Local hazard mitigation plans: A preliminary estimation of state-level completion from 2004 to 2009

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 121
Author(s):  
Andrea M. Jackman, PhD ◽  
Mario G. Beruvides, PhD, PE
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Management ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Hazard Mitigation ◽  
State Level ◽  
Initial Study ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Hazard Vulnerability ◽  
Us Census

According to the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and subsequent federal policy, local governments are required to have a Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) written and approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be eligible for federal mitigation assistance. This policy took effect on November 1, 2004. Using FEMA’s database of approved HMPs and US Census Bureau’s 2002 Survey of Local Governments, it is estimated that 3 years after the original deadline, 67 percent of the country’s active local governments were without an approved HMP. A follow-up examination in 2009 of the eight states with the lowest completion percentages did not indicate significant improvement following the initial study and revealed inconsistencies in plan completion data over time. The completion percentage varied greatly by state and did not appear to follow any expected pattern such as wealth or hazard vulnerability that might encourage prompt completion of a plan. Further, the results indicate that ~92 percent of the approved plans were completed by a multijurisdictional entity, which suggests single governments seldom complete and gain approval for plans. Based on these results, it is believed that state-level resolution is not adequate for explaining the variation of plan completion, and further study at the local level is warranted.

The variational effects of jurisdictional attributes on hazard mitigation planning costs

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 53
Author(s):  
Andrea M. Jackman, PhD ◽  
Mario G. Beruvides, PhD, PE
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Management ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Hazard Mitigation ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Influential Factor ◽  
Mitigation Planning ◽  
Follow Up Studies ◽  
Final Rule ◽  
The Cost

Under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and Federal Emergency Management Agency's subsequent Interim Final Rule, the requirement was placed on local governments to author and gain approval for a Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) for the areas under their jurisdiction. Low completion percentages for HMPs—less than one-third of eligible governments— were found by an analysis conducted 3 years after the final deadline for the aforementioned legislation took place. Follow-up studies showed little improvement at 5 and 8 years after the deadline. Based on these results, a previous study hypothesized that the cost of creating a HMP might be an influential factor in explaining why most jurisdictions had failed to write or gain approval for a HMP. The frequency of natural hazards experienced by the planning jurisdiction, the number of jurisdictions participating in the plan, and the population and population density were found to explain more than half of the variation in HMP costs. This study is a continuation of that effort, finding that there are significant differences in cost both across ranges of values for the jurisdictional attributes and single-jurisdictional versus multijurisdictional plans.

How much do hazard mitigation plans cost? An analysis of federal grant data

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 271
Author(s):  
Andrea M. Jackman, PhD ◽  
Mario G. Beruvides, PhD, PE
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Predictive Power ◽  
Hazard Mitigation ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Matrix Analysis ◽  
Federal Grant ◽  
Interaction Terms ◽  
Final Rule ◽  
The Cost

Under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and Federal Emergency Management Agency’s subsequent Interim Final Rule, the requirement was placed on local governments to author and gain approval for a Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) for the areas under their jurisdiction. Low completion percentages for HMPs—less than one-third of eligible governments—were found by an analysis conducted 3 years after the final deadline for the aforementioned legislation took place. Follow-up studies showed little improvement at 5 and 8 years after the deadline. It was hypothesized that the cost of a HMP is a significant factor in determining whether or not a plan is completed. A study was conducted using Boolean Matrix Analysis methods to determine what, if any, characteristics of a certain community will most influence the cost of a HMP. The frequency of natural hazards experienced by the planning area, the number of jurisdictions participating in the HMP, the population, and population density were found to significantly affect cost. These variables were used in a regression analysis to determine their predictive power for cost. It was found that along with two interaction terms, the variables explain approximately half the variation in HMP cost.

scholarly journals A National Evaluation of State and Territory Roles in Hazard Mitigation: Building Local Capacity to Implement FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (23) ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Gavin Smith ◽  
Olivia Vila
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Management ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Hazard Mitigation ◽  
Grant Applications ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Low Levels ◽  
Resilient Infrastructure ◽  
Survey Responses

This article describes the findings of a national survey of State Hazard Mitigation Officers (SHMOs) in U.S. states and territories in order to gain a greater understanding of the roles that they play in assisting local governments to build the capacity required to successfully develop and implement Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-funded Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grants, an important but understudied aspect of hazard mitigation governance. The research questions focus on: (1) How states and territories enable local governments to develop and implement HMA grants and (2) SHMOs’ opinions regarding their perceived capacity and effectiveness in assisting local governments to develop and implement HMA grants. Results show that while states and territories are relatively well-equipped to perform general administrative duties required by FEMA, SHMOs expressed wide variation in their capacity to assist local governments to develop and implement HMA grants. This was particularly evident with regard to the delivery of specific technical assistance measures required to develop HMA grants. Survey responses also highlight modest levels of participation in FEMA-designed efforts to delegate responsibility to states and territories and low levels of participation in programs that offer pre-application funding to local governments to help them develop HMA grant applications. These findings should concern FEMA as the agency embarks on the implementation of the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, an ambitious pre-disaster hazard mitigation grant initiative.

Using National Financial Incentives to Build Local Resiliency: The U.S. Disaster Mitigation Act

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 164-171
Author(s):  
Kenneth C. Topping ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Hazard Mitigation ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Federal Grants ◽  
Local Resilience ◽  
State And Local ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) which requires adoption of multihazard mitigation plans as a precondition of local government eligibility for federal pre-disaster and postdisaster hazard mitigation grants. Its underlying purpose was to encourage local governments to systematically plan for reducing risks and future disaster losses before requesting federal grants to execute hazard mitigation projects. This paper examines the DMA 2000 legislation, its purposes, and the responses to it by state and local governments. Among other things the paper: 1) describes DMA 2000 statutory requirements, 2) assesses overall participation by region, 3) uses the State of California as a case study to examines hazard mitigation plan compliance issues, and 4) explores long-term implications of this broad national effort to use financial incentives to increase local resilience. By early 2009, 18,783 locally adopted hazard mitigation plans had been approved by FEMA. Although community resilience outcomes cannot be truly assessed without further research, the magnitude of this response implies substantial long-term local capacity building benefits within the U.S. This experience should also be the subject of comparative research regarding parallel efforts elsewhere.

Local Fiscal Behavior Under Subnational Provisions

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yilin Hou
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Policy Design ◽  
Local Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
State Governments ◽  
Local Policy ◽  
Policy Interactions ◽  
Local Finance ◽  
Fiscal Behavior ◽  
State And Local

Abstract This study examines fiscal policy interactions between state and local governments. Research in this area has been increasing but remains inadequate, especially on local policy options during economic downturns. State governments oversee local finances, also provide financial assistance; localities are expected to adopt counter-cyclical fiscal policies (CCFP). There has been an increasing literature on CCFP at the state level, but little on the local level. This paper uses U.S. county data for empirical analysis and attempts to move closer to consensus on the determinants of local savings and their effects on outlays. I find no evidence that localities smooth across boom-bust cycles; i.e., they do not save for revenue shortfalls. I find that state fiscal institutions cast real impact on local finance. These shed light on local policy making, also add to existing evidence for subnational policy design.

A cross-sectional analysis of local government health and wellbeing plans and priorities in Victoria, Australia

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Anthony Alindogan ◽  
Eli Ristevski ◽  
Anske Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Low Socioeconomic Status ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Local Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
Health Priorities ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Low Socioeconomic ◽  
Health And Wellbeing ◽  
Significant Difference

The aim of this study is to explore local health and wellbeing plans and priorities by Victorian local governments (LGs), specifically to: (1) analyse how LG priority areas are described in comparison to the State-level plan; (2) identify differences between regional and metropolitan health priorities; and (3) identify differences between LGs with high and low socioeconomic status. Content analysis of 79 LG health and wellbeing plans was undertaken. Differences in health and wellbeing priorities between LGs were examined using the t-test for two proportions. In total, 20% of the plans did not specify actions to address health priorities. One in three (34%) did not specify how evaluation will be done. Alcohol and other drugs, gambling and housing were prioritised more by metropolitan LGs, whereas disease prevention was prioritised more in regional LGs. There was no significant difference in health and wellbeing priorities of LGs with high and low socioeconomic status except for gambling. State-level health and wellbeing plans should be sensitive to differences in priorities of LGs. There is a need for local plans to commit to specific actions and evaluation. This analysis provides basis for more community-reflective, State-level planning and calls for more emphasis on identifying actions and evaluation in local level planning.

scholarly journals Spatial assessment of socio-economic vulnerability to climate-related disasters at the local level: Study of coastal villages in Indramayu, Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 916 (1) ◽  
pp. 012035
Author(s):  
N C Drestalita ◽  
N Wijaya ◽  
N M Iqbal
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Economic Indicator ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Ecological Impacts ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Economic Indicators ◽  
Economic Vulnerability ◽  
Demographic Indicators

Abstract Climate change has brought ecological impacts in the coastal area, such as seawater intrusion, coastal floods, and erosion, which have caused broader effects on non-physical aspects of human activities, including the coastal economy and society. This study aims to assess the socio-economic vulnerability to climate-related disasters in the coastal villages of Indramayu, Indonesia. Secondary data were collected based on available sources. Spatial and statistical analyses were applied. This study uses ten indicators to measure the socio-economic vulnerability of 41 coastal villages. These indicators include seven socio-demographic indicators and three economic indicators. The analysis shows that ten villages (24.39%) are socially vulnerable, and five villages (4.87%) are economically vulnerable. Overall, two out of seven socio-demographic indicators have high vulnerability levels, namely disaster mitigation systems and established community groups. Two out of three economic indicators also have high degrees of vulnerability, namely the availability of economic facilities and the employment-based sector. The other indicators with medium to low degree of vulnerability are population density, the elderly population, the disabled population (socio-demographic indicators), and poverty (economic indicator). From this study, local governments and other relevant actors can prioritize climate-related disaster reduction strategies in particular sectors and locations through spatial and development plans.

scholarly journals Promoting Clean Energy Innovation at the State and Local Level

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 360-373
Author(s):  
David Popp
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Local Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Local Economy ◽  
Working Paper ◽  
Energy Innovation ◽  
State And Local

AbstractInnovation is an important part of energy policy, and encouraging clean energy innovation is often an explicit goal of policy makers. For local governments, promoting clean energy innovation is seen not only as a pathway to a cleaner economy but also as a tool for promoting the local economy. But is such optimism warranted? There is a substantial literature examining the relationships between innovation and environmental policy, but few studies focus explicitly on innovation at the state and local level. In this paper, I provide key lessons from research on clean energy innovation, focusing on lessons relevant for state and local governments. I then summarize the results of a recent working paper by Fu et al. (2018) that studied wind energy innovation across individual states in the United States. While state-level policies can promote clean energy innovation, it is overall market size that matters most. Thus, innovation need not occur in those states most actively promoting clean energy. I conclude with lessons for state and local governments drawn from both this work and the broader literature on energy innovation.

Special Issue on Effective Emergency Management: A Geographic Approach

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-4
Author(s):  
Haruo Hayashi ◽  
Go Urakawa
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Damage Assessment ◽  
Government Agency ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Tokyo Metropolitan ◽  
Special Project ◽  
Housing Damage

This special issue introduces 12 papers on a variety of best practices for effective emergency management using geospatial database and geographic information system (GIS). The first seven papers are grouped under GIS in action, show how GIS is used for different disaster reduction services. In response to the 2007 Niigata-ken Chuetsu-oki Earthquake, GIS maps have been a part of Niigata PrefectureGovernment Emergency Operation Center work to aid in decisionmaking by providing Common Operational Picture (COP) as detailed by Tamura et al. A victim database was used as the key for integrated victim support in Kashiwazaki City in long-term recovery as detailed by Inoguchi et al. The success of GIS-based postdisaster operations vastly impacts on local governments in Wajima City, hit by the 2007 Noto Hanto Earthquake, where the use of GIS continued and expanded as an effective tool for building local government agency response capacity as detailed by Ura et al. In Kashiwazaki, the failure to apply municipal integrated GIS in postdisaster operations changed GIS policy to a less expensive service-oriented GIS readily available for local government agency use as detailed by Honma et al. A nationwide GIS map archive for researchers contains maps created at different disaster response stages as detailed by Nawa et al. Visualization of disaster impact using GIS is a powerful tool for disaster mitigation and preparedness, with impact by a worst-case-scenario magnitude 7.3 Tokyo Metropolitan earthquake as detailed by Suzuki et al. Design principles for visualization are reviewed by Urabe et al. In Japan, damage certification is used as the basis for deciding public and private support eligibility for quake victims, making it imperative for local governments to issue certification based on housing damage assessment results as soon and as fairly as possible. Based on practices in Kashiwazaki City following the 2007 Niigataken Chuetsu-oki earthquake, damage to 64,000 household footprints was assessed within one month as detailed in the last five papers. Two papers cover GIS-based data acquisition in housing damage assessment - PDA-assisted real-time input as detailed by Tonosaki et al., and OCRassisted paper result conversion as detailed by Higashida et al. In addition to housing damage assessment data, preexisting residential and housing databases should be integrated. Basic principles for creating this new database using GeoWrap are detailed by Yoshitomi et al. and implemented for Kashiwazaki as detailed by Matsuoka et al. In anticipating future disasters, a proposal to integrate local government operations both daily routine and emergency management was made by Urakawa et al. We appreciate the support of the Special Project for Governance in Ubiquitous Society (2007-2009) by the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) and the Special Project for Metropolitan Earthquake Disaster Mitigation in Tokyo Metropolitan Area (2007-2011) by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan (MEXT). Lastly, we would like to appreciate all the authors for their wonderful contribution as well as all the blind reviewers for their dedication to make this issue more valuable.

Quantifying the relationship between predisaster mitigation spending and major disaster declarations for US states and territories

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 341-347
Author(s):  
Katharina Renken, PhD ◽  
Andrea M. Jackman, PhD ◽  
Mario G. Beruvides, PhD, PE
Keyword(s):  
Local Government ◽  
Local Governments ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Disaster Mitigation ◽  
Major Disaster ◽  
National Implementation ◽  
Disaster Declarations ◽  
Proactive Measures ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Relationship

Since the Stafford Act of 1988, the process of obtaining a formal Major Disaster Declaration has been codified for national implementation, with tasks defined at the smallest levels of local government up to the President. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) placed additional requirements on local government to plan for mitigation activities within their jurisdictions. The goal of DMA 2000 was to not only implement more mitigative actions at the local level, but also initiate a process by which local governments could set up ongoing conversations and collaborative efforts with neighboring jurisdictions to ensure continuous, proactive measures were taken against the impacts of disasters. Based on the increased attention paid to mitigation and planning activities, a reasonable expectation would be to see a decline in the number of major disaster declarations since DMA 2000. However, simple correlation analysis shows that since DMA 2000, the number of major disaster declarations continues to increase. This article is intended as a preliminary study to encourage more detailed analysis in the future of the impacts of federal policy on local-level disaster prevention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document