全球恐怖袭击发展趋势与伤亡风险分析

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.06.022

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (6): 170-175.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.06.022

全球恐怖袭击发展趋势与伤亡风险分析

许兴鹏¹, 许清风² 高级工程师, 房志明^**1 副教授, 吕伟³ 副教授, 黄溶岩¹

1 上海理工大学管理学院,上海 200093;
2 上海市建筑科学研究院上海市工程结构安全重点实验室,上海 200032;
3 武汉理工大学安全科学与应急管理学院,湖北武汉 430070

收稿日期:2021-03-17 修回日期:2021-05-11 出版日期:2021-06-28 发布日期:2021-12-28
通讯作者: ^**房志明(1986—),男,山东武城人,博士,副教授,主要从事突发事件下人群安全动力学方面的研究。E-mail:zhmfang2015@163.com。
作者简介:许兴鹏 (1996—),男,安徽芜湖人,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为突发事件应急管理。E-mail:xxpeng1996@163.com。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助(72074149);上海市科技启明星计划项目(19QC1400900)。

Development trend of global terrorist attacks and analysis on casualty risk

XU Xingpeng¹, XU Qingfeng², FANG Zhiming¹, LYU Wei³, HUANG Rongyan¹

1 Business School, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 200093, China;
2 Shanghai Key Laboratory of Engineering Structure Safety, Shanghai Research Institute of Building Sciences, Shanghai 200032, China;
3 School of Safety Science and Emergency Management, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan Hubei 430070, China

Received:2021-03-17 Revised:2021-05-11 Online:2021-06-28 Published:2021-12-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为揭示全球恐怖主义发展趋势,基于全球恐怖主义数据库(GTD),分析近50年恐怖袭击事件的发生次数和伤亡人数的时空变化特征;从恐怖袭击的发生地区、武器类型和袭击目标等方面分析全球恐怖袭击特征,提出一种恐怖袭击伤亡风险量化模型及4级风险划分标准。研究结果表明:地域上,撒哈拉以南非洲地区的风险最高;武器类型中,以交通工具作为袭击武器的伤亡风险最高;袭击目标中,以军事、普通民众和非政府武装部队等作为目标的伤亡风险最高。全球恐怖袭击演变特征仍然呈现出严峻态势,伤亡风险量化模型可杜绝经验评估的主观性。

关键词: 恐怖袭击, 伤亡风险, 全球恐怖主义数据库(GTD), 发展趋势, 风险等级划分

Abstract: In order to reveal evolution trend of global terrorism, based on GTD, temporal and spatial evolution trends of terrorist attack numbers and causalities over last 50 years were analyzed. Then, characteristics of such attacks were analyzed from aspects of areas, weapon types and targets, and a quantitative model of casualty risk and a four-level risk classification standard for terrorist attacks were proposed. The results show that sub-Saharan Africa is at the highest risk geographically, while among all weapon types, transportation as a weapon features the highest risk of casualties. For attack targets, military, civilian and non-state militias are at the highest risk. In summary, global terrorist attacks still evolve in a grim way, and the quantitative model of casualties puts an end to subjectivity of experience assessment.

Key words: terrorist attacks, casualty risk, global terrorism database (GTD), development trend, risk rating

中图分类号:

X913.4

许兴鹏, 许清风, 房志明, 吕伟, 黄溶岩. 全球恐怖袭击发展趋势与伤亡风险分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(6): 170-175.

XU Xingpeng, XU Qingfeng, FANG Zhiming, LYU Wei, HUANG Rongyan. Development trend of global terrorist attacks and analysis on casualty risk[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(6): 170-175.

参考文献

[1] 梅传强,张永强. 我国恐怖活动犯罪的现状、特征及防控对策[J]. 北京师范大学学报:社会科学版, 2015(6): 174-182.
MEI Chuanqiang, ZHANG Yongqiang. The status quo, characteristics and countermeasures of terrorist crimes in China[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University:Social Sciences, 2015(6): 174-182.
[2] 乔顺利. 我国恐怖袭击的特点及其应对策略研究[J]. 新疆警察学院学报, 2015,35(3): 16-20.
QIAO Shunli. On characteristics and counter-measures of terrorism crimes in China[J]. Journal of Xinjiang Police College, 2015,35(3): 16-20.
[3] 王冠. 地铁反暴恐处置策略[J]. 铁道警察学院学报, 2016,26(4): 55-58.
WANG Guan. On the disposal of violent terrorism events on subway[J]. Journal of Railway Police College, 2016,26(4): 55-58.
[4] 杨新贺, 亐道远. 铁路安全恐怖风险防范研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019,29(增1): 145-149.
YANG Xinhe, QU Daoyuan. Research on prevention of railway safety and terrorist risks[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019,29(S1): 145-149.
[5] MA Liang, CHEN Bin,QIU Sihang, et al. Agent-based modeling of emergency evacuation in a railway station square under sarin terrorist attack[J]. International Journal of Modeling, Simulation, and Scientific Computing, 2017, 8(2): DOI:10.1142/S1793962317500222.
[6] 刘晓山, 门甜. 恐怖主义犯罪对民航领域的渗透及其防控[J]. 铁道警察学院学报, 2018,28(3): 18-25.
LIU Xiaoshan, MEN Tian. Infiltration and prevention of the terrorist crimes in civil aviation[J]. Journal of Railway Police College, 2018,28(3): 18-25.
[7] REUTER C, PTSCH K, RUNFT E. IT for peace? fighting against terrorism in social media: an explorative twitter study[J]. De Gruyter, 2017, 16(2): 181-193.
[8] 郑超慧,吴建松,胡啸峰,等.复杂街区脏弹恐怖袭击下放射性物质扩散模拟[J].中国安全科学学报,2018,28(9): 134-141.
ZHENG Chaohui, WU Jiansong, HU Xiaofeng, et al. Simulation of radionuclides dispersion under dirty bomb attack with complex street geometry[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018,28(9): 134-141.
[9] BAGCHI A, PAUL J A. Youth unemployment and terrorism in the MENAP (middle east, north africa, afghanistan, and pakistan) region[J]. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 2018,64: 9-20.
[10] HUERTA A, PADILLA P. Understanding the interrelationship between global terrorist attacks and the citizen's wellbeing: the complexity of terrorism[J]. Sociology, 2016,6(5): 283-292.
[11] FALODE A J. Terrorism 4.0: a global and structural analysis[J]. Open Political Science, 2018, 1(1): 153-163.
[12] 周骥, 李丽娟, 陆惠龙, 等. 浅议网络恐怖主义现状、发展趋势及对策[J]. 武警学院学报, 2018,34(10): 78-83.
ZHOU Ji, LI Lijuan, LU Huilong, et al. Discussion on cyberterrorism's present situation, development trend and countermeasures[J]. Journal of the Armed Police Academy, 2018,34(10): 78-83.
[13] 姜丁菊, 刘学文, 姜晓雪. 基于聚类的恐袭事件嫌疑人与可疑据点预测[J]. 重庆工商大学学报:自然科学版,2019,36(3): 18-23.
JIANG Dingju, LIU Xuewen, JIANG Xiaoxue. Cluster-based terrorist attack suspects and suspicious base prediction[J]. Journal of Chongqing Technology and Business University:Natural Science Edition, 2019,36(3): 18-23.
[14] 刘明辉. 基于K-means聚类分析的民航系统恐怖主义风险评估[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2018,2(10): 21-26.
LIU Minghui. Risk assessment of civil aviation terrorism based on K-means clustering[J]. Data Analysis and Knowledge Discovery, 2018,2(10): 21-26.
[15] 戴联双, 汤长江, 冯治中, 等.油气管道恐怖袭击风险评估方法与应用[J]. 油气储运, 2011,30(5):337-339,314.
DAI Lianshuang, TANG Changjiang, FENG Zhizhong, et al. Risk assessment methodology and application for oil and gas pipelines' terrorist attack[J]. OIL & GAS Storage and Transportation, 2011, 30(5): 337-339,314.
[16] START. Global terrorism database(2018) [EB/OL]. [2020-04-28]. http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd.
[17] ASONGU S, TCHAMYOU V S, MINKOUA J R, et al. Fighting terrorism in Africa: benchmarking policy harmonization[J]. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2018,492: 1 931-1 957.
[18] 中华人民共和国国务院.生产安全事故报告和调查处理条例[L].2007-06-01.
[19] 李玉梅. 数据的正态性检验方法[J]. 怀化学院学报, 2015,34(11): 81-82.
LI Yumei. The methods for testing normal distributing of data[J]. Journal of Huaihua University, 2015, 34(11): 81-82.

全球恐怖袭击发展趋势与伤亡风险分析

Development trend of global terrorist attacks and analysis on casualty risk

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	杨黎霞, 许茂增, 陈仁祥. 数据样本有限的交通恐怖袭击行为识别^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(8): 30-37.
[2]	王乾坤, 朱科, 王军武, 郭佩文, 申文忠. 工程项目风险管理文献计量分析^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 15-23.
[3]	钟茂华, 刘畅, 史聪灵. 地铁火灾全尺寸实验研究进展综述[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(10): 51-63.
[4]	范正日. 我国铁路重特大事故发生规律与特征研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(S1): 135-140.
[5]	郑超慧, 吴建松, 胡啸峰, 侯毅, 侯苗苗, 邱凌峰. 复杂街区脏弹恐怖袭击下放射性物质扩散模拟[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(9): 134-141.
[6]	赵学刚，谭迎新. 区域道路交通事故伤亡风险源分类评价研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2013, 23(2): 160-.
[7]	种鹏云，帅斌. 恐怖袭击下危险品运输网络节点风险评估方法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2012, 22(8): 104-.
[8]	汪志红，王斌会. 基于城市地铁实证分析的突发事件风险发展趋势评价模型研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2010, 20(9): 166-.
[9]	孙玉波，李铁虎，朱振泰，王连军. 生化恐怖威胁谱系研究进展[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2008, 18(12): 5-.
[10]	陈清光，肖雪莹，陈国华. 化学恐怖袭击事件的危害、征兆及紧急应对措施研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2008, 18(11): 5-.
[11]	刘成晔. 汽车辅助制动装置发展综述[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2008, 18(1): 105-.
[12]	张黔生，王文甫，岳虎，陈玉明. GIS应用于城市重大危险源监控的综述[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2007, 17(6): 49-.
[13]	王彦亭，赵爱国. 我国道路交通安全发展情景分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2005, 15(1): 43-.
[14]	张峥，吴宗之，刘茂. 恐怖袭击风险减缓实例分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2004, 14(2): 95-.
[15]	张峥，吴宗之，刘茂. 设施遭恐怖袭击的风险分析方法探讨[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2003, 13(7): 60-.