Do Existing State Planning Mandates Matter in FEMA-Approved Plans under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000?
A Comparison of Cities in States with Existing Planning Mandates Versus Cities in States without Mandates Before the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K), some states required local governments to include hazard mitigation elements in their comprehensive land use plans, while others did not. Past research has investigated the effect of planning mandates on the quality of local hazard mitigation plans by comparing the quality of local plans in states with mandates with those in states without mandates. This research answers the question: Do cities in states with existing mandates address more required issues in their Federal Emergency Management Agency-approved hazard mitigation action plans than cities in states without mandates? The assumption would be that cities in states with mandates have more experience in responding to hazard mitigation directives and would incorporate them into their action plans more easily than those who do not. This study focuses on collaboration, public
Related Questions
- Where can I find more information on Hazard Mitigation Planning and the requirements of both North Carolina Hazard Mitigation Planning Initiative and the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000?
- Can the Mitigation 20/20™ programs be used to comply with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000?
- How do the Mitigation 20/20™ programs support state and local mitigation planning?
