Four years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, UCLA
professors and researchers from various departments continue to
work to better understand how the events affect American society
and the world. In the days after the attacks, Americans had
concerns over the future of the economy and the safety of the
country’s transit systems and asked questions about why
America’s intelligence system was not able to prevent the
attacks. UCLA academics have used the past four years to conduct
research and try to answer some of these questions. Three UCLA
researchers have explored the economic impacts of Sept. 11,
intelligence reform and the safety of transit systems given
potential terrorist threats, an issue which was brought again to
public consciousness with the attacks in London in July and Madrid
in March 2004.
Economic impacts Christopher Thornberg, a senior economist with
the UCLA Anderson Forecast, was one researcher who studied
long-term economic impacts of the attacks. Thornberg compared
economic data from the time period after Sept. 11, 2001 to other
major domestic events such as Hurricane Andrew and the Northridge
earthquake, and found that the attacks have not significantly
affected the economy in the long term. While Thornberg notes that
the attacks impacted America’s psyche, he found that the
United States did not experience a recession in the long run. For
an event to cause a recession, Thornberg said three elements are
required: The event needs to be big, rapid, and sustained over a
duration of time. Thornberg came to the conclusion that the event
was big and rapid, but it was not sustained over a duration of
time. As a result, Thornberg concluded that these type of
“disasters do not cause recession.” Based on his
findings, terrorism and natural disasters will only postpone
business, but not prevent it from taking place in the long term.
“Business is delayed, but not cancelled,” he said.
Thornberg compared New York after Sept. 11 to the local communities
affected by natural disasters, such as Hurricane Andrew in parts of
Florida and Louisiana in 1992 and the Northridge earthquake in
California two years later. He concluded that “there is no
evidence showing consumers respond to domestic tragedies.” In
other words, these events typically do not affect how consumers
behave and they will continue to spend and participate in the
economy.
Cold War mentality in intelligence Professor Amy Zegart, in the
public policy department, has studied intelligence reform. In 2006,
she will be releasing a book called “Intelligence in
Wonderland: 9/11 and the Roots of Failure.” In her book,
Zegart writes that “the Cold War had dominated both the
thinking and operation of the CIA and the 13 other agencies of the
U.S. intelligence community,” even in light of emerging
terrorist threats. Zegart believes that after the Cold War,
America’s intelligence agencies were slow to adapt with the
changing world. “The U.S. intelligence community showed a
stunning inability to adapt to the rise of terrorism after the Cold
War ended,” Zegart said. The book will detail how well
intelligence agencies adapted to the threat of terrorism and the
difficulties associated with intelligence reforms.
Transit safety Professor Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris in the
social welfare department has conducted a study on the safety of
America’s transit systems. She started the research at the
end of 2003 and finished the study in June. Loukaitou-Sideris
worked with a team of professors and graduate students from UCLA,
as well as other universities in a study funded by the UCLA
International Institute and the Mineta Transportation Institute.
With her team, Loukaitou-Sideris also analyzed the safety of
transit systems of major cities, such as London, Paris, Madrid and
Tokyo, and compared these international cities with the United
States. To study the transit systems of these foreign cities, the
team traveled abroad and spoke with transportation officials.
During the two-year study, they also evaluated the safety of
American transit systems and in their research found that European
cities tend to have more centralized planning in the government.
“We really need to give more attention to transit safety. …
We need to do more,” Loukaitou-Sideris said. According to her
findings, public transit centers, such as bus stations and subways,
are especially vulnerable. Her team came to the conclusion that
“major threats are in the largest systems, in the largest
cities.” The professor believes “we need to standardize
the procedure of emergency response” with better coordination
between state and federal governments. “There is much more
coordination (in Europe) than what exists in the United
States,” she said. However, she said she believes that the
United States is moving in the right direction. The study concluded
that more federal funding and better coordination between federal
and state governments are the keys to improving America’s
transit centers.