Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

How and why we should take deradicalization seriously

Nature Human Behaviour volume 1, Article number: 0095 (2017) Cite this article

Subjects

Deradicalization programmes are the cornerstone of counter-terrorism strategies in many countries, yet few have been evaluated for their effectiveness. Stakeholders must introduce standards to ensure basic elements are in place, such as programme development, staff training, advisory services, and transparency.

When, in 2008, TIME magazine chose reversing radicalism as one of its ten ideas for changing the world1, deradicalization programmes had only recently started to gain interest from international researchers and policymakers. Following the first prison-based programmes designed to challenge the theological convictions of incarcerated jihadists, which came into existence in the Middle East after the 9/11 attacks, a global search for new and alternative counter-terrorism methods beyond the classic ‘kinetic’ approach — the targeted killing and arresting of radicals, violent extremists and terrorists — began. Quickly, this new approach — deradicalization — became a promising route to challenge and break the psychological or ideological commitment of members of terrorist and violent extremist organizations. Although these groups can be physically defeated or forced into the defensive, arresting and killing are not effective methods to defeat the psychological attraction of extremist groups and their ideology, nor to effectively counter violent radicalization processes leading to new generations of committed extremists and terrorists. It seemed that deradicalization programmes (which were later termed countering violent extremism (CVE) programmes) were especially suitable for that difficult task. Indeed, between 40 and 50 high-profile CVE programmes currently exist around the world, all with the goal to intervene and dismantle a person's physical and psychological bond to terrorist and violent extremist groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Ripley, A. Future revolutions. 4. Reverse radicalism. TIME (13 March 2008).

  2. Bjørgo, T., Horgan, J. Leaving Terrorism Behind: Individual and Collective Disengagement (Routledge, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Horgan, J., Braddock, K. Terror. Political Violence 22, 267–291 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Horgan, J., Altier, M. B., Shortland, N. & Taylor, M. Behav. Sci. Terror. Polit. Aggress. 9, 63–77 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. European Commission's Expert Group on Violent Radicalisation. Radicalisation Processes Leading to Acts of Terrorism (European Commission, 2008); http://go.nature.com/2qQYkyP

  6. Latessa, E. J. Evaluating correctional programs. In 151st International Training Course (UNAFEI, 2013); http://go.nature.com/2qQAyCU

  7. Koehler, D. Structural Quality Standards for Work to Intervene With and Counter Violent Extremism (KPEBW, 2017); http://go.nature.com/2pK9ogR

  8. Rome Memorandum on Good Practices for Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Violent Extremist Offenders (Global Counterterrorism Forum, 2013); http://go.nature.com/2qvmAnd

  9. Koehler, D. Understanding Deradicalization: Methods, Tools and Programs for Countering Violent Extremism (Routledge, 2016).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Lützinger, S., Gruber, F., Kemmesis, U. Extremismusprävention in Deutschland — Erhebung und Darstellung der Präventionslandschaft (Bundeskriminalamt, 2016); http://go.nature.com/2rpEo28

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. director at the German Institute on Radicalization and De-Radicalization Studies and is a fellow of George Washington University's Program on Extremism, Tulpenstraße 58, Stuttgart, 70180, Germany

    Daniel Koehler

Authors
  1. Daniel Koehler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Koehler.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koehler, D. How and why we should take deradicalization seriously. Nat Hum Behav 1, 0095 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0095

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0095

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing