Analysis and optimization of global terrorism index indicators

Author:

Evdokimov V. I.1ORCID,Chernov K. A.2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Nikiforov Russian Center of Emergency and Radiation Medicine, EMERCOM of Russia

2. The Civil Defence Academy of EMERCOM of Russia

Abstract

Relevance. Terrorism has a significantly disrupts life of the population across regions (countries). In recent years, armed conflicts have increased in number, and global terrorist activity has intensified.The objective is to analyze the Global Terrorism Index (GTI) reported across countries from 2010 to 2022 and suggest GTI optimization techniques based on risk metrics and risk indicators.Methods. The GTI is a comprehensive method to study the impact of terrorism in 163 countries, comprising 99.7 % of the world’s population. Data was obtained from annual 2011 to 2023 GTI reports, published by the Institute for Economics & Peace and its founder Steve Killelea, a technology entrepreneur. Quasi-logarithmic structures were used to normalize the baseline data to a 10-point GTI scale (where 10 is the maximum score). The risk of death (injury) among the world’s population was calculated based on the Global Terrorism Database indicators for terrorism biomedical consequences registered from 2011 to 2020. Risks were calculated per 1 million people (10–6). Among the world’s population, the individual risk of death from a terrorist attack was 2.55 • 10–6 deaths/(person • year), while the injury risk was 3.63 • 10–6 injuries/(person • year). Qualitative risk indicators were also calculated as optimal, acceptable, and elevated.Results and analysis. From 2010 to 2022, the annual average GTI indicator showed that 4 countries had a very high terrorism level (average index in Iraq – 9.32, Afghanistan – 9.03, Pakistan – 8.42, Nigeria – 8.11); 8 countries were classified as high risk, 30 countries – as average risk (including Russia – 5.57), 25 countries – as low risk, 84 countries – as very low risk, and 12 countries – as zero cases of terrorism. The GTI correlated well with the number of deaths as a most crucial indicator. At the same time, countries with a large population showed inconsistencies between GTI and terrorism risk indicators. For example, according to 2011–2020 data, China’s GTI level (5.09) was classified as average level of terrorism, with the risk of dying 0.11 • 10–6 deaths/(person • year) and the risk of injury 0.56 • 10–6 injuries/(person • year), which was 15.5 and 4.3 times below the optimal global risk, respectively. Notably, Afghanistan’s GTI level (9.15) was classified as very high risk, with the death risk 93.53 • 10–6 deaths/(person • year) and injury risk 128.49 • 10–6 injuries/(person •year), which was 27.5 and 26.6 times above the elevated global risk, respectively.Conclusion. Although apparently impossible to eradicate completely across the world, terrorism can be drawn to a minimum. The Global Terrorism Index reveals potential threats and allows to compare terrorist activity across individual territories (countries) in order to undertake the necessary political or organizational counter-terrorism measures. Following large-scale studies, risks of death and injury should be incorporated in the Global Terrorism Index enhance unbiased terrorism threat assessment for individual countries (territories).

Publisher

NRCERM EMERCOM of Russia

Reference15 articles.

1. Evdokimov V.I., Bobrinev E.V., Kondashov A.A. Analiz proizvodstvennogo travmatizma i gibeli lichnogo sostava Federal’noj protivopozharnoj sluzhby MChS Rossii (2006–2020 gg.) [Analysis of occupational injury and deaths of personnel of the Federal Fireprotection Service of the EMERCOM of Russia (2006–2020)]. St. Petersburg. 2022. 138 p. (In Russ.)

2. Evdokimov V.I., Shulenin N.S. Terrorizm i ego mediko-biologicheskie posledstvija v mire (2011–2020 gg.) [Terrorism and its global biomedical consequences (2011 to 2020)]. Mediko-biologicheskie i social’no-psihologicheskie problemy bezopasnosti v chrezvychajnyh situacijah [Medicо-Biological and Socio-Psychological Problems of Safety in Emergency Situations]. 2024; (1):14–33. DOI: 10.25016/2541-7487-2024-0-1-14-33. (In Russ.)

3. Rjazanov D.S., Ohrimenko A.V. Ispol’zovanie jelektronnyh baz dannyh v issledovanii terrorizma [Use of electronic data bases in investigation of terrorism]. Istoricheskie, filosofskie, politicheskie i juridicheskie nauki, kul’turologija i iskusstvovedenie. Voprosy teorii i praktiki [Historical, philosophical, political and law sciences, culturology and study of art. Issues of theory and practice]. 2015; (11-2):172–176. (In Russ.)

4. Holmatova K.K., Grjibovski A.M. Panel’nye issledovanija i issledovanija trenda v medicine i obshhestvennom zdravoohranenii [Panel- and trend studies in medicine and public health]. Jekologija cheloveka [Human ecology]. 2016; (10):57–63. DOI: 10.33396/1728-0869-2016-9-57-64. (In Russ.)

5. Acosta B., Ramos K. Introducing the 1993 Terrorism and Political Violence Dataset. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism. 2016. 04 June. 16 p. doi: 10.1080/1057610X. 2016.1184061.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3