Designing and Operating Safe and Secure Transit Systems: Assessing Current Practices in the United States and Abroad
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
MTI Report 04-05 MTI Assessing Current Practices in the United States and Abroad Assessing Current Practices in the United States and Designing and Operating Safe and Secure Transit Systems: Designing and Operating Safe Secure Transit Funded by U.S. Department of Designing and Operating Transportation and California Department Safe and Secure Transit of Transportation Systems: Assessing Current Practices in the United States and Abroad Report 04-05 November 2005 Mineta Transportation Institute Created by Congress in 1991 MTI REPORT 04-05 DESIGNING AND OPERATING SAFE AND SECURE TRANSIT SYSTEMS: ASSESSING CURRENT PRACTICES IN THE UNITED STATES AND ABROAD November 2005 Brian Taylor, PhD, Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, PhD, Robin Liggett, PhD, Camille Fink, MA, Martin Wachs, PhD, Ellen Cavanagh, Christopher Cherry, Peter J. Haas, PhD A Report Cosponsored by the UCLA International Institute a publication of the Mineta Transportation Institute College of Business San José State University San Jose, CA 95192-0219 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA/CA/OR-2005-107 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Designing and Operating Safe and Secure Transit Systems: November 2005 Assessing Current Practices in the United States and Abroad 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Authors 8. Performing Organization Report Brian D. Taylor, PhD, Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, PhD, et al. MTI 04-05 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10.Work Unit No. Mineta Transportation Institute College of Business 11.Contract or Grant No. San José State University 65W136 12.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13.Type of Report and Period Covered U.S. Department of Transportation California Department of Research and Special Programs Final Report Transportation Administration 14.Sponsoring Agency Code Sacramento, CA 95819 400 7th Street, SW Washington, DC 20590-0001 15.Supplementary Notes 16.Abstract Public transit systems around the world have for decades served as a principal venue for terrorist acts. Today, transit security is widely viewed as an important public policy issue and is a high priority at most large transit systems and at smaller systems operating in large metropolitan areas. Research on transit security in the United States has mushroomed since 9/11; this study is part of that new wave of research. This study contributes to our understanding of transit security by (1) reviewing and synthesizing nearly all previously published research on transit terrorism; (2) conducting detailed case studies of transit systems in London, Madrid, New York, Paris, Tokyo, and Washington, D.C.; (3) interviewing federal officials here in the United States responsible for overseeing transit security and transit industry representatives both here and abroad to learn about efforts to coordinate and finance transit security planning; and (4) surveying 113 of the largest transit operators in the United States. Our major findings include: (1) the threat of transit terrorism is probably not universal—most major attacks in the developed world have been on the largest systems in the largest cities; (2) this asymmetry of risk does not square with fiscal politics that seek to spread security funding among many jurisdictions; (3) transit managers are struggling to balance the costs and (uncertain) benefits of increased security against the costs and (certain) benefits of attracting passengers; (4) coordination and cooperation between security and transit agencies is improving, but far from complete; (5) enlisting passengers in surveillance has benefits, but fearful passengers may stop using public transit; (6) the role of crime prevention through environmental design in security planning is waxing; and (7) given the uncertain effectiveness of antitransit terrorism efforts, the most tangible benefits of increased attention to and spending on transit security may be a reduction in transit-related person and property crimes. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Bombings; Building materials; Case studies; Chemical attack; No restrictions. This document is available to the public Public transit; Safety and through the National Technical Information Service, security; Terrorism Springfield, VA 22161 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 290 $15.00 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Copyright © 2005 by Mineta Transportation Institute All rights reserved Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2005924526 To order this publication, please contact the following: Mineta Transportation Institute College of Business San José State University San Jose, CA 95192-0219 Tel (408) 924-7560 Fax (408) 924-7565 E-mail: [email protected] http://transweb.sjsu.edu ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study was a joint endeavor of faculty and students in the Department of Urban Planning and Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA); the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Berkeley; and the Mineta Transportation Institute at San José State University (SJSU). Research funding was provided by the Mineta Transportation Institute and the UCLA International Institute. The authors are grateful for this support. The work of this report was a truly collaborative effort by faculty, staff, and graduate students at these three academic institutions. The introduction to the study was written by Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris with contributions by Brian Taylor and input from other team members. The second section, “Securing Urban Rail Transit Systems against Terrorism: A Review of the Literature,” was written by Ellen Cavanagh and edited by Martin Wachs and Camille Fink. Camille Fink, with input from other team members, created the survey instrument administered to transit operators in the United States. Norman Wong coded the survey instrument and prepared its electronic format, set up and managed the survey Website, and generated the survey sample. Robin Liggett analyzed the results of the survey and coauthored the third section with Brian Taylor. The interviews for the fourth section were conducted by Peter Haas, Camille Fink, and Ellen Cavanagh; the section was written by Peter Haas and Camille Fink. The fifth section, “Case Studies of Contemporary Terrorist Incidents,” was primarily written by Christopher Cherry and edited by Martin Wachs and Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, who also wrote the Madrid case study in this section. The interviews for the section “Transit Security Strategies of International Agencies” were conducted by Rachel Factor, Camille Fink, Babak Hedjazi, and Kimiko Shiki; the section was written by Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris. The concluding section and executive summary were written by Brian Taylor, with input from Anastasia Loukaitou- Sideris and Camille Fink. Norman Wong provided significant support in the compilation, formatting, and editing of the full document. Douglas Ng designed the letterhead that was sent out to the transit agency operators. Photos of the Madrid, Paris, Tokyo, and Hong Kong subway stations were taken by Rachel Factor, Babak Hedjazi, Kimiko Shiki, and Norman Wong. The authors are especially grateful for the work of urban planning PhD students Babak Hedjazi and Kimiko Shiki, and urban planning MA student Rachel Factor for conducting, translating, and transcripting the Paris, Tokyo, and Madrid field interviews in French, Japanese, and Spanish, respectively. Without the exceptional programming and computer skills of Norman Wong, our extensive online survey would not have been possible. The authors thank our project advisory board—Annabelle Boyd, Frances Edwards, Greg Hull, Brian Jenkins, John Sullivan, and Amy Zegart—for their helpful comments and suggestions on earlier drafts of this report. We also wish to thank all the transit managers, chiefs of security, planners, and architects who took time to share their thoughts and opinions in our interviews and survey. Thanks are also offered to MTI staff, including Research Director Trixie Johnson, Research and Publications Assistant Sonya Cardenas, Webmaster Barney Murray, and Graphic Artist Shun Nelson. Editing and publication services were provided by Catherine Frazier, Irene Rush, and Beth Blevins. EDITOR’S NOTE The attacks on the London subway and bus systems in July 2005 occurred as this report was being prepared for publication. A complete case study of the event will be done by the Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI) through the National Transportation Security Center at MTI. Table of Contents i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 RESEARCH APPROACH 2 LAYOUT OF THE STUDY 3 FINDINGS: A DOZEN LESSONS LEARNED 5 POSTSCRIPT 17 INTRODUCTION 19 TRANSIT SECURITY IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT 20 CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF TRANSIT TERRORIST EVENTS 21 SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM, THIS RESEARCH, AND POLICY RESPONSES 22 METHODOLOGY 24 LAYOUT OF THE STUDY 24 SECURING URBAN RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEMS AGAINST TERRORISM: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 27 SCOPE OF THE LITERATURE 28 CASE STUDIES AND THE HISTORY OF TRANSIT TERRORISM 28 CHRONOLOGY 29 CASE STUDIES 31 FRAMEWORK FOR ADDRESSING RAIL TRANSIT TERRORISM 33 DESIGNING FOR SECURITY 37 DESIGN STRATEGIES 39 ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN 39 UNDERSTANDING THE THREAT TO THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 43 CHALLENGES TO THE SECURITY PARADIGM 46 SECURING TRANSIT SYSTEMS IN THE POST-9/11 ERA: A SURVEY OF U.S. TRANSIT OPERATORS 53 Mineta Transportation Institute ii Table of Contents OVERVIEW 53 DESCRIPTION OF SURVEY