Countering violent extremism policy in the United States: are CVE programs in America effectively mitigating the threat of homegrown violent extremism?

Abstract

Despite a continued threat of violent extremism, current efforts to develop and implement nationally led programming to counter violent extremism in the United States are ineffective. America's current countering violent extremism (CVE) strategy suffers from a lack of scale and foundational scientific support, and contains no system of metrics to evaluate its success. This thesis conducts a comparative policy analysis between the United States' and the United Kingdom's CVE strategies to identify their respective strengths and, in doing so, to determine which UK policies may be leveraged to improve the American CVE strategy. In furthering the discussion surrounding American CVE efforts, this thesis surveys several models from social science to demonstrate the value of incorporating scientifically supported research into future CVE policy discussions. Concluding the comparative analysis and discussion of scientific theory, the thesis closes with a series of policy recommendations and implementation plans for consideration. Based on the research presented, it is recommended that the United States adopt nationally led, locally implemented CVE policies like those found in the United Kingdom's Prevent strategy, and that improved strategies are grounded in social science research.