cargo theft report - le moci · formed in 2009 by verisk analytics and the nicb, cargonet helps...

2011 United StatesCargo Theft Report

®

Overview ..........................................................................................

U.S. Cargo Theft Analysis

U.S. Cargo Theft by Year ......................................................... U.S. Cargo Theft by State ........................................................ U.S. Cargo Theft by Day of Week ............................................ U.S. Cargo Theft by Location Type .......................................... U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Gross Domestic Product .......................... U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Retail Sales Pattern ................................. U.S. Cargo Theft by Commodity Type ..................................... U.S. Cargo Theft by Loss Value .............................................. U.S. Cargo Theft Geographic Analysis ................................... U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Truck Freight Flow & Population .............. U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Miles Per Ton Hauled ............................. U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Tractor & Trailer Vehicle Theft .................

Conclusion ......................................................................................

February, 2012

22011 U.S. Cargo Theft Report

3

579

10111213

19

1516

2122

23

®

3 2011 U.S. Cargo Theft Report

About this Report

CargoNet has aggregated and analyzed U.S. cargo theft incidents reported since January, 2009. This data-collection effort has resulted in an expanding cargo theft database that contains a growing number of cargo theft incident reports including a high level of relevant detail. This 2011 United States Cargo Theft Report provides a snapshot of American cargo theft during the time period between January 1 and December 31. You will find information on stolen commodity type; theft incident location, date, and time; cargo origin/destination; mode of transportation; and additional analysis generated from 286 specific data fields.

The information in this report can be used to measure supply chain security risks, especially with regards to ground transportation. The report assists logistics professionals in mitigating risk by pinpointing areas of vulnerability surrounding the movement of goods, mapping patterns of theft against the flow of goods, and forecasting future cargo theft challenges.

Although CargoNet has collected significant amounts of international cargo theft data, this report only focuses on theft data for incidents occurring within the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

About CargoNet

Formed in 2009 by Verisk Analytics and the NICB, CargoNet helps prevent cargo theft and increases recovery rates through secure and controlled information sharing among theft victims, their business partners, and law enforcement. Crime analysts and subject-matter experts manage CargoNet’s database and information-sharing system.

CargoNet applies an integrated, layered approach that analyzes cargo crime from multiple perspectives and includes:

• Integrated databases • Cargo recovery network • Task force and investigations support • Tractor/trailer theft deterrence program • Secondary-market monitoring and interdictions • Crime trend analysis and loss control services • Training and education

Availability of Additional Data

The results within this report were generated directly from the CargoNet database. Cargotheft reports can be accessed in real-time by CargoNet members and the law enforcement community.

For more information about CargoNet, please visit www.cargonet.com, email [email protected], or call 1-888-595-CNET (2638).

®

February, 2012®

Purpose and Uses of the CargoNet Annual Report

The 2011 United States Cargo Theft Report presents findings from our analysis of cargo theft incidents and discusses the potential impact on U.S. businesses.

The research found within this report addresses five fundamental topics with regard to 2011cargo theft:

1. What commodity categories were impacted the most by cargo theft?

2. Where did U.S. cargo theft incidents occur?

3. When did U.S. cargo theft incidents occur?

4. Why did U.S. cargo theft incidents occur at a specific location and time?

5. What factors contributed to U.S. cargo theft, including economic fluctuations? Highlights

• There was a 17% increase in reported annual cargo theft incidents at the close of 2011 (1,215) over what was reported at the close of 2010 (1,035).

• After the 2010 U.S. Cargo Theft Report was published, the number of cargo theft incidents reported in 2010 increased from 1,035 to 1,284, an increase of 24% due to delayed cargo theft incident reporting. If 2011 statistics follow the same pattern as 2010, i.e. a 17% increase, the final number of cargo theft incidents will be approximately 1,507.

• Indiana and New York joined the Top 10 list of states with the highest number of cargo theft incidents reported in 2011.

• The Top 10 list of states with the highest number of reported cargo theft incidents make up 85% of total reported cargo theft incidents in 2011. These states all are economically developed and have a high population and cargo concentration.

• In 2011, municipalities containing a major port continued to be targets for cargo theft activities.

• The number of reported cargo theft incidents in 2011 is positively correlated with a state’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

• The “V” pattern seen on a bar graph that compares reported cargo theft by weekday was still present but less pronounced than previous years. This is because reported cargo theft numbers dropped on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday in 2011 as compared to 2010.

• U.S. retail sales grew slowly in 2011, while reported cargo theft incidents fluctuated on a high level.

• Prepared food and beverage products became the most stolen commodity in 2011. Prepared food and beverage, electronics, base metals, apparel, and animals and animal products represented 59.4% of all commodity types reported stolen.

• In 2011, there was an increase in the theft of low value (less than $50,000) cargo, and a decrease in mid value ($50,000 - $100,000) and high value (over $100,000) cargo.

• Total estimated cargo related theft loss value in 2011 is approximately $130,000,000.


February, 2012®

U.S. Cargo Theft by Year

Figure 1 Figure 2

Figure 3 Figure 4

As of December 31, 2011, 1,215 cargo theft incidents were reported to CargoNet, shown in Figure 1. Through the reporting of historical cargo theft data by CargoNet members and partner law enforcement agencies, the total number of reported cargo theft incidents for 2010 now stands at 1,284.

The delay in incident reporting is a challenge in accurately analyzing cargo theft data. In Figure 3, the first column represents theft incidents that occurred in Q1. The number of Q1incidents increased at an average rate of 21% over the following three quarters. Case in point, only 163 first quarter cargo thefts were reported in Q1. By the end of the year, that number rose by 63%, and in the end there were 265 Q1 cargo theft incidents reported.


Cargo Theft by Year

2010 2011

2010 2011

Cargo Theft by Quarter

2011 Cargo Theft Reporting Delay Cargo Theft by Year (Adjusted)Year End Data Late Reporting Estimated Increase

20112010

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Reported in Q1

Reported in Q3

Reported in Q2

Reported in Q4

0

100150200250300350400

50

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

0

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

200

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

0

100150

200250300350400

50

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

0

800

1200

1600

400Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

338

265

340

303 295312 311

335

1284 1215

2247

33

163

46

52

205

58

254335

249

10351215

292

February, 2012®

U.S. Cargo Theft by Year

Putting aside the cumulative number of 2010 cargo theft incidents which includes incidents reported in 2011, the initial 2011 data reveals that the total number of cargo theft incidents were higher than what was initially reported in 2010 (1,035 incidents reported in 2010 at the end of the year versus 1,215 incidents reported in 2011 at the end of the year). This data is shown in Figure 4.

In 2011, there were 249 cargo theft incidents that occurred in 2010, which contributed to a 24% increase in overall 2010 cargo theft incident data. By applying the same ratio to the initial 2011 cargo theft incident data, it can be estimated that that total 2011 reported cargo theft incident data will increase by 292 reported incidents by the end of 2012, as shown in Figure 4.

While the following data comparisons contained within this report are based on up-to-date reported cargo theft incident data generated from the CargoNet & NICB, these numbers should be viewed with the consideration that there will be delayed cargo theft incident reportingfrom 2011 that will increase these end-of-the-year numbers.


February, 2012®

U.S. Cargo Theft by State

Figure 5

Of the top ten states where cargo theft incidents are reported, four showed a decrease in reported cargo theft incidents from 2010 to 2011. In 2011, California held the number one ranking for reported cargo theft incidents, but the number of thefts reported in California decreased by 13% from 2010 to 2011.

Cargo theft incidents in New Jersey and North Carolina decreased slightly in 2011, while reported cargo theft incidents in Georgia, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania decreased dramatically by 32%, 31%, and 23%, respectively.

In Texas, Florida, Indiana, and New York, reported cargo theft incidents increased by 40%, 4%, 91% and 55%, respectively. In Illinois, cargo theft incidents remained at the same rate is 2011 as 2010 at 88 theft incidents. Refer to Table 1 for 2011 reported cargo theft incident numbers by quarter and by state.


Cargo Theft by State (Top 10)2010 2011

0

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

50

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

CA TX FL NJ IL GA TN PA IN NC NY

*Note: NC and NY tied for 10th place with both states having 17 reported cargo theft incidents in 2011

February, 2012

350

304

124

173

141146 135130

88 88113

7647 32 38 29

11 21 18 17 11 17

®

U.S. Cargo Theft by State

Table 1

Ranking State Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2011 Total 1 CA 56 84 70 94 304 2 TX 40 29 57 47 173 3 FL 34 43 41 28 146 4 NJ 29 38 28 35 130 5 IL 12 19 27 30 88 6 GA 23 15 19 19 76 7 TN 11 8 7 6 32 8 PA 1 10 9 9 29 9 IN 3 6 6 6 21 10 NC 3 4 3 7 17 11 NY 6 4 2 5 17 12 VA 3 3 5 3 14 13 OH 1 6 5 1 13 14 AL 2 4 4 2 12 15 MI 4 1 4 3 12 16 MD 3 1 7 11 17 MS 1 2 4 4 11 18 NV 3 3 1 3 10 19 IA 3 2 2 2 9 20 LA 1 2 3 3 9 21 SC 6 1 2 9 22 AZ 4 2 1 1 8 23 MO 4 3 1 8 24 KY 5 2 7 25 OK 1 2 1 3 7 26 UT 2 1 3 6 27 AR 2 1 1 1 5 28 KS 2 2 4 29 WA 1 1 2 4 30 WI 2 2 4 31 MA 1 1 1 3 32 NE 3 3 33 NM 1 1 1 3 34 OR 1 2 3 35 WV 1 1 2 36 DC 1 1 37 DE 1 1 38 ME 1 1 39 MN 1 1 40 ND 1 1 Grand Total 265 303 312 335 1215


February, 2012®

U.S. Cargo Theft by Day of Week

Figure 6

Reported cargo theft incidents showed a similar “V” pattern in 2010 and 2011 when viewed by day of the week. The “V” pattern was present both years, although less prominent in 2011 due to a drop in reported cargo theft incidents on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday (see Figure 6).

In 2011, cargo theft incidents reported to have occurred during a “weekend period” (Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday) were significantly higher than incidents that were reported to have occurred during the week. This trend is due to trailers and warehouses being left unattended during non-working hours. This trend may also be due to “book sales” behavior. From an operations perspective, in order to maintain sales performance and meet weekly/quarterly targets, sales people tend to push their customers to place orders before Friday and promise to ship loads as soon as possible. In order to ship a load early on Monday morning, trailers are loaded with cargo and parked in facility lots on Friday afternoon. Without sufficient security, trailers loaded with cargo that are left unattended over weekend periods are easily stolen.

In four out of seven weekdays, there were less cargo thefts reported in 2011 than in 2010. However,Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday showed more theft incidents reported in 2011 than 2010.


Cargo Theft by Day of Week2010 2011

217

183

235

164

145 145

155163

130

154

188

211 214

195

120

160

200

220

240

180

260

140

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

February, 2012®

U.S. Cargo Theft by Location

Figure 7

The cargo theft locations with the most reported thefts are truck stops, warehouses and distribution centers, parking lots, and carrier and terminal lots, as shown in Figure 7.

The 2011 cargo theft incident location-type data was collected on 56% of the 1,215 incidents reported. Of the theft location data collected, 77% of the incidents occurred within the top five location types. These location types made up 60% of the total reported loss value.


Cargo Theft by Top Location Types2010 2011

Truc

k Stop

War

ehou

se / D

CPar

king L

ot

Carrie

r / Te

rmina

l Lot

Unsec

ured

Yard

Secur

e Yar

dSide

of R

oad

Drop L

ot

Other

On Rou

te

Rail Ya

rd

Airpor

t

Port

0

406080100120140160

20

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

February, 2012

131139

145

122

81

115

10994

40

52 52

39 36 30

20 24

5

24 2620

6

13 14

6 5 1

®

U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Figure 8

Cargo theft can be correlated directly to economic activity based on a state’s GDP. States with healthy economies tend to have more cargo theft incidents reported than with lesspopulated states.

New York and New Jersey were combined into a single area on the chart above due to the fact that they represent the same metropolitan area and share strong economic ties. With New York and New Jersey as a single entity and their individual GDP and reported cargo theft incidents added together (see Figure 8), the chart supports the conclusion that cargo theft is more likely to happen in more developed economic zones.

The noticeable discrepancy in Georgia (lower GDP and higher cargo theft) can most likely be attributed to the state having a major container port location (Savannah) and a large number of distribution centers.


Cargo Theft vs. 2011 U.S. GDP (Adjusted)

2011 Theft 2011 GDP Estimate

0

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

50

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

CA NJ/NY TX FL IL PA OH GA TN SC

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

GD

P in

Bill

ions

February, 2012®

U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Retail Sales Pattern

Figure 9

In 2011, U.S. retail sales were still struggling due to the weak economic recovery, pressure from increasing production costs, high unemployment rates, and fluctuations in consumer confidence. Despite these negative pressures, retail sales did show a steady increase from 2010 to 2011.

In addition to weak economic performance, September showed a significant decrease in reported cargo thefts incidents. Both retail sales and cargo theft incidents reached a periodic high during the holiday season of 2011. In 2011, the number of reported cargo theft incidents started to fluctuate and remain at a relatively high level showing a slowly increasing rate regardless of underreporting in Q4, as seen in Figure 9.

With retail sales increasing steadily since January 2010, cargo flow volume and frequency will continued to increase. Shipments that were ordered in advance to meet demand spikes were targeted. Towards the end of the retail sales cycle, reported cargo theft incidents responded to sales patterns: they both declined in January following the holiday season, and increased for Easter during March.

http://www.census.gov/retail1


Cargo Theft vs. U.S. Retail Sales

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

$450Ja

n 20

10 Feb

Mar Apr

May Ju

n

Aug

Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

2011

Feb

Mar Apr

May Ju

n

Aug

Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Theft 2010 / 2011 Retail Sales

Jul

Jul

February, 2012

$400

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Ret

ail S

ales

in B

illio

ns

Rep

orte

d Th

eft I

ncid

ents

®

2011 Cargo Theft by Commodity

Figure 10

Figure 10 represents the 1,215 cargo theft incidents reported in 2011 by commodity type. 24 major commodity categories were reported stolen in 2011, the top five of which accounted for 59% of all cargo theft incidents reported. This percentage is consistant with results published in the 2010 cargo theft report.

Prepared foodstuffs and beverages accounted for 19% of cargo theft incidents reported in 2011. Electronics, which accounted for18%, is no longer the most stolen commodity. Base metals, apparel and accessories, animal and animal products and machinery accountedfor 9%, 8%, 5% and 5% respectively of the total 2011 reported cargo theft incidents. 13 commodity types make up the "Other" category. Cargo thieves tend to target specific commodities due to their value and ease of resale.


2011 U.S. Cargo Theft Frequency by Commodity Type

Other17% Food

19%

Electronics18%

Base Metals9%Apparel

8%

Animals & Animal Products - 5%

Machinery - 5%

Plastics & Rubber - 5%

Personal Care & Beauty - 4%

Pharmaceuticals - 4%

Wood Pulp, Paper,Cork & Straw - 3%

Furniture - 3%

February, 2012®

Figure 11

2011 Cargo Theft by Commodity


2011 U.S. Cargo Theft Loss Value by Commodity Type

Other6% Food

10%

Electronics47%

Base Metals

6%

Apparel11%

Animals & Animal Products - 3%

Machinery6%

Plastics & Rubber - 3%

Personal Care & Beauty - 5%

Pharmaceuticals - 2%

Wood Pulp, Paper,Cork & Straw - 0%

Furniture - 1%

February, 2012®

Figure 11 represents the 1,215 cargo theft incidents reported in 2011 by commodity type in reference to loss value. Electronics accounted for 47% of total cargo theft loss value reported in 2011. Apparel and accessories, prepared foodstuffs and beverages, base metals, machinery, andpersonal care and beauty accounted for 11%, 10%, 6%, 6%, and 5% respectively of the total lossvalue of 2011 reported cargo theft incidents.

Figure 12 Figure 13

U.S. Cargo Theft by Loss Value Range

Year Total Incidents Cargo Loss Value Vehicle Loss Value Avg. Cargo Loss Value2011 1,215 $129,844,687 $59,630,500 $179,0002010 1,284 $253,658,706 $72,982,000 $357,000

Table 2

In Figures 12 and 13, reported cargo theft incidents from 2010 and 2011 are broken down by loss value. In Figure 12, of the 675 reported cargo theft incidents that contained a loss value over $10,000, 3% had a value over $1,000,000. 540 reported cargo theft incidents contained a value under $10,000.

About 46% of reported theft incidents contained a loss value of $100,000 to $1,000,000 in 2010. The number of reported theft incidents in this range decreased (by 8%) in 2011.

Loss value in the ranges of $50,000- $100,000 decreased slightly (by 1%) in 2011 compared to 2010. In 2011, thefts with smaller values in the $10,000 - $50,000 range increased significantly by 11%.

In 2011, the total estimated loss value of reported cargo theft incidents was $129,844,687, making the average loss value per theft incident $179,000. This number was higher in 2010 due to a single major pharmaceutical loss of $76,000,000.

Cargo, Tractor & Trailer Loss Value


2011 U.S. Cargo Theft by Loss Value Range

2010 U.S. Cargo Theft by Loss Value Range

$10MM -$50MM $100MM -

$1M

$50MM -$100MM

>$1M

$10MM -$50MM

$100MM -$1M

$50MM -$100MM

>$1M

February, 2012®

2011 Cargo Theft U.S. Geographic Analysis

To aid in the identification of patterns and trends, the NICB created three maps that provide a geographical analysis of the cargo theft incidents reported in 2011. Each map depicts cargo theft incidents on a geographic scale: by state, by core based statistical area (CBSA), and by city.

Map 1

Table 3

ElectronicsState Incidents CA 80 FL 37 NJ 22 GA 19 TX 15

Table 4

Prepared FoodState Incidents CA 65 FL 59 TX 40 NJ 37 IL 27

Table 5

ApparelState Incidents CA 57 NJ 18 FL 5 GA 4 TX 2

Table 6

Base MetalsState Incidents TX 33 IL 16 CA 10 GA 8 FL 6

Tables 3, 4, 5 and 6 indicate the the number of reported cargo theft incidents involving the top four commodities by state. California, Florida, and New Jersey had the most reported incidentsinvolving electronics and apparel, where Texas and Illinois had the most reported incidentsinvolving base metals.


Cargo Theft byCommodity Type

Other

Prepared Food & Beverage

ElectronicsBase Metals

Apparel & AccessoriesAnimals & Animal Products

Machinery

Plastics & Rubber

Personal Care & BeautyPharmaceuticals

Precious Stones & Metals

2011 U.S. Cargo Theft by Commodity Type

February, 2012®


Map 2

Table 7 lists the top ten U.S. cities by the number of cargo theft incidents in 2011. Dallas, TX, had the greatest number of cargo thefts with 68 incidents. Los Angeles, CA, was the city with the second greatest number of cargo thefts with 38 incidents.

Table 7

Reported Cargo Theft IncidentsCity State IncidentsDallas TX 68Los Angeles CA 38Doral FL 28Houston TX 20Kearny NJ 18Carson CA 16Miami FL 15Elk Grove Village IL 15Linden NJ 15Fort Worth TX 14


2011 U.S. Cargo Theft by City

Cargo Theft by City

21 - 38

9 - 20

3 - 8

0 - 2

39 - 68

February, 2012®


Table 8 lists the top ten CBSAs by the number of cargo theft incidents in 2011. Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA was the CBSA with the greatest number of cargo thefts with 183 incidents. New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA, was the CBSA with the second greatest number of cargo thefts in 2011 with 126 incidents followed by Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX, with 123 incidents. These three CBSAs represented 35.6% of all cargo theft incidents reported in 2011.

Map 3

Table 8

Reported Cargo Theft Incidents by CBSACBSA IncidentsLos Angeles - Long Beach - Santa Ana, CA 183New York - Northern New Jersey - Long Island, NY-NJ-PA 126Dallas - Fort Worth - Arlington, TX 123Chicago - Naperville - Joliet, IL-IN-WI 77Riverside - San Bernardino - Ontario, CA 72Miami - Fort Lauderdale - Miami Beach, FL 69Atlanta - Sandy Springs - Marietta, GA 55Houston - Sugar Land - Baytown, TX 24Orlando - Kissimmee, FL 20Memphis, TN-MS-AR 16


2011 U.S. Cargo Theft by CBSA

Cargo Theft by CBSA

25 - 7812 - 245 - 11

2 - 4

79 - 202

01

February, 2012®

Cargo Theft vs. Truck Freight Flow & Population Density

Map 4 - Truck Freight Flow (All Commodities) Map 5 - U.S. Population Density

Map 6 - 2011 U.S. Reported Cargo Theft Incidents

Maps 4, 5, and 6 provide an overview of 2011 U.S. reported cargo theft incidents, truck freight flow, and population density. When comparing all three maps, it can be seen that cargo theft incidents tend to occur in highly populated areas in close proximity to shipping ports or terminals.


February, 2012®

By examining maps 4, 5, and 6, we find that:

• Cargo theft is more likely to happen in areas with a high concentration of container/trailer movement, such as California, New York / New Jersey, Texas, Florida, and Illinois. The reported cargo theft incidents decrease as cargo flows from coastal ports inland. Figure 5 and Table 1 indicate that there are more reported cargo theft incidents in California than any other U.S. state annually.

• Cargo thieves are more likely to use the complex U.S. highway network to avoid possible pursuit. Thieves will often transport the load to a southern port, such as the Port of Miami, to ship stolen cargo to South America. In addition, a commodity flow survey conducted by the Department of Transportation showed that an average truck cargo load will travel within a 206 mile radius from container ports. Warehouses, unsecured parking lots, and truck stops adjacent to highways within the 206 mile radius are the locations where reported cargo theft incidents tend to occur.

• Cargo theft is more likely to occur inside a highly populated area where thieves can enter the local gray and black markets quickly to offload stolen cargo in efforts to avoid unnecessary exposure. Fresh perishables and branded apparel can be re-circulated into the marketplace quickly.

http://www.bts.gov/publications/commodity_flow_survey/index.html

Cargo Theft vs. Truck Freight Flow & Population Density


February, 2012®

2

2

Table 9 Table 10

2011 Reported Cargo Theft Incidents Involving Tractors/Trailers

Type Incidents Tractor 650 Trailer 815

2011 Stolen Vehicle (Tractor/Trailer)Report - Based on Insurance Claims

Type Incidents Tractor 1536 Trailer 594

U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Tractor & Trailer Vehicle Theft

Of the 1,215 cargo theft incidents reported in 2011, 650 incidents involved the theft of thetractor unit and 815 incidents involved the theft of the trailer, as shown in Table 9.

Table 10 indicates the total number of tractor and trailer thefts that occured within the U.S.that were reported to ISO ClaimSearch - the all claims database, and not to CargoNet. 1,536 tractors and 594 trailers were reported stolen in 2011.


February, 2012®

U.S. Cargo Theft vs. Miles Per Ton Hauled

Figure 14

Trucks carrying cargo travel an average of 206 miles from U.S. ports of entry (see Figure 14), but some trucks travel much further.

In Figure 14, the vertical axis represents the average travel distance of one metric ton of a particular commodity. The types of stolen commodities are shown along the horizontal axis. The size of the bubble represents the loss value of that commodity type.

Looking at the vertical axis of miles hauled per ton hauled, one can see that during 2011 the distance per ton hauled of the top ten commodities varied by commodity type. For example, cargo labeled as “apparel” was hauled 620 miles, where as cargo labeled “base metals” was hauled an average of 330 miles.

Some of the commodities featured in Figure 14 are imported from China and South East Asian countries. These commodities are unloaded at West Coast ports and loaded onto trucks that drive inland over major interstate highways. In most cases, trucks will travel at a speed of 55 miles per hour and drive consistently for eight hours per day, for an average of 440 miles (red line) per day. Long haul shipments greater than the 206-mile average have a higher probability of risk exposure. For safety and compliance reasons, drivers need rest breaks at truck stops, commercial logistics areas, or other locations off the highways while on trips over 440 miles.


2011 Miles Per Ton Hauled vs. Loss Value

Food

Machinery

ElectronicsApparel

Plastics & Rubber

Personal Care & Beauty

PharmaceuticalsVehicle, Aircraft & Vessel

Textiles

Stone, Cement, Ceramic

Toys & GamesFurniture

Animals & Animal Products

Base Metals

Precious Stones & Metals

Size = loss Value

150

250

350

450

550

650

750

Mile

s P

er T

on H

aule

d

February, 2012®

Summary

Cargo Theft Characteristics

Cargo theft has historically been affected by certain factors:

1. Cargo theft incidents are more likely to happen in a cargo rich environment, such as economically developed areas with clusters of distribution centers, warehouses, transportation network hubs, and container ports. Locations with elevated levels of urbanization are ideal places for cargo thieves to conduct business.

2. Cargo theft incidents are likely to occur within highly populated areas that contain busy container ports. This is because it is easy to resell stolen goods at higher prices due to convenient access to local grey and black marketplaces. In addition, these ports make convenient locations from which to ship stolen cargo to buyers in foreign markets. 3. Cargo theft patterns are positively correlated to certain primary trends including, economic climate, income level, poverty level, and job availability. Some indicators are sensitive in the short term, while the others are important in the long term.

4. The longer the distance cargo is hauled, the higher the chance it will be stolen. This is because of the increased number of driver rest and refueling stops at unsecured truck stops or other locations along U.S. highways.

Closing Statement

CargoNet encourages transportation, manufacturing, and retail professionals to continue to provide information about cargo theft incidents as quickly as possible to law enforcement. Information sharing needs to be front and center for all industries in order to define, measure, and analyze cargo theft incidents, thus enabling the delivery and implementation of viable solutions that can help prevent cargo theft and related supply chain disruptions.

To Report a Theft,Call 1-888-595-CNET (2638)


February, 2012®

© ISO Crime Analytics, Inc., 2012.CargoNet and the CargoNet logo are reigstered trademarks of ISO Crime Analytics, Inc.Verisk Analytics and the Verisk Analytics logo, and Verisk is a trademark of Insurance Services Office, Inc. NICB and the NICB logo are registered trademarks of the National Insurance Crime Bureau. cn

011

(2/1

2)

cargo theft report - le moci · formed in 2009 by verisk analytics and the nicb, cargonet helps...

Documents