in Europe: The TWEED Dataset.”  In Journal of Peace Research, 44:1 (2007).

Bunn, Matthew and Anthony Wier.  “Terrorist Nuclear Weapon Construction: How Difficult?”  In The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 607 (September 2006).

Coaffee, Jon, Paul O’Hare, and Marian Hawkesworth.  “The Visibility of (In)security: The Aesthetics of Planning Urban Defences Against Terrorism.”  In Security Dialogue,  vol. 40 (August/October 2009).

Curtis, Charles B.  “Curbing the Demand for Mass Destruction.”  In The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 607 (September 2006).

Iqbal, Zaryab and Christopher Zorn.  “The Political Consequences of Assassination.” In  Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 52 (June 2008).

Monahan, Torin and Neal A. Palmer.  “The Emerging Politics of DHS Fusion Centers.”  In Security Dialogue, vol. 40 (December 2009).

Saradzhyan, Simon.  “Russia: Grasping the Reality of Nuclear Terror.”  In The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 607 (September 2006).

Snowden, Lynne L.  “How Likely are Terrorists to Use a Nuclear Strategy?”  In American Behavioral Scientist, 46:6 (February 2003).