Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
In This Section

Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management

Editor-in-Chief: Renda-Tanali, Irmak, D.Sc.

Managing Editor: McGee, Sibel, Ph.D.

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 0.466
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.760

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.272
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.640
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 0.493

Online
ISSN
1547-7355
See all formats and pricing
In This Section

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Advanced Imaging Technology Full Body Scanners for Airline Passenger Security Screening

Mark G Stewart
  • The University of Newcastle, Australia
/ John Mueller
  • Ohio State University
Published Online: 2011-06-16 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1837

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has been deploying Advanced Imaging Technologies (AITs) that are full-body scanners to inspect a passenger’s body for concealed weapons, explosives, and other prohibited items. The terrorist threat that AITs are primarily dedicated to is preventing the downing of a commercial airliner by an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) smuggled on board by a passenger. The cost of this technology will reach $1.2 billion per year by 2014. The paper develops a preliminary cost-benefit analysis of AITs for passenger screening at U.S. airports. The analysis considered threat probability, risk reduction, losses, and costs of security measures in the estimation of costs and benefits. Since there is uncertainty and variability of these parameters, three alternate probability (uncertainty) models were used to characterise risk reduction and losses. Economic losses were assumed to vary from $2-$50 billion, and risk reduction from 5-10 percent. Monte-Carlo simulation methods were used to propagate these uncertainties in the calculation of benefits, and the minimum attack probability necessary for full body scanners to be cost-effective were calculated. It was found that, based on mean results, more than one attack every two years would need to originate from U.S. airports for AITs to pass a cost-benefit analysis. However, the attack probability needs to exceed 160-330 percent per year to be 90 percent certain that full body scanners are cost-effective.

Keywords: terrorism; security; cost-benefit analysis; aviation security; passenger screening

About the article

Published Online: 2011-06-16



Citation Information: Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, ISSN (Online) 1547-7355, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1837. Export Citation

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Janne Merete Hagen, Anne Kari Valdal, Kenneth Pettersen, and Brita Gjerstad
Journal of Risk Research, 2014, Page 1
[2]
Mark Stewart and John Mueller
International Journal of Protective Structures, 2014, Volume 5, Number 3, Page 275
[3]
Mark G. Stewart and John Mueller
Journal of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism, 2014, Volume 9, Number 2, Page 98
[4]
Mark G. Stewart and John Mueller
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2013, Volume 32, Number 3, Page 615
[5]
Mark G. Stewart and John Mueller
Risk Analysis, 2013, Volume 33, Number 5, Page 893

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in