Guide

Identify vulnerable targets

The anticipated identification of potential targets of organized crime actions or terrorist attacks remains a central objective of prevention within the analysis framework of the Cube. In order to prioritize specific settings based on risk assessment (i.e., expected loss + vulnerability), Clarke and Newman established a set of factors that assist in evaluating the vulnerability of such locations[1]. These factors are:

Exposed, refers to the ability of the location to attract attention and be visible to surrounding areas or to stand out in any manner. Targets that “stick out” are more vulnerable than locations that are hidden among other buildings or structures.

Vital, targets are those that play a crucial role in the daily behaviors of a community. Locations that are highly Vital include water and food supply sources, electricity grids, and transportation systems. The inability of any of these locations to operate properly greatly inhibits the functionality of the community. These targets attract the attention of terrorists due to their ability to cause mayhem when inoperative.

Iconic, Iconic refers to the symbolic value of the specific location. Symbols that represent the nation’s power and unity are attractive to terrorists who seek to figuratively impair the strength of the country. Examples of Iconic locations include the Statue of Liberty or the White House.

Legitimate, targets include those that will bring about a positive reaction from the supporters of the terrorist or the terrorist organization. Consistent with the idea that terrorists are rational beings, they seek to maximize positive reinforcements and avoid condemnation, or negative consequences. Therefore, terrorists seek targets that will be viewed as Legitimate, which typically include locations housing military and government officials. Illegitimate targets would be considered locations housing children or defenseless persons.

Destructible refers to the ability to destroy the target/location or kill a targeted person. Although all targets are destructible in some way, some locations are more durable than others, and some persons are more heavily protected than others. Thus, the Destructible element refers to “the amount and accessibility of weapons required to destroy a target” (Boba, 2009, p.14). Targets that would require a large amount of weapons that are not easily accessible could be less attractive to terrorists than a target that could be destroyed with easily obtainable, conventional weapons.

Occupied targets include those that house a large amount of people. Terrorists characteristically seek to harm as many people as possible in order to strengthen their purpose (increase fear, increase legitimacy, etc.). Locations with high population densities provide the greatest opportunities for terrorists to exert great harm and establish fear among the targeted community. The Occupied element is dependent on timing as some locations may be heavily occupied only during certain times of the day or certain periods in the year. For example, a sporting arena houses tens of thousands of people in a compact location, but only during a sporting event. The locations with greater occupancies will be more vulnerable than those with fewer.

Near refers to the distance from which the location is to the terrorist’s home or the terrorist organization’s abode. Crime pattern theory and criminological studies have emphasized that offenders prefer targets that are closer to home and rarely travel large distances to commit crimes. This theory holds true for terrorism in that terrorists prefer opportunities in locations that they are familiar with and require less travel. Targets that are near home are not only easier to attack, but also easier to escape from. Clarke and Newman suggest that this element holds the greatest relevance in domestic terrorism when the jurisdiction is larger. In foreign terrorism, all terrorists are relatively distant.

Easy targets include those that are weakly protected or are accessible to the public. It refers to the effort required to obtain access to the locations based on the provided security measures. For example, it was easy for the recent domestic terrorists to place the pressure-cooker bomb in a duffle bag and leave it on a busy public street during the 2013 Boston Marathon. It would be much more difficult to gain access to a federal building to do the same. The lack of security measures and accessibility reduces the required effort and increases the ease targeting a specific location.

[1] The following description is taken from Stacy Paton, EVIL DONE Vulnerability Assessment: Examining Terrorist Targets, Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The College for Design and Social Inquiry in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for he Degree of Master of Science, Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida, December 2013, pg. 27-31