Volume 17, Issue 1

Participatory System Dynamics modeling is presented as a methodology to engage stakeholders in collaborative decision making in scenarios involving humanitarian logistics. Using the System Dynamics (SD) model, we simulated different scenarios, the results of which yielded factors that influence performance of humanitarian logistics. Once these were identified and discussed, different options on performance improvement were tested. This approach showed that the SD model can facilitate system thinking for stakeholders and form shared mental models critical to reaching consensus-based decisions in humanitarian logistics situations.

Hurricanes are one of the most dangerous catastrophes faced by the USA. The associated life losses can be reduced by proper planning and estimation of evacuation demand by emergency planners. Traditional evacuation demand estimation involves a sequential process of estimating various decisions such as whether to evacuate or stay, evacuation destination, and accommodation type. The understanding of this sequence is not complete nor restricted to strict sequential ordering. For instance, it is not clear whether the evacuation destination decision is made before the accommodation type decision, or the accommodation type decision is made first or both are simultaneously made. In this paper, we develop a nested logit model to predict the relative ordering of evacuation destination and accommodation type that considers both sequential and simultaneous decision making. Household survey data from Hurricane Matthew is used for computing empirical results. Empirical results underscore the importance of developing a nested structure among various outcomes. In addition to variables related to risk perception and household characteristics, it is found that social networks also affect this decision-making process.

We discuss a Red Team-Blue Team (RT-BT) study conducted to examine the formation and efficacy of social networks in self-organizing, ad hoc , or crowd-sourced intelligence and counter-intelligence operations in grassroots, improvised communities. Student volunteers were sorted into two teams: one team (Blue) was asked to find puzzle pieces using clues provided by the organizers, with the goal of reconstructing a message contained therein, while the opposing team (Red) was tasked with disrupting this process. While the Blue Team quickly organized into an efficient, centrally-governed structure, the Red Team instead adopted a decentralized, distributed operational network to hinder puzzle completion, using creative and diverse infiltration and disruption methods to interfere in the more centralized, hierarchical organization of their opponents. This exercise shows how untrained, unaffiliated individuals may self-organize into different types of social organizations to accomplish common tasks when aware of potential adversarial organizations, and how these choices may affect their efficacy in accomplishing collaborative clandestine goals.

Our study examines respondents’ perceptions of terrorism and counterterrorism in the USA during the 2016 presidential campaign. It does so by conducting an experiment where a group of respondents were randomly assigned to a vivid example of a terrorist attack and another group did not receive this treatment. The study’s results find opposing individual perceptions of the job government is doing to protect the country from terrorism and on differences among respondents as to the root causes of terrorism. Our research points to one explanation of this difference: Americans feel there is little they can do about terrorism and though the government is working to protect the nation, the public feels the government cannot stop, only prevent, terrorist acts from occurring. This causes the public to shift their perceptions of terrorism away from questions of efficient public policy responses to one of values. The experiment suggests heightened levels of fear among 2016 Trump voters who received the treatment compared to both Republican voters and Clinton supporters, though control and treatment groups also showed variation. Finally, this work highlights a major challenge for counter-terrorism policymakers in dealing with a highly polarized public. Recent electoral campaigns have demonstrated that politicians are actively trying to politicize terrorism. This work provides evidence that these efforts are resonating among the public. The danger of politicizing terrorism is that it blocks efforts to find common ground, between polarized groups in society in keeping the nation safe.