The conceptual limits of risk governance in terrorism prevention: Towards a theory of threat thinking

Abstract

Risk theories have dominated research on policing and punishment for the past 30 years, including a growing interest in crime prevention. Drawing on excerpts from court documents of 351 counterterrorism stings, an empirical exemplar in contemporary crime prevention, I demonstrate that these cases both defy the logics of actuarial risk governance and exceed the logics of precautionary risk governance in three ways: (1) who they target; (2) how they assess these targets; and (3) what they target as a sign of dangerousness. Engaging core biopolitical ideas, including the notion of the criminal “other”, I build a theory of threat thinking, speaking to shared cultural beliefs that exceed formal governance. Threat thinking offers fresh insights into criminal justice practices in contemporary terrorism prevention and beyond, while also explaining why both adherence to risk management and rejection of it result in such similar outcomes: future-oriented strategies that disproportionately target minoritized groups.