Presenting a model for assessment of future smart threats

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student in Futures Studies, Department of Management, Science and Technology, AmirKabir University of Technology

2 Professor in AmirKabir University of Technology

Abstract

Contemporary threats significantly differ from traditional ones. It is no longer enough to rely on traditional “analytical-estimation” theories and models for the assessment of new threats. Proportional to the transformations which took place in the nature, dimensions, and methods of the operationalization of threats it is necessary to design and offer more advanced analytical frameworks and assessment models in the area of threats. The present research is one of the first attempts to respond to this need. In this research, “futures studies" were performed in the field of defense-security and issues related to “threat identification” which resulted in the presentation of a model titled “threat dissection analysis”. This method performs a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the intensity of smart threats via Raymond Quivy – Luc Van Campenhoudt’s indexing method in form of three dimensions (hard, semi-hard and soft) four factors (approaching, behavioral, structural and implemental), eight major indices (type of threat, size of threat, extent of threat, time of threat, depth of threat, repetition of threat, domain of threat and location of threat), 24 basic indices and 120 relative sub-indices. This study employed a normative approach with a mixed methods research design. The tools utilized to collect explicit knowledge included documentary research and web mining. The tools used to collect implicit knowledge were distributed questionnaires. To verify and validate the data, interviews, expert opinion, and validity (credibility) and reliability (confidence) assessment of the questionnaires were employed to make sure that the questionnaire’s questions match the research objectives and ensure its repeatability.

Keywords


  •  

    • Buzan, B. & Waever, O. (2003). Regins & power: The Structure of International Security, Cambridge, C.U.P.
    • Calin, T. & Smart poweroxford, B. (2008). (CSP) Commission on smart power.
    • Deudncy, D. (1990). The Case aginst Living enviromental/degration and National Security, Milleniu, p 465.
    • Durch, W. J. (1999). Searching for National Security: Threat and Response in the Age of Vulnerability, The Stimson Center. Report 30.
    • Ernest J. & Wilson, L. (2008). The ANNALS of American Acdemy of Political and Social Scince, Hard Power, Soft Power, Smart Power, http://ann.sagepub.com.
    • Jerome C. Glenn, E.F. & the Millennium Project Team. (2016). State of the Future.
    • Joseph S. & Nye, J. (2011). The Future of Power.
    • Joseph, S. N. (2002). The information revolution and American soft power, Asia pasific review, 9 (1).
    • Joseph, S. N. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, New York: Public Affairs.
    • JSOU Report. (2013). Smart Power and U.S. National Strategy, Joint Special Operations University, JSOU Report 13-3, The JSOU Press, MacDill Air Force Base, Florida.
    • Lukes, S. (1986). The Third Dimension of power, Washington, Brookings Institution.
    • Maya, K. (2013). American Smart Power Strategies: redefining leadership in a post-American world, under the direction of: Maud Quessard-Salvaing.
    • Michael, B. (1996). The International Diemmmensions of International Canflict, Cambridge, Massachusetts & Londan, The MIT Press.
    • Mohammad, A. (2012). Difining Security: a subaltern realist perspectiv, in Keith & M.William, critical Security; Concepts & Cases, Londan, UCL Press, p125.
    • Naomi, R. (1997). Competitive Intelligence: An External Threat and an Internal Requirement, available at: www.pro-tecdata.com.
    • Nossel, S. (2004). Smart Power, Foreign Affairs, 83 (2).
    •  Pallaver, M. (2011). Power and Its Forms: Hard, Soft, Smart, (A thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics for the degree of Master of Philosophy. London.
    • Patton, Q. M. (1997). Utilization Focused Evaluation: The New Century Text (3rd Ed), London, Sage Publications.
    • Richard, L, Armitage, N. & Joseph, S. (2007). A smarter, more secure America, Csis Commission on Smart Power.
    • Thomas, L. Pangale, S. & Peter Ahrensdorf, J. (1999). Justic Among Nations: On The Moral Basis of Power & Peace, University of Kansas, chps 1-1.
    • Ulman, R. (1983). Redefing Security, International Security, 8 (1).
    • Vidalis, S. Blyth, A. (2001). Understanding and Development Methodology, School of Computing, University of Glamorgan.
    • Waever, O. (1998). Securitization & Desecuritization in On Security, Edited by: Ronnine D. Lipschutz, New York: Kolubia University Press, chp 3.
    • Walt, S. M. (1994). Aliance Formation and Balance of World Power, Micheal E.Brown, Eds, in perils of Anarchy: Conteporary Realis and International security, Londan. MIT Press.
    • Wendell, B. (2003). Foundation of Futures Studies (History, Purposes and Knowledge), Transaction Publishers.