Over the past two decades, the concept of ‘radicalisation’ has gained significant importance, particularly following the September 11 attacks. These events reshaped the understanding of radicalisation as a gradual process through which individuals become inclined to support or perpetrate terrorism. Within counter-terrorism practices, this concept became a foundational element of strategies designed to identify and address individuals or groups at risk of engaging in extremist activities.

However, the evolving dynamics of radicalisation are now posing new challenges. Researchers have identified a trend where many individuals suspected of radicalisation are very young and often lack clear ideological motivations. This shift highlights significant uncertainties surrounding the role that cognitive and ideological factors play in the trajectory toward terrorism, necessitating a reevaluation of traditional counter-terrorism methodologies.

Historically, radicalisation research placed considerable emphasis on cognitive and ideological domains as central to the process. Yet, emerging evidence suggests that these aspects might not be as impactful as previously thought. Instead, social and economic factors appear to play a more substantial role in the radicalisation journey, calling for policymakers and academics to pivot toward these dimensions for effective prevention and intervention.

In the United Kingdom, a pioneering force in counter-terrorism strategy, approaches to radicalisation are undergoing significant transformations. There is a growing trend to focus on understanding individual and community dynamics rather than exclusively relying on markers of ideological extremism. This shift involves investing more resources into fostering social cohesion and building trust, which are essential for sustainable prevention strategies.

Looking ahead, the future of the radicalisation concept presents complex challenges for both academic discourse and public policy. If the emerging view continues to demonstrate that ideological beliefs are secondary to other motivational factors, it could lead to a fundamental redefinition of the concept itself. This paradigm shift would require a focus on the societal roots of extremism and the development of integrated frameworks that address these root causes comprehensively.