首页> 外文期刊>Aviation security international >Comparative Security: harmonisation or individuality?
【24h】

Comparative Security: harmonisation or individuality?

机译:比较安全:统一还是个性?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Private security providers in aviation security were more ubiquitous before the 9/11 attacks; post-9/11, many countries federalised aviation security. However, the benefits of private security providers never changed and they can be a very effective method of increasing operational efficiency and effectiveness. As pointed out in the 9/11 commission report, private security does have its weaknesses; fundamentally, private security providers within the aviation security system bring a market-driven approach to security management which can sometimes lead to a decrease in quality as providers seek to reduce costs and increase profits. But, in turn, this approach also removes excess from the system and forces operators to be more effective and efficient. For an aviation security system to effectively utilise private security providers, it must be well regulated and have a robust inspection and testing regime managed by the regulator. This is the success of the Australian model.
机译:在9/11袭击之前,航空保安中的私人保安提供者更为普遍。 9/11之后,许多国家将航空安全联邦化。但是,私人安全提供商的利益从未改变,它们可以成为提高运营效率和效力的非常有效的方法。正如9/11委员会报告中指出的那样,私人安全确实有其弱点。从根本上说,航空保安系统中的私人保安提供者带来了市场驱动的保安管理方法,随着提供者寻求降低成本和增加利润,有时可能导致质量下降。但是,反过来,这种方法也消除了系统中的多余部分,并迫使操作员变得更加有效。为了使航空保安系统有效地利用私人保安提供者,必须对其进行良好的监管,并具有由监管机构管理的健全的检查和测试制度。这是澳大利亚模式的成功。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号