Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

Dynamics and disruption: Structural and individual changes in two Dutch Jihadi networks after police interventions

Longitudinal studies of criminal networks are rare yet necessary to assess the adaptation and recovery of criminal networks after disruptions. We study the structural and individual effects of law enforcement disruption on criminal networks using longitudinal data on two ...

Published onMay 06, 2022
Dynamics and disruption: Structural and individual changes in two Dutch Jihadi networks after police interventions
key-enterThis Pub is a Version of
Dynamics and disruption: Structural and individual changes in two Dutch Jihadi networks after police interventions
Description

Longitudinal studies of criminal networks are rare yet necessary to assess the adaptation and recovery of criminal networks after disruptions. We study the structural and individual effects of law enforcement disruption on criminal networks using longitudinal data on two Dutch jihadi networks (n1 = 57; n2 = 26). We expect that actors in criminal networks under disruption seek security and to remain concealed as much as possible. We argue how the structural properties of networks as well as mechanisms operating at the actor level might change after a disruption. We used descriptive measures of network cohesion together with core-periphery model fit and modularity to analyse the structural changes in the networks. To obtain the actor-level tendencies, we used undirected stochastic actor oriented models. At the structural level, both networks display opposite tendencies – the larger one is becoming less cohesive after the disruption, whereas the smaller network counter-intuitively becomes structurally more cohesive. Despite the structural differences, the actor-level mechanisms are similar in both studied networks with actors being inclined towards triadic closure and reliance on pre-existing ties. Our study demonstrates the importance of considering the analytical levels of networks and actors by showing that a disruption may disrupt the network at the structural level, while triggering contradictory unintended consequences by increasing individual-level connectivity as in the case of our second network.

 

Comments
0
comment
No comments here
Why not start the discussion?