Knowles addresses emergency response in the sense that if regulations would have been previously put in place and enforced prior to a disaster, the emergency response to the disaster wouldn't be as drastic.
To make this argument Knowles used various other academic papers, public and private reports from investigations, past and current government policies, and news articles and reports.
"Clashes over authority among powerful institutions both public and private, competition among rival experts for influence, inquiry into a disaster elevated to the status of a memorial for the dead: these are the base elements of the World Trade Center investigation. And yet, even a brief historical review shows us that these elements are not unique.""Notions of public responsibility for private safety were highly evolved by this time, hence the fact that a coroner's inquest indicted Mayor Harrison and a full slate of city officials for complicity in the deaths of the Iroquois victims."
"The most bizarre, and perhaps most telling, moment in the hearing occurred when Rep Anthony D. Weiner of New York, addressing the panel of experts, asked for the person in charge of the investigation to raise his hand. When three hands went up..."
Knowles supports this argument through his investigation and presentation of three historical disasters that occurred in the United States. The disasters he chose included a structural integrity factor and a general malfunction or misuse of safety equipment. Knowles also discussed policy that resulted because of these disasters. The argument is also supported through his discussion of the events that occurred post 9/11 and the public out cry from that event as well. Knowles discusses the investigation after theses events occurred and how often times there is a lot of opinions and findings as to what the cause of the disaster or equipment failure was.
The article has a long bibliography that includes other research papers, articles, public and private reports, as well as policies. The diversity of the bibliography shows the Knowles developed his arguement from a variety of sources and opinions.
The main argument Knowles develops in this article is structural and engineering integrity of buildings and equipment is not always questioned until a disaster occurs and there is public outcry for regulations to be put in place. Whereas if building codes and safety equipment was being regularly tested and enforced, when disasters occured they would not be as tramatic.
This article has been primarily referenced or discussed in other papers that discuss historical disasters.
Scott Knowles is a professor and the head of the Department of History Center for Science, Technology, and Society at Drexel University. His work specifically focuses on risk and disaster, with particular interests in modern cities, technology, and public policy. Knowles has recently released a book addressing the risks and disasters in modern America.