**4.2. Opportunity to crime**

166 Risk Management – Current Issues and Challenges

1. Motivated perpetrator

3. Lack of capable guardian

2. Suitable object

crime [56].

**4. Preventing the threats - solutions** 

**4.1. Interdisciplinary research mixing criminology into logistics** 

and complex economic crimes [55, 56, 57]. The elements are:

These three different elements can be described as:

categorisation of the antagonistic threat is found [3].

and target are normally referred to as a crime opportunity.

According to several authors [50, 51, 52], criminology is interdisciplinary research of the history and future of crimes, and this paper follows this tradition by using theories from criminology to strengthen the field of logistics. This mix of theories also challenges the predominant research approach in logistics related to tangible artefacts [53], and human intervention or influence to a smaller extent [54]. The reason for this approach is that violation of law is considered a human attribute. Criminology distinguishes three elements of a crime that are present in all sorts of crime ranging from occasional violence to advance

*Motivated perpetrator*: The perpetrator is an individual that, based on the outcome of the own decision process, commits a certain action or prepares for a certain action that is prohibited by locality or country of international law. The perpetrator can be modelled with two different categories depending on how decisions are made by each individual, namely rational choice theory (also known as the economical man theory) or determinism [54, 58]. It is commonly agreed that different crimes demand various mixtures of rational choice and determinism from the perpetrator's side, where crimes of passion (sexual crime, etc.) are considered more deterministic than property crimes (economic crime, etc.), which are more rational [59]. Thus, therefore can the general description of human behaviour be described as acting rational on the margin or limited (by circumstance, choice or mixture of both) rational choice [60, 61].

*Object*: The desirable outcomes or objects for the motivated perpetrator differ greatly depending on the motivated perpetrator's decision process. Normally is it suitable to describe the object as the primary or direct reason for the action, but also as secondary or indirect reasons [56]. The primary objects can be shipped products, resources used, infrastructure, or even the media attention an attack will receive (terrorist attacks, action junkies etc.). It is in the relationship between object and motivated perpetrator that the

*Lack of capable guardian*: The preventive measures that can be induced to alter the motivated perpetrator's decision process are called security [62]. If the security measures are considered insufficient by the motivated perpetrator, then there is nothing to prevent the

Most important to remember about the elements of crime is that it is first when all three elements comes together at the same time that a crime is possible. This means that if one of the three elements is missing than is crime impossible. Any combination of lack of security Crime opportunity is a cornerstone of criminal behaviour. There are ten crime opportunity principles as follows [63]:


Some of these principles are self-explanatory and easy to understand. All of them are valid for every type of crime and therefore they are also valid for crimes committed against the transport network. The more interesting examples of these opportunities will be explained and described later in this thesis. The most important thing to remember about crime opportunity is that an opportunity alone does not explain why a crime occurs because a crime needs a motivated perpetrator and opportunity to occur [64]. The theory of crime opportunity also refers to the fourth principle of microeconomics [57] - *people respond to incentives -* and there the degree of necessary opportunity or incentive depends on the individual. The incentives could range from vindication to morality, ethics, altruism, or determinism [3, 64]. Altogether, this leads to that the relationship between threats (motivated perpetrator) and countermeasures (security) linked around a desirable outcome or object, are complex and contextual depended.

#### **4.3. The two different outlooks on mankind in criminology**

It is possible to separate mankind into two different categories, depending on how decisions are made. This separation is a theoretical construction and its validity varies for every person in every situation.

Modern criminology uses rational choice theory as the basis for research. Rational choice theory, also known as rational action theory, is a framework for describing and modeling social and economic behavior. This theory originates in the idea of the economic man in economic research, primarily microeconomics. This theoretical model is also central in modern political science and scientific fields such as sociology and philosophy. Rational choice theory assumes that individuals choose the best action according to the constraints, opportunities, functions, and abilities they face. Today, rational choice theory in microeconomics is defined best with the first four principles of microeconomics [58]. In short, the theory states that every presumed criminal is should be considered a rational person who makes decisions about potential crime from relationships between the benefits of the crime and the troubles and risk it brings. By increasing the perceived trouble and/or risk, it is possible to reduce criminal activity with this perspective [55].

Supply Chain Security – Threats and Solutions 169

authors' [16, 67, 68] request for stronger prosecution of criminals can be seen as a way to understand the surrounding society in general [65]. Compare that to [69] who state that risk management and TQM systems are normally linked to a punishment and reward system for the users. The difference between legal prosecution achieved by a state and a punishment and reward system controlled by a company or similar organization is that legal prosecution

The relationship between security and opportunity is the predominant understanding of security in different contexts. This depends on the premise that security only can deter or repel a motivated perpetrator from committing a crime by limiting the opportunities for a certain crime. The most important thing to remember with crime opportunities is that an opportunity alone does not explain why a crime occurs because a crime needs a motivated perpetrator and opportunity to occur [62]. Opportunity plays a role in causing crime, and these opportunities are highly specific, concentrated in time and place, and depend on everyday movements. These opportunities can be reduced and focused opportunity reduction can produce wider declines in crime. It is the theory behind security. The real problem occurs when an organisation's security capability is lower than the capability of the potential perpetrator. The driving force within each potential perpetrator can be vindication from morality, ethics, altruism, or determinism. Therefore, the relationship between security and opportunity must be understood from the viewpoint that the parties involved (stakeholders, actors, and humans) have different individual incentives to exploit opportunity that security needs to address. Consequently, security cannot be seen as only opportunity limiting but also as incentive limiting, making security a preventive factor on

Crime opportunities depend on routines or predictability within certain boundaries. This is the routine activity perspective in criminology and it argues that normal movement and other routine activities play a significant role in potential crime. The routine activity theory states that potential perpetrators may seek locations where their victims or targets are numerous, available, convenient, and/or vulnerable. [70] uses the illustration of "*how lions look for deer near their watering hole*" to explain the practical relevance of the routine activity perspective. Social disorganization in combination with the routine activity theory can

The security of freight transport was long under-developed, but since terminal security has improved, theft incidents have increased in the links between terminals [71]. This development is also valid from a supply chain perspective; while security in manufacturing facilities normally is focused and well-managed, the rest of the chain is without security [72]. Security during transport is necessary to prevent unwanted negative disruption in the flow of goods. Transport security means the interaction between physical obstructing

involves a weaker relationship between action and consequence for the perpetrator.

**4.5. Perpetrator, opportunity and security** 

both sides of the opportunity (pre- and post-event).

provide a wider and better explanation of property crime.

**4.6. Incident preventing** 

The opposite of rational choice is determinism. The idea is that the course of events depends completely on existing conditions. This approach refuses the idea of free will - everything is predetermined. In reality, every individual is a mixture of their ability to be influenced and the lawful. Among social scientists today, the idea of restricted free will is a common and useful insight. The cause of these restrictions can be found in the individual biological or psychological vulnerability, way of life, upbringing, social group, ethnic background, or society in which the individual lives, and how this affects his or her life with regard to their ethnic background, gender, and social position [55].

These opposing perspectives of the human being as either the master of his own life or as a victim of circumstance can be found in every aspect of criminology. This contrast affects not only how we see the causes of criminal behaviour, but is also important with respect to the social response to criminal behaviour [55]. According to [65], the current approach toward crime, punishment, and pardon is a good way to understand the surrounding society. It is commonly agreed that different crimes demand various mixtures of rational choice and determinism from the perpetrator's side, where crimes of passion (sexual crime, etc.) are considered more deterministic than property crimes (economic crime, etc.), which are more rational. That being said, the big difference appears when discussing the possible punishment for a certain crime. If an individual is responsible for his or her actions (rational choice), then the possible punishment will deter the crime; however, if the individual is a victim of circumstance (determinism), then it is useless to punish the individual. Therefore all crime prevention methods assume that an individual is responsible for his own actions and that he can perceive the consequences of those actions. The big question for the rational choice perspective is how each individual estimates the risk in a rational way. An individual that has received a formal or perceived punishment for an action previously should be less likely to commit that action again. The outcome of a formal punishment on the perception of risk is mixed [66] and each individual should be considered not rational, but to act rationally on the margin [3].

#### **4.4. Criminal prosecution and punishment**

This discussion of the two outlooks on mankind in criminology clearly demonstrates the need to add theories from criminology into logistics. Several logistics authors claim that the weak prosecution of criminals is one reason behind the increasing need for security [16, 67, 68]. In the context of the two outlooks on mankind in criminology, [16, 67, 68], state the threats against logistics activities is simply based on the rational choice theory, while authors in criminology [55, 63, 66, 72, 74] refer to an individual acting rationally on the margin which eliminates the deterring effect of potential punishment that [16, 67, 68] suggest. The deterrent effect that a punishment can have on a perpetrator not to commit a certain crime is very low, due to that the perpetrators do not plan to get captured. Therefore has the risk for detection a bigger deterrent effect that the potential punishment [41]. The authors' [16, 67, 68] request for stronger prosecution of criminals can be seen as a way to understand the surrounding society in general [65]. Compare that to [69] who state that risk management and TQM systems are normally linked to a punishment and reward system for the users. The difference between legal prosecution achieved by a state and a punishment and reward system controlled by a company or similar organization is that legal prosecution involves a weaker relationship between action and consequence for the perpetrator.

### **4.5. Perpetrator, opportunity and security**

168 Risk Management – Current Issues and Challenges

on the margin [3].

ethnic background, gender, and social position [55].

**4.4. Criminal prosecution and punishment** 

of the crime and the troubles and risk it brings. By increasing the perceived trouble and/or

The opposite of rational choice is determinism. The idea is that the course of events depends completely on existing conditions. This approach refuses the idea of free will - everything is predetermined. In reality, every individual is a mixture of their ability to be influenced and the lawful. Among social scientists today, the idea of restricted free will is a common and useful insight. The cause of these restrictions can be found in the individual biological or psychological vulnerability, way of life, upbringing, social group, ethnic background, or society in which the individual lives, and how this affects his or her life with regard to their

These opposing perspectives of the human being as either the master of his own life or as a victim of circumstance can be found in every aspect of criminology. This contrast affects not only how we see the causes of criminal behaviour, but is also important with respect to the social response to criminal behaviour [55]. According to [65], the current approach toward crime, punishment, and pardon is a good way to understand the surrounding society. It is commonly agreed that different crimes demand various mixtures of rational choice and determinism from the perpetrator's side, where crimes of passion (sexual crime, etc.) are considered more deterministic than property crimes (economic crime, etc.), which are more rational. That being said, the big difference appears when discussing the possible punishment for a certain crime. If an individual is responsible for his or her actions (rational choice), then the possible punishment will deter the crime; however, if the individual is a victim of circumstance (determinism), then it is useless to punish the individual. Therefore all crime prevention methods assume that an individual is responsible for his own actions and that he can perceive the consequences of those actions. The big question for the rational choice perspective is how each individual estimates the risk in a rational way. An individual that has received a formal or perceived punishment for an action previously should be less likely to commit that action again. The outcome of a formal punishment on the perception of risk is mixed [66] and each individual should be considered not rational, but to act rationally

This discussion of the two outlooks on mankind in criminology clearly demonstrates the need to add theories from criminology into logistics. Several logistics authors claim that the weak prosecution of criminals is one reason behind the increasing need for security [16, 67, 68]. In the context of the two outlooks on mankind in criminology, [16, 67, 68], state the threats against logistics activities is simply based on the rational choice theory, while authors in criminology [55, 63, 66, 72, 74] refer to an individual acting rationally on the margin which eliminates the deterring effect of potential punishment that [16, 67, 68] suggest. The deterrent effect that a punishment can have on a perpetrator not to commit a certain crime is very low, due to that the perpetrators do not plan to get captured. Therefore has the risk for detection a bigger deterrent effect that the potential punishment [41]. The

risk, it is possible to reduce criminal activity with this perspective [55].

The relationship between security and opportunity is the predominant understanding of security in different contexts. This depends on the premise that security only can deter or repel a motivated perpetrator from committing a crime by limiting the opportunities for a certain crime. The most important thing to remember with crime opportunities is that an opportunity alone does not explain why a crime occurs because a crime needs a motivated perpetrator and opportunity to occur [62]. Opportunity plays a role in causing crime, and these opportunities are highly specific, concentrated in time and place, and depend on everyday movements. These opportunities can be reduced and focused opportunity reduction can produce wider declines in crime. It is the theory behind security. The real problem occurs when an organisation's security capability is lower than the capability of the potential perpetrator. The driving force within each potential perpetrator can be vindication from morality, ethics, altruism, or determinism. Therefore, the relationship between security and opportunity must be understood from the viewpoint that the parties involved (stakeholders, actors, and humans) have different individual incentives to exploit opportunity that security needs to address. Consequently, security cannot be seen as only opportunity limiting but also as incentive limiting, making security a preventive factor on both sides of the opportunity (pre- and post-event).

Crime opportunities depend on routines or predictability within certain boundaries. This is the routine activity perspective in criminology and it argues that normal movement and other routine activities play a significant role in potential crime. The routine activity theory states that potential perpetrators may seek locations where their victims or targets are numerous, available, convenient, and/or vulnerable. [70] uses the illustration of "*how lions look for deer near their watering hole*" to explain the practical relevance of the routine activity perspective. Social disorganization in combination with the routine activity theory can provide a wider and better explanation of property crime.

### **4.6. Incident preventing**

The security of freight transport was long under-developed, but since terminal security has improved, theft incidents have increased in the links between terminals [71]. This development is also valid from a supply chain perspective; while security in manufacturing facilities normally is focused and well-managed, the rest of the chain is without security [72]. Security during transport is necessary to prevent unwanted negative disruption in the flow of goods. Transport security means the interaction between physical obstructing

artifacts (locks, fences, Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) etc.) and the intervention of humans, with the aim of reducing theft, sabotage and other types of illegal activity. The technological development of the range and sophistication of anti-theft devices and aftertheft systems is increasing rapidly [73]. There are different preventive methods that can be used to reduce the risk of a cargo theft incident, but the primary method is to use physical security countermeasures correctly (fences, locks, seals, guards etc). The objectives for these types of countermeasures are to make the theft both harder and riskier to commit. The next important countermeasure is the control and trust of employees in the company. This method targets the internal theft problem and can be subdivided in two parts: present employees' supervision and new employee reference checks [74].

Supply Chain Security – Threats and Solutions 171

have not thanked me for it" [79]. This is a form of ethic relativity. Companies and organizations can affect this ethic relativity by using company rules, signs, and regulations that demonstrate the right moral values. When theft is seen as an additional wage benefit for employees, this preventive action has failed [24]. By appealing to people's morals and making it easy for them to do the right thing, it will be more difficult to make excuses [71].

Some of the criticism against situational crime prevention states that this method leads to property crime receiving more attention than is appropriate. Furthermore, situational crime prevention addresses the symptom and not the cause of the crime. This can lead to an excessive trust in technology [80]. Both of these criticisms are valid for the usage of situational crime prevention to hinder cargo theft. This may explain the over confidence in technology in order to prevent terrorism due to that terrorism is not a property crime and therefore has the use of technology an even lower impact on reducing the threat than for a cargo theft incident. The prevention of incidents are traditionally closely linked to the definition of security as a *show of force* which leads to that security work becomes symbolised with uniformed guards and normal police duties [81]. In order to include impact reduction in the term security is the second definition, *freedom from danger*, better to use. This definition embraces all things that allow the organization to act and carryout the business "free from

danger". This is from this view point the supply chain security shall be understood.

The theory of crime displacement says that crime prevention in one area may have unintentional consequences in other areas or situations. Therefore, crime prevention may not lead to an absolute reduction in crime. The theory of crime displacement is based on rational choice theory, with the following three assumptions about the potential perpetrator

*Crime displacement assumes that crime is inelastic* [82] - This assumption indicates that the demand for crime is unaffected by preventive efforts. This is not true because all crimes are more or less elastic [83]. Professional criminals are more inelastic while opportunistic

*The perpetrator has mobility* [75] - Perpetrators have flexibility relative to time, place, method, and type of crime. In reality, perpetrators are limited in their mobility, adaptability, and

*There exist unlimited numbers of alternative targets* [84] - The perpetrators have unlimited numbers and types of potential targets to choose from. In reality, the number of targets is

The theory of crime displacement states that rational thinking perpetrators with crime mobility will alter their behaviour in response to crime prevention efforts [69]. Crime displacement will only occur when the alternative crime has a similar cost-benefit structure rationalised within the perpetrator's decision process [85]. Based on the ten principles of

flexibility relative to a particular crime, place, time, and method [76].

**4.7. Crime displacement** 

criminals are more elastic [75].

limited in one way or another [76].

and target [69]:

The configuration of transport networks leads to the need for security measures in different forms, depending on the exact function and appearance of each nod and link. All different theft preventive methods used can be explained with the basic theory of situational crime prevention. The aim is to reduce factors specific to different types of crimes, locations and situations. The key issue in situational crime prevention is the recognition that a crime often reflects the risk, effort and the payoff as assessed by the perpetrator [75]. The theory does not state that a perpetrator will commit a crime every time an opportunity occurs. Rather, the potential perpetrator makes a calculated decision about the opportunity to commit a crime [76]. In short, a perpetrator acts according to the rational choice theory, seeking to maximize its utility with regards to a particular time and available resources. Since cargo theft is a property crime, situational crime prevention is a useful method to address this problem. Basically this is achieved by applying the following three prevention principles [77]:

*Increased perceived effort* [78] – Motivation to commit a theft is reduced if the perpetrator believes the crime is too hard to commit. Preventive actions based on this idea can be categorized as physical separation of the potential perpetrator and the object of the theft. This can be accomplished through the use of access control and physical barriers (fences, locks, etc.).

*Increased perceived risks* [70] – If perpetrators think they will get away with a theft, it is more likely they will commit it. By increasing the risk for perpetrators they are less likely to commit a theft. This can be accomplished with surveillance systems, security personnel, and by increasing employee's security awareness.

*Reducing anticipated rewards [70]* – People are more likely to commit a theft if they can benefit from it. By making the target for the theft worthless or reducing its resale value it becomes less attractive for potential perpetrators. This can be accomplished by marking the goods with unique numbers or a product destruction device. Good examples of this principle are the safety cases used in transports of valuables and money and the ink tags used in fashion stores.

[71] added a fourth preventive principle based on rational choice theory:

*Inducing guilt or shame* – A theft is more likely to occur if it can be excused by appeal to reasons such as "the company can afford it" or "I've worked hard for the company but they have not thanked me for it" [79]. This is a form of ethic relativity. Companies and organizations can affect this ethic relativity by using company rules, signs, and regulations that demonstrate the right moral values. When theft is seen as an additional wage benefit for employees, this preventive action has failed [24]. By appealing to people's morals and making it easy for them to do the right thing, it will be more difficult to make excuses [71].

Some of the criticism against situational crime prevention states that this method leads to property crime receiving more attention than is appropriate. Furthermore, situational crime prevention addresses the symptom and not the cause of the crime. This can lead to an excessive trust in technology [80]. Both of these criticisms are valid for the usage of situational crime prevention to hinder cargo theft. This may explain the over confidence in technology in order to prevent terrorism due to that terrorism is not a property crime and therefore has the use of technology an even lower impact on reducing the threat than for a cargo theft incident. The prevention of incidents are traditionally closely linked to the definition of security as a *show of force* which leads to that security work becomes symbolised with uniformed guards and normal police duties [81]. In order to include impact reduction in the term security is the second definition, *freedom from danger*, better to use. This definition embraces all things that allow the organization to act and carryout the business "free from danger". This is from this view point the supply chain security shall be understood.

#### **4.7. Crime displacement**

170 Risk Management – Current Issues and Challenges

locks, etc.).

stores.

by increasing employee's security awareness.

artifacts (locks, fences, Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) etc.) and the intervention of humans, with the aim of reducing theft, sabotage and other types of illegal activity. The technological development of the range and sophistication of anti-theft devices and aftertheft systems is increasing rapidly [73]. There are different preventive methods that can be used to reduce the risk of a cargo theft incident, but the primary method is to use physical security countermeasures correctly (fences, locks, seals, guards etc). The objectives for these types of countermeasures are to make the theft both harder and riskier to commit. The next important countermeasure is the control and trust of employees in the company. This method targets the internal theft problem and can be subdivided in two parts: present

The configuration of transport networks leads to the need for security measures in different forms, depending on the exact function and appearance of each nod and link. All different theft preventive methods used can be explained with the basic theory of situational crime prevention. The aim is to reduce factors specific to different types of crimes, locations and situations. The key issue in situational crime prevention is the recognition that a crime often reflects the risk, effort and the payoff as assessed by the perpetrator [75]. The theory does not state that a perpetrator will commit a crime every time an opportunity occurs. Rather, the potential perpetrator makes a calculated decision about the opportunity to commit a crime [76]. In short, a perpetrator acts according to the rational choice theory, seeking to maximize its utility with regards to a particular time and available resources. Since cargo theft is a property crime, situational crime prevention is a useful method to address this problem.

Basically this is achieved by applying the following three prevention principles [77]:

*Increased perceived effort* [78] – Motivation to commit a theft is reduced if the perpetrator believes the crime is too hard to commit. Preventive actions based on this idea can be categorized as physical separation of the potential perpetrator and the object of the theft. This can be accomplished through the use of access control and physical barriers (fences,

*Increased perceived risks* [70] – If perpetrators think they will get away with a theft, it is more likely they will commit it. By increasing the risk for perpetrators they are less likely to commit a theft. This can be accomplished with surveillance systems, security personnel, and

*Reducing anticipated rewards [70]* – People are more likely to commit a theft if they can benefit from it. By making the target for the theft worthless or reducing its resale value it becomes less attractive for potential perpetrators. This can be accomplished by marking the goods with unique numbers or a product destruction device. Good examples of this principle are the safety cases used in transports of valuables and money and the ink tags used in fashion

*Inducing guilt or shame* – A theft is more likely to occur if it can be excused by appeal to reasons such as "the company can afford it" or "I've worked hard for the company but they

[71] added a fourth preventive principle based on rational choice theory:

employees' supervision and new employee reference checks [74].

The theory of crime displacement says that crime prevention in one area may have unintentional consequences in other areas or situations. Therefore, crime prevention may not lead to an absolute reduction in crime. The theory of crime displacement is based on rational choice theory, with the following three assumptions about the potential perpetrator and target [69]:

*Crime displacement assumes that crime is inelastic* [82] - This assumption indicates that the demand for crime is unaffected by preventive efforts. This is not true because all crimes are more or less elastic [83]. Professional criminals are more inelastic while opportunistic criminals are more elastic [75].

*The perpetrator has mobility* [75] - Perpetrators have flexibility relative to time, place, method, and type of crime. In reality, perpetrators are limited in their mobility, adaptability, and flexibility relative to a particular crime, place, time, and method [76].

*There exist unlimited numbers of alternative targets* [84] - The perpetrators have unlimited numbers and types of potential targets to choose from. In reality, the number of targets is limited in one way or another [76].

The theory of crime displacement states that rational thinking perpetrators with crime mobility will alter their behaviour in response to crime prevention efforts [69]. Crime displacement will only occur when the alternative crime has a similar cost-benefit structure rationalised within the perpetrator's decision process [85]. Based on the ten principles of

theft opportunities presented earlier in this thesis and the configuration of the transport network, it is obvious that all opportunities cannot be eliminated, but they can be reduced by applying substantive preventive countermeasures. The object is to reduce crime opportunities which will lead to a change in potential theft situations. Therefore crime displacement is a valid theory [75].

Supply Chain Security – Threats and Solutions 173

Security for an individual or a group of individuals can, if unrestricted, jeopardise the security of others by threatening them or transferring threats to them. This type of discussion can be found with philosophers such as Hobbes and Mills. Unbounded or unrestricted individual security could threaten the authority of a state. This problem is demonstrated in the current debate about individual and private secure communication encryption, which some states want to make illegal unless they can break them. Taking this into account, a security problem may or may not be a legal problem. As a concept, security involves a protector or guardian and a threat against an asset or object [74]. This threat can be from either side of the law. To obtain the right security, it is vital to answer who is protecting what, from whom, in which situation, to what extent, and to what consequence

Contextual and statistical risk management approaches as crime prevention methods work in different ways and address different types of potential perpetrators. This demonstrates the difference in the philosophical views of contextual and statistical risk management. Statistical risk management needs a fairly predictable world, or at least a larger amount of trustworthy statistics. Since previous events or incidents are the basis of statistical risk management, it cannot deal effectively with a self-inflicted alteration of the threat pattern. Therefore, statistical risk management is effective in crime prevention if the potential perpetrators are limited to unsophisticated and indifferent methods based on opportunistic behaviour [87]. However, as potential perpetrators become more sophisticated and gain more capability, the accuracy of statistical prediction will reduce dramatically. Antagonistic perpetrators study the victim to discover routines and regularities and improve their skills with this knowledge (planning, technologies, and tactics) to maximize their likelihood for success [88]. The prevention of antagonistic threats by following current business trends makes the system even more predictable. Military special forces and similar organizations

The mitigation of antagonistic threats refers to strategies to transfer the economic impact to another organisation/company. The basic idea is that by transferring the risk to someone else through different types of contracts, it reduces personal risk substantially [89, 90]. The contractual agreements are divided into two different categories - insurance policies and non-insurance contractual agreements between two organisations. Good risk transfer

*Transfer of risk by usage of insurance:* The insurance principle prescribes that the insurance company takes over the economic impact if something happens that is covered by the insurance contract. Therefore, the risk of this event needs to be rather easy to identify, classify, and determine for the insurance company to estimate the cost related to the risk and determine the insurance premium. This premium is also accompanied by an insurance excess, giving the potential insurance buyer three components to consider: the terms, premium, and excess of specific insurance. The incentive for each individual

[61]. Security can be seen as contextual risk management [3].

have proven this time after time [75].

**4.9. Transfer of the effect from antagonistic threats** 

strategy is composed normally of both types of risk transfer.

Crime displacement can occur in several ways. [75] uses five types of displacement - crime, target, method, place, and time. [86] add another type of displacement, the perpetrator. The six types of displacement are explained below [65]:


The theory of crime displacement does not explain why perpetrators commit a certain crime or why some crimes are more attractive than others. Furthermore, it does not explain the perpetrator's perceptions and reactions to changes in opportunities [76]. Crime displacement is one probable explanation of why criminal patterns change in a certain system. A practical statement about crime displacement is that *if perpetrators have the ability, mobility, and flexibility to exploit the weakest link in the chain, they will do so*. It is the perpetrator's ability to organize a successful crime and their relationship relative to the actors within the transport network that are the fundamental variables for categorizing perpetrators.

## **4.8. Logistics, risk management and criminology**

The three terms security, risk management, and crime prevention often are considered similar and always work together [61, 74]. This idea suggests that security and risk management are good from an ethics point of view because they reduce crime; therefore, more or better security or risk management will reduce crime. The problem here is that crime is defined by a law according to the principle "no crime without a law" [54], while security or risk management has no philosophical attachment to law. Therefore, people on both sides of the law can have better security or risk management and that security and risk management are not necessary against crime.

Security for an individual or a group of individuals can, if unrestricted, jeopardise the security of others by threatening them or transferring threats to them. This type of discussion can be found with philosophers such as Hobbes and Mills. Unbounded or unrestricted individual security could threaten the authority of a state. This problem is demonstrated in the current debate about individual and private secure communication encryption, which some states want to make illegal unless they can break them. Taking this into account, a security problem may or may not be a legal problem. As a concept, security involves a protector or guardian and a threat against an asset or object [74]. This threat can be from either side of the law. To obtain the right security, it is vital to answer who is protecting what, from whom, in which situation, to what extent, and to what consequence [61]. Security can be seen as contextual risk management [3].

Contextual and statistical risk management approaches as crime prevention methods work in different ways and address different types of potential perpetrators. This demonstrates the difference in the philosophical views of contextual and statistical risk management. Statistical risk management needs a fairly predictable world, or at least a larger amount of trustworthy statistics. Since previous events or incidents are the basis of statistical risk management, it cannot deal effectively with a self-inflicted alteration of the threat pattern. Therefore, statistical risk management is effective in crime prevention if the potential perpetrators are limited to unsophisticated and indifferent methods based on opportunistic behaviour [87]. However, as potential perpetrators become more sophisticated and gain more capability, the accuracy of statistical prediction will reduce dramatically. Antagonistic perpetrators study the victim to discover routines and regularities and improve their skills with this knowledge (planning, technologies, and tactics) to maximize their likelihood for success [88]. The prevention of antagonistic threats by following current business trends makes the system even more predictable. Military special forces and similar organizations have proven this time after time [75].
