Skip to main content
Log in

Identifying factors influencing flood mitigation at the local level in Texas and Florida: the role of organizational capacity

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the United States, mitigating the adverse impacts of flooding has increasingly become the responsibility of local decision makers. Despite the importance of understanding why flood mitigation techniques are implemented at the local level, few empirical studies have been conducted over the last decade. Our study addresses this lack of research by examining the factors influencing local communities to adopt both structural and non-structural flood mitigation strategies. We use statistical models to predict multiple flood mitigation techniques implemented by cities and counties based on a survey of floodplain administrators and planning officials across Texas and Florida. Particular attention is paid to the role of organizational capacity to address floods in addition to various local geophysical and socioeconomic characteristics. Results indicate that organizational capacity is a significant factor contributing to the implementation of both structural and non-structural flood mitigation techniques, even when controlling for contextual characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. While past studies have analyzed capacity and commitment as separate variables, we combine these two concepts into one measure for two reasons. First, the modern organizational design literature often considers commitment a component of capacity. Second, the two variables are so highly correlated statistically, that we could not analyze them in the same equation due to very high levels of multicollinearity.

References

  • Abell RA (1999) Freshwater ecoregions of North America: a conservation assessment. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander D (1993) Natural disasters. Chapman & Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Berke P, Roenigk D, Kaiser EJ, Burby RJ (1996) Enhancing plan quality: evaluating the role of state planning mandates for natural hazard mitigation. J Environ Plan Manag 39:79–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkland TA, Burby RJ, Conrad D, Cortner H, Michener WK (2003) River ecology and flood hazard mitigation. Nat Hazards Rev 4(1):46–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody SD (2003a) Are we learning to make better plans? A longitudinal analysis of plan quality associated with natural hazards. J Plan Educ Res 23(2):191–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody SD (2003b) Examining the effects of biodiversity on the ability of local plans to manage ecological systems. J Environ Plan Manag 46(6):733–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody SD (2003c) Implementing the principles for ecosystem management through land use planning. Popul Environ 24(6):511–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody SD (2008) Ecosystem planning in Florida: solving regional problems through local decision making. Ashgate Press, Aldershot

    Google Scholar 

  • Brody SD, Highfield WE (2005) Does planning work? Testing the implementation of local environmental planning in Florida. J Am Plan Assoc 71(2):159–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody SD, Zahran S, Highfield WE, Grover H, Vedlitz A (2007) Identifying the impact of the built environment on flood damage in Texas. Disasters 32(1):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burby RJ (1998) Cooperating with nature: confronting natural hazards with land-use planning for sustainable communities. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Burby RJ, French SP (1981) Coping with floods: the land use management paradox. J Am Plan Assoc 47(3):289–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burby RJ, May PJ (1998) Intergovernmental environmental planning: addressing the commitment conundrum. J Environ Plan Manage 41(1):95–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burby RJ, French SP, Cigler BA, Kaiser EJ, Moreau D (1985) Flood plain land use management: a national assessment. Westview, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Burby RJ, May PJ, Berke PR, Dalton LC, French SP, Kaiser EJ (1997) Making governments plan: state experiments in managing land use. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Burby RJ, Beatley T, Berke PR, Deyle RE, French SP, Godschalk DR, Kaiser EJ, Kartez JD, May PJ, Olshansky R, Paterson RG, Platt RH (1999) Unleashing the power of planning to create disaster-resistant communities. J Am Plan Assoc 65(3):247–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapin T, Connerly C, Higgins H (2007) Growth management in Florida: planning for paradise. Ashgate Press, Aldershot

    Google Scholar 

  • Correia FN, Fordam M, Saraiva M, Bernardo F (1998) Flood hazard assessment and management: interface with the public. Water Resour Manag 12:209–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton LC, Burby RJ (1994) Mandates, plans and planners: building local commitment to development management. J Am Plan Assoc 60(4):444–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deyel RE, Chapin T, Baker E (2008) The proof of the planning is in the platting: an evaluation of Florida’s hurricane exposure mitigation planning mandate. J Am Plan Assoc 74(3):349–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deyle RE, Smith RA (1998) Local government compliance with state planning mandates: the effects of state implementation in Florida. J Am Plan Assoc 64(4):457–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillman DA (2000) Mail and internet survey: the tailored design method. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • FEMA (1997) Multi-hazard identification and risk assessment. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Few R (2003) Flooding, vulnerability and coping strategies: local responses to a global threat. Prog Dev Stud 3(1):43–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godschalk DR, Brower DJ, Beatley T (1989) Catastrophic coastal storms: hazard mitigation and development management. Duke University Press, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  • Godschalk DR, Beathley T, Berke P, Brower DJ, Kaiser EJ, Bohl CC, Goebel RM (1999) Natural hazard mitigation: recasting disaster policy and planning. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Grindle MS, Hilderbrand ME (1995) Building sustainable capacity in the public sector: what can be done? Public Adm Dev 15:441–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handmer J (1996) Policy design and local attributes for flood hazard management. J Conting Crisis Manag 4(4):189–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haque E (2000) Risk assessment, emergency preparedness, and response to hazards: the case of the 1997 Red River Valley flood, Canada. Nat Hazards 21:225–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartig JH, Law NL, Epstein D, Fuller K, Letterhos J, Krantzberg G (1995) Capacity building for restoring degraded areas in the Great Lakes. Int J Sustain Dev World 2:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartvelt F, Okun DA (1991) Capacity building for water resources management. Water Int 16:176–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling C (1996) Surprise for science, resilience for ecosystems, and incentives for people. Ecol Appl 6(3):733–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honadle BW (1981) A capacity-building framework: a search for concept and purpose. Public Adm Rev 43(5):575–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innes J (1996) Planning through consensus building: a new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. J Am Plan Assoc 62:460–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivey JL, Loe RC, Kreutzwiser RD (2002) Groundwater management by watershed agencies: an evaluation of the capacity of Ontario’s conservation authorities. J Environ Manag 64:311–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kartez J, Faupel C (1995) Factors promoting comprehensive local government hazards management. Paper presented at the nineteenth annual conference of the association of state floodplain managers, Portland, Maine

  • Larson L, Pasencia D (2001) No adverse impact: new direction in floodplain management policy. Nat Hazards Rev 2(4):167–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurian L, Day M, Backhurst M, Berke P, Ericksen N, Crawford J, Dixon J, Chapman S (2004) What drives plan implementation? Plans, planning agencies and developers. J Environ Plan Manag 47(4):555–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Flood Insurance Program (2007) Policy & claim statistics for flood insurance. http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/statistics/pcstat.shtm. Accessed 9 June 2008

  • Olshansky RB, Kartez JD (1998) Managing land use to build resilience. In: Burby R (ed) Cooperating with nature: confronting natural hazards with land use planning for sustainable communities. Joseph Henry Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt RH (1999) Disasters and democracy: the politics of extreme natural events. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonovic SP, Ahmad S (2005) Computer-based model for flood evacuation emergency planning. Nat Hazards 34:25–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith K (1996) Environmental hazards: assessing risk and reducing disaster. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein J, Moreno P, Conrad D, Ellis S (2000) Troubled waters: congress, the corps of engineers, and wasteful water projects. Taxpayers for Common Sense and National Wildlife Federation, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Texas State Data Center (2008) Population growth of Texas. http://txsdc.utsa.edu/. Cited 5 Dec 2008

  • Thampapillai DJ, Musgrave WF (1985) Flood damage and mitigation: a review of structural and non-structural measures and alternative decision frameworks. Water Resour Res 21:411–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2006) Services for the publics. http://www.usace.army.mil/public.html. Retrieved 13 Jan 2007

  • Westley F (1995) Governing design: the management of social systems and ecosystems management. In: Gunderson L et al (eds) Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Whipple W (1998) Water resources: a new era for coordination. ASCE Press, Reston, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • White GF (1936) Notes on flood protection and land use planning. Plan J 3(3):57–61

    Google Scholar 

  • White GF (1945) Human adjustment to floods: a geographical approach to the flood problem in the United States. Research Paper No. 29. Department of Geography, University of Chicago, Chicago

  • White GF (1975) Flood hazard in the United States: a research assessment. Institute of Behavioral Sciences. University of Colorado, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Wondolleck JM, Yaffee SL (2000) Making collaboration work: lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahran S, Brody SD, Peacock WG, Vedlitz A, Grover H (2008) Social vulnerability and the natural and built environment: a model of flood casualties in Texas, 1997–2001. Disasters (4). doi:10.1111/j.0361-3666.2008.01054.x

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article is based on research supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation Grant No. CMS-0346673. The findings and opinions reported are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the funding organizations or those who provided assistance with various aspects of the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samuel D. Brody.

Appendix A

Appendix A

See Table 5

Table 5 Indicators for mitigation and organizational capacity

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brody, S.D., Kang, J.E. & Bernhardt, S. Identifying factors influencing flood mitigation at the local level in Texas and Florida: the role of organizational capacity. Nat Hazards 52, 167–184 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9364-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9364-5

Keywords

Navigation