Natural Hazards

, Volume 22, Issue 2, pp 185–201 | Cite as

Factors Influencing the Incorporation of Hazard Mitigation During Recovery from Disaster

  • Swaroop D. Reddy


This paper examines the factors promoting theadoption of mitigation measures during long-term recoveryfollowing Hurricane Hugo in the United States. Recovery fromdisaster offers opportunities for improving community resilienceto future disasters and for promoting sustainability. Variousdynamics during recovery, however, can interfere with mitigationof hazards. In this study the adoption of mitigation duringrecovery in three case communities after Hurricane Hugo isevaluated, with a focus on the influence of various regulations onhazard mitigation. There is a very strong connection betweendevelopment management and hazard mitigation; resourcemanagement also contributes to hazard mitigation. Conditionsthat influence advancement of hazard mitigation at thecommunity level include local leadership, a linkage betweenwell-established ways of doing things and new policies,adaptation to dynamic local conditions, monitoring andcompliance strategies tailored to suit local conditions, recognitionof local rights, and stakeholders' involvement in developingstrategies.

disaster recovery hazard mitigation storm surge floods hurricanes 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Berke, P. R. and Beatley, T.: 1992, Planning for Earthquakes: Risk, Politics and Policy, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.Google Scholar
  2. Berke, P. R., Kartez, J., and Wenger, D.: 1993, Recovery after a disaster: Achieving sustainable development, mitigation, and equity, Disasters 17(2), 93–109.Google Scholar
  3. Drabek, T. E. and Hoetmer, G. J. (eds.): 1991, Emergency Management: Principles and Practice for Local Government, ICMA, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  4. Drabek, T., Mushkatel, A., and Kilijanek, T.: 1983, Earthquake Mitigation Policy: The Experience in Two States, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  5. Federal Emergency Management Agency.: 1984, Elevated Residential Structures, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  6. Godschalk, D., Brower, D., and Beatley, T.: 1989, Catastrophic Coastal Storms, Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  7. Kingdon, J.: 1984, Agendas, Alternatives and Public Choices, Little, Brown and Company, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  8. Mileti, D.: 1980, Human adjustment to the risk of environmental extremes, Sociology and Social Research 64, 327–347.Google Scholar
  9. Mittler, E.: 1993, The public policy response to hurricane Hugo in South Carolina, Working Paper No. 84, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
  10. Nutter, F.: 1995, The changing policy environment, Paper presented at the Hazards Research and Applications Workshop, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
  11. Ostrom, E.: 1990, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action, Oxford University Press, London, England.Google Scholar
  12. Phillips, R.: 1990, Folly Beach Hurricane Hugo: Six Months Later, Darts Project, BCD Council of Governments, Charleston, South Carolina.Google Scholar
  13. Pilkey, O. and Dixon, K.: 1996, The Corps and the Shore, Island Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  14. Rubin, C. and Popkin, R.: 1990, Disaster recovery after hurricane Hugo in South Carolina, Working Paper No. 69, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
  15. Rubin, C., Saperstein, M., and Barbee, D.: 1985, Community Recovery From a Major Natural Disaster, Boulder, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado.Google Scholar
  16. Uphoff, N. T.: 1989, Local Institutional Development: An Analytical Source Book With Cases, Kumarian Press, West Hartford, Connecticut.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Swaroop D. Reddy
    • 1
  1. 1.Emergency Administration and Planning, Department of Public AdministrationUniversity of North TexasDentonU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations