| dc.description.abstract |
Both the war and criminal justice models are seen as too crude, particularly in their theory of deterrence, for responding to the problem of global terrorism. An alternative regulatory model is advanced that overlays thepublic health concepts of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention with the ideas of containment (of injustice) and enlargement (of justice). An interconnected web of controls might enable an overdetermined preventionof terrorism that, in spite of its redundancy, might be more cost-effective than the war or criminal justice models because the principle of responsiveness means parsimony in resort to coercive modalities of control2 that are expensive. It is possible to have an evidence-based approach to regulating rare events like 9/11 terrorism by applying the principles ofevidence-based regulation to micro-elements that are constitutive of macrodisasters. Viewed through this lens, support for the war on terrorism is notevidence-based but grounded in other public philosophies like retribution and arm-chair utilitarianism. |
