Recommended by Walter Reich:

Krueger's is a necessary and superb book. It demolishes the myth that poverty breeds terrorism, especially Islamist terrorism. Because it’s such a simple and widely-embraced explanation in the realm of ordinary crime—one that, moreover, suggests a simple solution (in this case, some kind of anti-poverty program in the Muslim world)—it was a myth that refused to die. World leaders such as Bill Clinton and Shimon Peres, as well as a panoply of other high government officials, theologians, journalists, intellectuals and Middle East specialists, all of whom should have known better, repeatedly resurrected it. Krueger’s demolition of the myth is probably the most effective and sustained one to date. I’m sure, though, that the argument that the gang member in West Side Story sarcastically cites to explain his criminal behavior—that he became depraved because he’d been deprived—will continue to be applied to the depravities of terrorism.

---

Product Description

Many popular ideas about terrorists and why they seek to harm us are fueled by falsehoods and misinformation. Leading politicians and scholars have argued that poverty and lack of education breed terrorism, despite the wealth of evidence showing that most terrorists come from middle-class, and often college-educated, backgrounds. In What Makes a Terrorist, Alan Krueger argues that if we are to correctly assess the root causes of terrorism and successfully address the threat, we must think more like economists do.

Krueger is an influential economist who has applied rigorous statistical analysis to a range of tough issues, from the minimum wage and education to the occurrence of hate crimes. In this book, he explains why our tactics in the fight against terrorism must be based on more than anecdote and speculation. Krueger closely examines the factors that motivate individuals to participate in terrorism, drawing inferences from terrorists' own backgrounds and the economic, social, and political conditions in the societies from which they come. He describes which countries are the most likely breeding grounds for terrorists, and which ones are most likely to be their targets. Krueger addresses the economic and psychological consequences of terrorism. He puts the terrorist threat squarely into perspective, revealing how our nation's sizeable economy is diverse and resilient enough to withstand the comparatively limited effects of most terrorist strikes. And he calls on the media to be more responsible in reporting on terrorism.

What Makes a Terrorist brings needed clarity to one of the greatest challenges of our time.

---

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #655290 in Books
• Published on: 2007-08-16
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 192 pages

Features

• ISBN13: 9780691134383
• Condition: NEW
• Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
• Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices

Review
"...complete with often counterintuitive findings about terrorism's root causes and impacts." -- Zack Phillips, Government Executive

"Krueger excels in making his difficult subject easy to grasp without reducing its inherent complexity." -- April Younglove, Library Journal

"Krueger's big idea is that terrorists tend to come from backgrounds of restricted civil and political rights." -- Mark Harrison, Times Higher Education Supplement

Review
What are the individual and societal causes of terrorism? The book's great strength is its focus on new sources of data examined in new ways. The most compelling analysis in the book is of biographical information on operatives from Hezbollah and Hamas. This is a substantial contribution, offering insight into who becomes a terrorist and, as important, pushing terrorism studies in a productive new direction, toward microlevel data. The book provides a valuable service in dispelling the stereotype of the poor, ignorant terrorist.
(Ethan Bueno de Mesquita Science )

It seems universally obvious that poverty and poor education breed terrorism. But it's wrong.... [Alan Krueger] went in search of evidence for the terrorism part of the proposition and found next to none. He has set out his findings in What Makes A Terrorist.
(Peter Martin Canberra Times )

This new book by Alan Krueger, full of first-rate empirical work, punctures many myths about terrorism.
(Tyler Cowen Marginal Revolution )

[Krueger] seeks to put the risks Americans face from terrorism into 'proper perspective' with his unique book.
(John McCaslin Washington Times )

What Makes a Terrorist brings together disparate data, such as academic studies and government reports, arraying them into a concise, accessible argument against the notion that we can defeat terrorism through aid and education. While Krueger is careful to affirm that these are useful in combating many social ills, he is adamant that terrorism is not one of them. He offers skilled analysis to show that an aggressive foreign policy based on this fallacious assumption has cost several nations dearly and also warns that continuing along this course may provoke further terrorist acts.
(Tony Azios Christian Science Monitor )

Using raw data from government, academic, and think-tank sources and citing the work of other economists on poverty, race, terrorism, and hate crimes, Krueger explains in clear and accessible prose that the average terrorist suspect is highly educated, professionally employed, from a middle- or higher-class background, and, most important, from a country that suppresses civil liberties...Avoiding jargon whenever possible and defining it when unavoidable, Krueger excels in making his difficult subject easy to grasp without reducing its inherent complexity. The occasional pop culture reference (e.g., to the Daily Show) adds to the appeal. Highly recommended for both academic and public collections.
(April Younglove Library Journal )

What makes a terrorist? Are the drivers primarily political or economic? Princeton economist Alan Krueger has made a great study of this question...What Makes a Terrorist lacks a question mark. That's because Krueger, marshaling persuasive statistics and analysis, comes down firmly on the side of politics, noting most terrorists are middle-class and well-educated.
(Thomas P.M. Barnett Knoxville News Sentinel )

Economist Alan Krueger explores this phenomenon with a systematic study of the evidence.... All in all, the research that Krueger gathers together suggests that if there is a link between poverty, education and terrorism, it is the opposite of the one popularly assumed.
(Tim Harford Financial Times )

[Krueger] analyzed data from NCTC and elsewhere, and came up with often counter-intuitive findings...Krueger's book collects comprehensive evidence.
(Zack Phillips Government Executive )

An invaluable little book.... What Makes a Terrorist uses standard tools of economics and statistical analysis to get at the truth about terrorism.... Krueger finds one familiar fact in all his numbers. Countries with fewer civil liberties tend to produce more terrorists.
(Daniel Finkelstein Times )

Krueger's book is a necessary read for anyone who wishes to understand terrorism, especially because many of the popular notions of what causes it are not rooted in reality. One wishes that politicians, especially, would pay attention.
(Amit Varma Live Mint )

[Krueger] in his groundbreaking new book, What Makes a Terrorist, enlists the 'dismal science' to tackle the despicable one. Provocative, dispassionate and accessible, Krueger's book is a breath of fresh air in the stifling climate of empty speculation that dominates the terror dialogue in post-9/11 America.
(Ryan Hagen Brooklyn Rail )

In a compelling analysis, Krueger points out how a lack of legitimate political expression and civil liberties turns some individuals to terrorism. He also provides a pointed and witty account of the problems the U.S. administration has faced in its own attempts at empiricism. . . . This book is a model of how academics can contribute to major public policy debates.
(Lawrence D. Freedman Foreign Affairs )

To challenge the widespread view that terrorism is caused by economic deprivation and lack of education, Krueger redirects thinking about terrorism by raising three provocative questions that can be answered by scrutiny of evidence from an economic perspective....Krueger shows how complex the data and issues are, the dangers of moving from correlation to cause--and how to think clearly and courageously about politically motivated violence.
(L.J. Alderink Choice )

I am quite sure that this book will be very widely read; it builds on recent literature by both Krueger and a young breed of scholars who have used technical sophistication to disprove the expected positive effect of poverty and ignorance on terrorism.
(Siddhartha Mitra Eastern Economic Journal )

Review
In this beautifully written book, one of the world's most respected economists tackles the question of terrorism. Krueger's work represents the most careful data-driven research ever done in this area. This is a book that a lay audience will read and enjoy, but with a rigor and depth that will inform the experts in the field. This is timely and important work which should play a critical role in shaping our public policies on terrorism.
(Steven D. Levitt, coauthor of "Freakonomics" )

---

Customer Reviews

Dismal Science: The Economics of Terrorism
In a series of three lectures, economist Alan Krueger offers 2 major insights on terrorism, one of them well known but oft forgotten, and the other somewhat more surprising. He then goes on to investigate various consequences of terrorism. Ultimately, his study leaves most of the truly difficult questions of terrorism unanswered - but given the enormity of the challenge, that is not really surprising.

Krueger opens by demolishing a myth that should have died a long time ago - that terrorism is caused by economic depravity. It turns out that there is no statistical correlation between either poverty or lack of education and terrorism. Krueger points out that we tend to analogize terrorism to property crime, of which the poor are guiltier then the rich. But that is the wrong view - terrorism should be seen as the equivalent of voting - an activity carried out by the educated and well informed, not by the hungry and rather apolitical masses.

In the second chapter, Krueger explores other issues relating to terrorism. His main conclusion is that terrorism is mostly a local issue: long range attacks such as 9/11 and 7/7 are the exception rather than the rule. Terrorism often works across religious lines: the targets of terrorist attacks are overwhelmingly members of another religion. But the particular religion doesn't matter: Islamic terrorists are no more widespread then other terrorists. Perhaps most significantly, Krueger finds that terrorists usually come from countries with poor civil and political liberties.

The final lecture deals with the consequences of terrorism. Krueger presents two views of terror's economic effects: That it has a big, lasting effect, or that it is only a temporary thing. Overall, Krueger comes out in favor of the latter, although he concedes that there are good counter arguments.

I think there are a lot of questions that are left unanswered in Krueger's study. First, Krueger does not differentiate his various terrorists. As I pointed out earlier, the ones involved in long range attacks like 9/11 are the exception, rather then the rule. Is the analysis Krueger offers for terrorists in general also relevant for al-Qaeda type terrorists? If terrorism is a world wide phenomenon, why are the majority of the terrorist attacks against US and Western targets Muslim or Arab in origin? More generally, what determines what target will a terrorist chose? Conceivably, North Koreans living under a dictatorship have legitimate grievances against the US for occupying their country - and yet North Korean terrorists are not attacking the US. The same could be said for Latin American and other East Asian countries.

As Krueger points out, Terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy. The challenge of extreme Islam may be a unique danger even if it has no monopoly on the use of terrorism. And the alleged solution - promoting civil liberties and political rights in states that hate the West - may be worse then the disease, as we are learning, to our sorrow, from the Iraq fiasco.

Very interesting but with many contradictions.
This is an original book that challenges mainstream beliefs about the root cause of terrorism. Learning from foreign policy luminaries such as Samuel Huntington in The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Bernard Lewis in What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East, and Thomas Friedman in From Beirut to Jerusalem, I believed that poor economic conditions contribute to high unemployment among youths that are prone to become terrorists out of frustration. It made sense.

Krueger demonstrates that poor economic conditions does not cause terrorism. He dismantles this theory by stating that half of the World's population lives on less than $2 a day. If poverty caused terrorism, we'd be overwhelmed by terrorists.

Much of Krueger's findings are counterintuitive. In some cases they are supported by robust statistical analysis (negative binomial regression). His regression models allow him to occasionally differentiate what directional role various socio economic and demographic variables play in relation to terrorism.

Within the book, Krueger expands on three lectures he gave in England and turns them into three long chapters on the subject. The first chapter addresses who becomes a terrorist. The second chapter covers where does terror emerge? And, the third one covers what does terrorism accomplish?

Within the first chapter, he indicates that participation in terrorism is positively correlated with education and negatively correlated with poverty. He found that was the case among Hezbollah militants. He stated that is not surprising as Hezbollah recruits young, educated, middle class students from college campuses in the Middle East.

In the second chapter, he develops a regression model that explains where terrorism originates and what countries it targets. The countries where terrorism originates have authoritarian governments with few civil liberties. The targeted countries are democracies with a more civil liberties and a high GDP per capita. Thus, economic wealth is not a significant variable in whether terrorism originates from a specific country (lack of civil liberties is); but it is in figuring out if a country is likely to be targeted. Democratic governments are vulnerable to terrorism because terrorists attacks can influence the media and government policies within a democracy. Meanwhile, they have little impact on authoritarian governments. Also surprising, trade between countries has no impact in figuring out likelihood of terrorism. Literacy rate has no influence on the likelihood of terrorism originating from a specific country. He concludes this chapter by stating that terrorism should be viewed as a violent political act rather than a response to economic conditions.

In the third chapter he reviews the impact of terrorism. He looks at both the economic and psychological impacts. Within the economic dimension, he conveys that there are two school of thoughts. The first one suggests that terrorism has a weak economic impact. The second one suggests it has a strong one. The difference between the two positions depends in part if terrorist acts are isolated (like in the U.S.) or chronic like in the Basque region. If they are isolated, an economy typically recovers quickly. But when chronic, terrorism leads to depressed foreign and domestic investments leading to economies performing way below potential. He moves on to the psychological and political impact of terrorism. In this area, he does not offer much that is already known. He concludes that overall terrorism has much of an impact only as much as we overreact to it. He seems to prefer a laissez faire attitude towards terrorism. Yet, he also mentions that terrorism could have potentially catastrophic consequences by alluding but not mentioning potential nuclear capability. Yet, he has nothing to prescribe to prevent such scenarios besides suggesting radiation sensors. That seems like an after-the-fact measure.

This book, however, is crippled with contradictions. The author reaches conflicting positions regarding the causal role Muslims play in terrorism. On page 81, he states that he found religion was not a significant factor in determining whether citizens from a country would be perpetrators of terrorism. But, on page 73, his own data shows that Muslim countries originate by far the highest terrorist attacks per million citizens. Also, on page 51 he states that terrorists are motivated by geopolitical grievances related to Western policies. Yet, on page 101 he found that the number of U.S. military troops stationed in a country had actually a lessening impact on the number of foreign insurgents captured in Iraq from such occupied countries. His studying the relationship between education levels and support for terrorism in Jordan, Morocco, Pakistan, Turkey, and Palestine is rather ambiguous. In the majority of cases, the data is trendless. And, you can observe with more confidence that the ones with no formal education have either no opinion or support terrorism less than citizens with other levels of education. Instead, the author pushes the case that it is the ones with university education who support terrorism the most. This argument is weak because it is correct only in certain countries (Turkey and Morocco) and is clearly wrong in others (Jordan and Pakistan). If the author had focused on the illiterate instead, his theory would have stronger data support. Also regarding the impact of terrorism, the entire chapter is ambiguous. He admits to being in both camps that terrorism has a significant economic impact and that it does not.

Overall, this is an interesting book. But, this is a complex subject that deserves further studying resulting in a more coherent analysis.

What Makes a Terrorist? We're still not sure
This book has some insights but it is clearly written for other economists. If you do not understand economics well, you will only understand half of this book.

Moreover, the author is so reluctant to draw conclusions from his research--with good reason, I should add--that it is almost a tease. The conclusions from his findings are very tentative, so while we learn some things from this book, we see how complex terrorism is and how difficult it is to draw broad conclusions about it.