RAND_MR1382

gives time, resources, and alternative paths to cope with the disturbance and limits its
impact.” 25 Criminal networks—apart from the core—are based largely on loose
coupling. Even if some parts of the network are destroyed, the effects are limited since
other parts are left intact. In a loosely coupled network, knock-on or cascading effects
are limited and damage to one part of the network does not undermine the network as a
whole. Loose coupling also preserves more diversity, in response offering considerable
latitude in the decision of which parts of the network should respond, in what manner
and in what location.
Resilience, however, stems not only from the capacity to limit the damage that is
inflicted but also from the ability to mitigate consequences. Criminal networks often
develop certain forms of redundancy that facilitate recovery if part of the network is
degraded or damaged. In legitimate business, redundant contacts in networks— and
indeed redundancy in general—are generally seen as wasteful and inefficient. For
criminal networks, such costs are greatly outweighed by the benefits of redundancy in
the face of attack and degradation by law enforcement.
The more redundancy in the network, the more options there are to compensate for law
enforcement successes whether in finding new ways of moving illicit commodities to the
market or alternative routes and methods of repatriating profits. In effect, redundancy
enables members of the network to take over tasks and responsibilities from those who
have been arrested, incarcerated, or killed by law enforcement. The diversity of
different connections allows the network to function even if some connections are
broken—not least because the nodes and connections that remain intact can be
redirected. In effect, network redundancy makes it possible to maintain organizational
integrity even in an extremely inhospitable environment.
Criminal Networks As Synergistic Organizations
Although social networks exist independently of technological networks, there are major
synergies among the two distinct network forms. The ability of transnational criminal
networks to exploit the information and communication networks that developed during
the 1990s provides major multiplier benefits. While exploitation of information
technologies is certainly not the sole prerogative of network-based organizations,
networks are extremely well placed to exploit new technological opportunities. Indeed,
many criminal organizations have been using technology as a force multiplier to carry
out their entrepreneurial activities with greater efficiency at lower cost.
There is one set of technologies in particular that could give them an enormous
advantage in their continued competition with law enforcement—strong forms of
encryption. One of the most potent weapons of law enforcement in its struggle with
organized crime has been the capacity to monitor communications among criminals—in
effect, to identify and listen in on network connections. Encryption provides
opportunities to neutralize this capacity and offers criminal networks a form of strategic