**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**Course Title: Coastal Hazards Management**

**Session Title: Coastal Hazards Management Framework**

**Author: Anna K. Schwab, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill**

**Time: 50 minutes**

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Objectives:**

1.  Present an overview of the institutions involved in coastal hazards
    management.

2.  Discuss the role of private landowners and investors in the
    development of the coastal zone.

3.  Discuss the role of non-governmental organizations in the management
    of coastal development.

26.4 Discuss the role of the various levels of government in the
management of coastal hazards: federal, state, local and regional.

**Scope:**

Sessions 26 and 27 are intended to give the students a broad overview of
the range of institutions that manage development in the coastal zone
and the legal framework within which they operate. It is through these
various institutions that the hazard mitigation strategies and
management policies that were introduced in earlier sessions, and that
will be expanded upon in later sessions, are carried out in the coastal
region. Students should keep the issues that are raised here in mind as
we review later sessions that speak of specific government programs and
policies that deal with natural hazards management.

Session 26 will introduce students to the various players on the coastal
management scene, including private landowners and investors,
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the various levels of
government that operate in our federal system. The objective of this
session is to highlight the vast array of stakeholders in coastal
management, and how this patchwork system impacts the management of
natural hazards. Some of this discussion reflects concepts that were
introduced during Sessions 12 and 13, when we discussed governance of
the coast and the types of policy that are available to coastal
managers.

More specific information about the role of government in coastal
hazards management will be found in Sessions 28 - 32 (Federal Policy);
Sessions 33 and 34 (State Policy); and Sessions 35 and 36 (Local
Policy).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Readings:**

*Instructor and Student Readings:*

Beatley, Timothy, et al. 2002. *An Introduction to Coastal Zone
Management*. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, pp. 56-63; chapter 4;
chapter 7.

May, Peter J. and Robert E. Deyle.1998. "Governing Land Use in Hazardous
Areas with a Patchwork System," in Raymond J. Burby, ed. *Cooperating
with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-Use Planning for
Sustainable Communities*. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press, pp.
57-82.

Paterson, Robert G. 1998. "The Third Sector: Evolving Partnerships in
Hazard Mitigation," in Raymond J. Burby, ed. *Cooperating with Nature:
Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-Use Planning for Sustainable
Communities*. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press, pp. 203 -- 230.

Platt, Rutherford H. 1999. *Disasters and Democracy: The Politics of
Extreme Natural Events.* Washington, D.C.: Island Press, pp. xv-xix; pp.
1-8; pp. 11-46; pp. 277-300.

*Additional Instructor and Student Readings:*

Beatley, Timothy, et al. 2002. *An Introduction to Coastal Zone
Management*. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, chapter 6; chapter 8.

City, Christopher. June 2000. "Duty and Disaster: Holding Local
Governments Liable for Permitting Uses in High-Hazard Areas." *North
Carolina Law Review*, Vol. 78, No. 5.

Platt, Rutherford H. 1999. *Disasters and Democracy: The Politics of
Extreme Natural Events.* Washington, D.C.: Island Press, Chapter 6.

Wright, Robert R. and Morton Gitelman. 2000. *Land Use in a Nutshell*,
4^th^ edition. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing, pp.1-10; 11-31

**General Requirements:**

The material of Session 26 is to be presented as lecture, supported by
PowerPoint slides. The material here lends itself very well to class
discussion, which is to be encouraged.

Some of the material in Session 26 reflects concepts that were
introduced during Sessions 12 and 13, when we discussed governance of
the coast and the types of policy that are available to coastal
managers. The instructor may wish to briefly review those sessions at
the beginning of Session 26, perhaps by quickly running through the
PowerPoint slides that were shown during Sessions 12 and 13.

**PowerPoint Slides:**

**PowerPoint 26.1** Players in Coastal Hazards Management

**PowerPoint 26.2** Land Ownership: The Bundle of Sticks

**PowerPoint 26.3** Rights of Ownership

**PowerPoint 26.4** Limits on Ownership

**PowerPoint 26.5** Factors in Coastal Development Decisions

**PowerPoint 26.6** Ways to Affect Private Sector Development Decisions

**PowerPoint 26.7** Non-Governmental Organizations: Private
Environmental Groups

**PowerPoint 26.8** Non-Governmental Organizations: Land Trusts

**PowerPoint 26.9** Non-Governmental Organizations: Private Interest
Groups

**PowerPoint 26.10** Non-Governmental Organizations: Professional
Associations

**PowerPoint 26.11** Government Coalitions

**PowerPoint 26.12** Third Sector Capabilities

**PowerPoint 26.13** Approaches to Government Regulation of Coastal
Development

**PowerPoint 26.14** Ad Hoc Federal Response to Early Disasters

**PowerPoint 26.15** Federal Disaster Response in the 1930s

**PowerPoint 26.16** Federal Disaster Response in the 1950s

### PowerPoint 26.17 Federal Disaster Response in the 1960s {#powerpoint-26.17-federal-disaster-response-in-the-1960s .unnumbered}

**PowerPoint 26.18** Federal Disaster Response in the 1970s

**PowerPoint 26.19** Federal Disaster Response during the 1980s and
1990s

### PowerPoint 26.20 A Change in Focus for Post-Disaster Recovery {#powerpoint-26.20-a-change-in-focus-for-post-disaster-recovery .unnumbered}

**PowerPoint 26.21** Federal Disaster Response in the late 1990s

**PowerPoint 26.22** Post September 11^th^

**PowerPoint 26.23** Federal Disaster Assistance: A Moral Hazard?

**PowerPoint 26.24** State Regulatory Tools for Hazard Areas

**PowerPoint 26.25** Local Land Use Management Tools

**PowerPoint 26.26** Disaster Resilient Local Communities

**PowerPoint 26.27** Issues of Regional Concern

**PowerPoint 26.28** Forms of Regional Governance

**PowerPoint 26.29** Elements of Success in Regional Governance

Objective 26.1 Present an overview of the institutions involved in
coastal hazards management.

**Requirements:**

The content should be presented as lecture, supported by PowerPoint
slides.

The following PowerPoint slide will be used during this Objective:

**PowerPoint 26.1** Players in Coastal Hazards Management

**Remarks:**

# Players in Coastal Hazards Management {#players-in-coastal-hazards-management .unnumbered}

There are myriad players in coastal hazards management.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.1 Players in Coastal Hazards Management\]**

1.  **Government**

    -   Different levels of government have **jurisdiction** in the
        coastal zone:

-   Federal

-   State

-   Local

-   Regional

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Some of these governments have **overlapping boundaries** and
    degrees of intervention.

-   Others **operate discreetly** from one another.

-   And within one level of government there are often many layers of
    management.

    -   **Government can manage** coastal development in **several
        ways.** Regulations, subsidies, practices, taxation, programs
        and ownership are all forms of management. We will discuss some
        of these tactics in later sessions.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The most direct form of management is through **land ownership**.
    Public lands in the coastal zone are quite extensive in some areas.

    -   The **federal government** in particular owns acres of national
        park and forestlands, as well as military bases and training
        grounds in coastal areas.

    -   The **coastal states** also own significant amounts of land in
        the coastal zone, including parks, recreation areas, ports and
        harbors, and other types of holdings

    -   **Local governments** also own some lands in coastal areas as
        open space, access areas and other public areas.

-   **Which level of government is most appropriate** to manage the
    coastal zone, including land use and development, is often a
    **troubling dilemma.**

> **2. Private Owners and Investors**

-   Government is not the only player on the coastal management scene.
    Much of the **land in the coastal zone is owned by private
    landholders** and investors.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   We will discuss what it means to be a private landowner in our legal
    system, including the various **rights and duties** that are
    inherent in ownership.

-   We will also discuss the extent to which private developers and
    investors can exert their own will in the **coastal real estate
    market**, and some of the driving forces behind their development
    and investment decisions.

> **3. Non-Government Organizations (NGOs)**

-   Non-governmental organizations also play **an important role** in
    coastal management.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Non-profit conservations, land trusts, environmental groups, and
    other organizations often are active in coastal areas.

-   Each type of organization pursues its own agenda, but many of the
    objectives overlap with local or state management goals.

# A Patchwork System {#a-patchwork-system .unnumbered}

-   The **complexities** of the **interrelationships** of the various
    players in the coastal hazard management scene can be intriguing and
    also confusing.

-   The **separation of government levels** in our federalist system
    makes **intergovernmental relations** a major mechanism for the
    pursuit of public policies and public programs in the United States
    (McDowell).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   With so little centralization, so much separation of powers, and so
    much pluralism, a "patchwork" system of governance has arisen,
    particularly with regard to the programs and policies that govern
    hazards and hazardous areas at the federal, state, and local levels.

-   This fragmented system has at times resulted in situations where the
    programs and policies of different agencies work at cross-purposes.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The patchwork system that results from the diverse federal programs
    and policies that relate to the management of natural hazards means
    that there is no overarching federal policy to govern land use and
    development in hazard-prone areas (May and Deyle).

-   In total, there are over 50 federal laws and executive orders that
    relate to hazard management (May and Deyle). Many of these policies
    apply in the coastal zone.

-   The net effect of federal programs is to encourage development in
    hazardous areas (May and Deyle).

# Conflicting Public Policy Goals {#conflicting-public-policy-goals .unnumbered}

-   Within this patchwork system, our society has conflicting public
    policy goals with regard to the management of hazardous lands.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   *On the one hand*, our society desires and promotes the
    **economically beneficial use of private property**. "There are
    strong incentives to permit and even promote economically beneficial
    use of land **despite the presence of natural hazards**. The land
    may have significant value as residential real estate ...or as
    important commercial access to resources or navigation. Moreover,
    there is a reluctance to constrain or prohibit land use when areas
    have already been developed in economically beneficial ways (May and
    Deyle).

-   *On the other hand*, private owners of land vulnerable to natural
    hazards may **put their land to use in a way that threatens public
    safety**. Some argue that government is obliged to protect
    individuals from their unwise land use decisions, or to protect
    their neighbors from the effects of those decisions... Still others
    maintain that is **inequitable for the government to subsidize land
    use in hazardous areas** through public financing of emergency
    management and disaster response programs, or through public
    maintenance of the infrastructure that serves those areas (May and
    Deyle).

Objective 26.2 Discuss the role of private landowners, developers, and
investors in managing development in the coastal zone.

**Requirements:**

The content should be presented as lecture, supported by PowerPoint
slides. Class discussion is to be encouraged.

The following PowerPoint slides will be used during this Objective:

**PowerPoint 26.2** Land Ownership: The Bundle of Sticks

**PowerPoint 26.3** Rights of Ownership

**PowerPoint 26.4** Limits on Ownership

**PowerPoint 26.5** Factors in Coastal Development Decisions

**PowerPoint 26.6** Ways to Affect Private Sector Development Decisions

**Remarks:**

# Ownership: The "Bundle of Sticks" {#ownership-the-bundle-of-sticks .unnumbered}

-   Much of the coastal land in the United States is privately owned.

    -   But what does it mean to be an "owner" of private land in our
        legal system?

***For class discussion:***

> {The instructor may wish to pause at this moment to solicit ideas from
> the students about how they might answer this question. ***What does
> it mean to "own" land?*** }

-   "***Ownership"*** in Anglo-American law is a broad term which
    encompasses many **different rights** inherent in a particular piece
    of real estate.

-   We can conceptualize ownership as a "**bundle of sticks**".

> **\[PowerPoint 26.2** **Land Ownership: The Bundle of Sticks\]**

-   **Some "sticks**" in the bundle represent **rights** which the owner
    may exercise or **privileges** which the owner may enjoy with
    respect to that property.

-   **Other sticks** symbolize **restrictions on ownership**, such as
    **duties** the owner must execute or **actions** that must be
    **avoided**.

## Rights of Ownership

-   **Rights of ownership include:**

> **\[PowerPoint 26.3 Rights of Ownership\]**

1.  ***The right of possession***:

This means the owner may **keep others off the property**; those
entering the property without permission may be deemed trespassers.

> In the coastal zone, however, there are sometimes rights of access
> that allow the public to reach resources held in the public domain,
> even if such access infringes on private property (we will discuss
> this topic in more detail later).

2.  ***The right to control***:

This means that the owner may **physically alter the property**. The
owner may also **exploit the land's natural resources**, including cut
the timber; till the soil and reap the harvest; graze livestock; drill
and extract minerals; draw off and use the water.

> The right to physically alter property means that a landowner may
> develop the land, which is particularly important in the context of
> coastal hazards, as we shall discuss later in this session.

3.  ***The right of enjoyment***:

The current owner is **protected from interference** by previous owners
or others asserting some claim on the property.

4.  ***The right of disposition***:

The owner is **allowed to convey** all or part of the bundle of sticks
to others, now or in the future.

> This includes the right to hold land for investment purposes, and
> dispose of the property in order to realize a profit. The
> decision-making processes of investors and developers will be
> discussed later in more detail.

## Limits on Ownership

-   The **rights** of ownership are **not "absolute**." The bundle of
    rights is subject to various limits, some of which restrict certain
    uses of the land. Others impose certain duties on the owner.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.4 Limits on Ownership\]**

-   Some **controls** on land ownership arise from **overriding public
    interest**, and include:

1.  ***Common law restrictions on property uses:***

One of these common law restrictions is the **law of** **"nuisance."**
Under the nuisance duty, the **owner must refrain** from undertaking any
activity which interferes with the rights of adjoining property owners,
or which inflicts **injury on the general public**.

> In the context of natural hazards, the law of nuisance could possibly
> entail a duty on the part of a landowner to secure structures so that
> they do not become flying missiles in the event of a hurricane or
> other high wind event. The doctrine could also imply a duty to refrain
> from developing property in such a way that it causes increased
> flooding in neighboring lots

2.  ***The police power***

This means that the owner is also under the **duty to conform to all
applicable public laws**, regulations and ordinances. The police power
is the inherent power of the government to promulgate laws and
regulations that promote the public health, safety and general welfare,
even when such regulations interfere with the landowner's wishes as to
use of the property.

> The police power includes regulations that may restrict coastal
> development or which impose certain construction standards. For
> instance, a landowner is bound to follow applicable state and local
> building codes when building a structure on private property, which
> may include provisions for making the structure more resilient to high
> winds, or require it to be elevated above the base flood level. Some
> states also impose setback rules, which dictate the distance from the
> shoreline that structures can be built.

3.  ***Eminent domain***:

The government also has the power of eminent domain, whereby **private
property may be taken** (condemned) **for public use**, for which the
owner is due just compensation.

4.  ***Property taxation***:

A final duty the owner must perform is **pay all property taxes**. Real
estate taxes are one of local governments' most reliable sources of
revenue. Unpaid property taxes constitute a lien, or claim against the
real estate and the government may force a sale of the property to
satisfy the claim.

# The Role of Developers and Investors {#the-role-of-developers-and-investors .unnumbered}

-   As we learned in the previous discussion, one of the **rights of
    ownership** is to **develop** privately owned real estate. While
    many owners of coastal lands use the property as a primary residence
    or vacation home for their own families, much coastal real estate is
    purchased, held, built upon, and sold as **a money-making venture.**

-   To understand how coastal lands are developed, and the degree to
    which natural hazards may or may not be considered during the
    development process, we must get inside the heads of the developers
    and investors.

    -   The **private sector** responds to the promise of **potential
        profit**. Development occurs where and when the investor will
        likely receive an acceptable return on the investment.

-   Developers **analyze markets and trends**, and build where there is
    **sufficient demand** for their products, with a **minimum of
    risk**.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.5 Factors in Coastal Development Decisions\]**

-   **Demand**:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   When demand is high, the private sector will try to meet that
    demand.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Coastal areas are often very desirable places to build -- the
    beautiful view, the proximity of the ocean, recreational uses, are
    all factors that make ocean and lakefront property attractive for
    development

-   Coastal areas are already highly developed in many areas of the
    country, some close to or surpassing build-out. The remaining
    available land is thus even more valuable due to its scarcity.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Risk**:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   As a general rule, investors are risk-averse. The degree of risk
    that is acceptable depends upon the likelihood and magnitude of the
    potential profit.

-   Developers consider many aspects of the region, community, and site,
    as well as the general market and economy, when deciding what and
    where to build.

-   Natural hazards are one of the factors considered along with other
    characteristics of a site when deciding upon the feasibility of a
    particular project.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Hazards**

    -   "The more hazards can be linked to the financial viability of
        the project, the more weight they will be given in the
        developer's decision process." (French)

    -   Many site-specific conditions can be mitigated, if adequate
        funds are expended (French).

        -   For example, structures can be elevated above the expected
            flood height to reduce the risk of flooding.

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   However, modifying a structure or a site to correct hazardous
        conditions often adds considerably to the engineering and
        construction costs of the project.

    -   A developer will avoid costs considered unnecessary to increase
        the financial attractiveness of a project.

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   **Regulation**

        -   Regulations and policies set by the government can partially
            determine the importance that hazard exposure plays in
            development decisions.

            -   *For example*, many coastal states have setback
                regulations in place that determine how far back from
                the shoreline a structure must be built. Larger
                structures are usually required to be built further back
                from the oceanfront than smaller, one-family units. A
                developer/investor must have enough space on the lot to
                build the size structure that will realize a profit.

            -   *For example*, regulations that prohibit filling of the
                floodplain will make a flood plain site less desirable
                for development.

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   **Infrastructure**

        -   The availability of infrastructure also plays a major role
            in development decisions, including where to build and at
            what density.

        -   Development cannot take place without adequate water, sewer,
            roads, and public services to support it. All but the very
            largest development companies are dependent to some degree
            upon public infrastructure to in order to build.

        -   Much infrastructure is provided by local governments, often
            subsidized by state and federal monies. The extension of
            infrastructure into hazardous areas can encourage
            inappropriate development. Likewise, the refusal to extend
            municipal services and infrastructure to hazardous lands may
            help prevent or delay intense development.

    -   **Time Value of Money**

        -   Investors also consider the time value of money. If a return
            on investment will be realized quickly, all the better.

        -   But what if a structure would be in danger of damage or
            collapse from storms, rapid erosion or other coastal hazards
            soon after it is built? Is it worth the risk?

        -   It depends in part on what types of mitigation techniques
            the developer could put in place to safeguard the
            investment.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Planners and emergency management personnel must **be aware of the
    criteria** that factor into the **development decisions of the
    private sector** in order to craft incentives or mandates for hazard
    mitigation.

    -   Steven French has listed some ***examples*** of how **planners
        and emergency managers** might **affect private sector
        development**:

> **\[PowerPoint 26.6 Ways To Affect Private Sector Development
> Decisions\]**

-   Lower demand for development in hazardous locations through public
    education programs that increase awareness of the hazard.

-   Limit developability by controlling infrastructure extensions into
    hazardous areas.

-   Adopt policies that require given levels of hazard mitigation and
    provide realistic cost estimates of implementing those measures.

-   Institute impact fees for providing services to development located
    in hazardous areas.

-   Offer density bonuses for projects that cluster development outside
    of hazardous areas.

-   Provide low-cost loans for incorporating mitigation into new
    development.

-   Provide subsidies for relocation of existing development out of
    hazardous areas.

-   Lower the developer's risks associated with delay by offering
    streamlined permitting in areas known to be hazard free.

-   Encourage local banks to offer differential loan rates for
    development in hazard areas.

***[For class discussion:]{.underline}***

*Consider such a scenario*: A large hotel is built with a wonderful
oceanfront view. Guests can walk right out onto the beach directly from
their rooms. Inland vacationers who come to the beach to revel in the
natural environment of sun, surf and sand are willing to pay for the
close proximity. The investors will see a return on their investment in
five years. The owners can charge top-dollar for such a premium
location.

*Consider further*: The hotel is built in a high-hazard erosion area.
Will the ocean eat up the beach in front of the hotel causing it to fall
into the ocean before the five years is up? What if the builders
construct a series of groins in front of the hotel to stave off the
effects of erosion, at least until the investment is realized. Is it now
a sound investment?

*But what if* the state does not allow shore-hardening erosion control
structures to be placed along the coastline? The structure cannot be
protected by artificial devices. Is it now a sound investment?

*Consider further*: the investors assume that the government will pay
for the cost of repairs and reconstruction if the hotel is damaged in a
coastal storm. Is this an appropriate assumption?

Objective 26.3 Discuss the role of non-governmental organizations in the
management of coastal development.

**Requirements:**

The content should be presented as lecture, supported by PowerPoint
slides and class discussion.

The following PowerPoint slides will be used during this Objective:

**PowerPoint 26.7** Non-Governmental Organizations: Private
Environmental Groups

**PowerPoint 26.8** Non-Governmental Organizations: Land Trusts

**PowerPoint 26.9** Non-Governmental Organizations: Private Interest
Groups

**PowerPoint 26.10** Non-Governmental Organizations: Professional
Associations

**PowerPoint 26.11** Government Coalitions

**PowerPoint 26.12** Third Sector Capabilities

**Remarks:**

-   **Non-governmental organizations** (NGO's), also known as the "third
    sector," are a growing and powerful force in our society. From
    non-profit environmental activist organizations, to professional
    associations and industry promotional groups, NGO's play a
    significant role in influencing policy on a wide range of issues,
    including development in coastal hazard areas.

# Environmental Groups {#environmental-groups .unnumbered}

> **\[PowerPoint 26.7 Non-Governmental Organizations: Private
> Environmental Groups\]**

-   An important group of stakeholders in the coastal management
    **policy formulation** process includes **environmentalists**.

-   Private organizations can be **influential in setting national
    priorities** for environmental policy, including such groups as:

    -   Natural Resources Defense Council

    -   Sierra Club

    -   Nature Conservancy

    -   Center for Marine Conservation

    -   other environmental and public interest groups

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   These national organizations, as well as state and local
        organizations, are **a powerful force** and often are quite
        visible and vocal in **presenting their agenda**. (Beatley).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Hazard reduction** and **environmental protection** are **mutually
    reinforcing** activities that often promote more sustainable
    communities (Paterson).

    -   Even though environmental organizations may not target their
        efforts to natural hazards per se, many of their resultant
        outcomes can have the **effect of reducing hazard impacts**.

        -   *For example*, purchasing acreage in the coastal zone for
            conservation and environmental protection purposes may also
            result in increasing the hazard mitigating function of these
            natural areas (wetlands, for example).

        -   Placing land under conservation easements or in permanent
            holding will also keep these areas out of the development
            stream, thereby avoiding structures being built in hazard
            areas.

# Land Trusts {#land-trusts .unnumbered}

> **\[PowerPoint 26.8 Non-Governmental Organizations: Land Trusts\]**

-   **Land trusts** are particularly suited to **tying conservation and
    mitigation together** in mutually supportive roles. Land trusts are
    **nonprofit organizations** that seek to **protect or conserve
    significant natural resources**.

-   They typically **raise funds to buy land** to hold in trust, or
    conservation or preservation easements.

    -   "Acquisitions by land trusts often do **double duty** by
        **preserving sensitive** riverine, coastal, mountain and
        forested **areas** and by helping to **prevent inappropriate
        development** in hazard-prone locations" (Paterson).

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   Land trusts **vary in scale and sophistication**.

        -   They range from **major national environmental
            organizations** such as the Nature Conservancy -- whose
            combined assets, professional staff, and high-level contacts
            place them on par with many major multinational corporations
            -- to **small-scale local groups** which depend solely on
            part-time voluntary efforts to succeed (Paterson).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The **complementary relationships** between **hazard mitigation**
    efforts, **environmental protection**, and, ultimately,
    **sustainability** become clear when consideration is given to how
    healthy natural systems often serve to protect communities from
    hazards and how land use strategies in turn often serve to keep
    those natural systems healthy (Paterson).

# Private Interest Groups {#private-interest-groups .unnumbered}

> **\[PowerPoint 26.9 Non-Governmental Organizations: Private Interest
> Groups\]**

-   Private interest groups that represent the **development and
    investment industries** also make up an **important stakeholder
    group** whose influence in setting coastal management and hazard
    mitigation policy cannot be understated.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Included in this group are powerful **energy organizations** such as
    the American Petroleum Institute, which calls for greater latitude
    in areas such as offshore oil exploration and drilling.

-   **Development organizations** such as the National Association of
    Homebuilders push for less regulation of private property to allow
    more development in coastal regions.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   These interest groups often are **supported by local economic
    development** advocates and **chambers of commerce**, which are
    anxious to see their communities grow (Beatley).

# Professional Associations  {#professional-associations .unnumbered}

> **\[PowerPoint 26.10 Non-Governmental Organizations: Professional
> Associations\]**

-   **Professional organizations** can also **play a role** in coastal
    management and hazards management policy.

    -   **Groups made up of professionals** can have a voice in setting
        a variety of policy goals, such as:

        -   floodplain managers

        -   emergency managers

        -   planners

        -   architects

        -   engineers

        -   builders

        -   bankers

        -   insurers

        -   landscapers

# Government Coalitions {#government-coalitions .unnumbered}

> **\[PowerPoint 26.11 Government Coalitions\]**

-   **Coalitions of government** groups also articulate the views of
    their various members on issues of development, risk, regulation,
    etc.,

    -   chambers of commerce

    -   leagues of municipalities

    -   county government leagues

    -   regional councils of government

# A Wider Role for NGOs {#a-wider-role-for-ngos .unnumbered}

-   There is much to be said for a **wider role of non-governmental
    organizations** in promoting the use of land measures to reduce
    losses from natural hazards (Paterson).

> **\[PowerPoint 26.12 Third Sector Capabilities\]**

-   The third sector has the ability to:

    -   mobilize public and political support

    -   shape public opinion

    -   attract diverse funding, and

    -   leverage scarce resources (Paterson).

Objective 26.4 Discuss the role of the various levels of government in
the management of coastal hazards: federal, state, local and regional.

**Requirements:**

The content should be presented as lecture, supported by PowerPoint
slides and class discussion.

The following PowerPoint slides will be used during this Objective:

**PowerPoint 26.13** Approaches to Government Regulation of Coastal
Development

**PowerPoint 26.14** Ad Hoc Federal Response to Early Disasters

**PowerPoint 26.15** Federal Disaster Response in the 1930s

**PowerPoint 26.16** Federal Disaster Response in the 1950s

### PowerPoint 26.17 Federal Disaster Response in the 1960s {#powerpoint-26.17-federal-disaster-response-in-the-1960s-1 .unnumbered}

**PowerPoint 26.18** Federal Disaster Response in the 1970s

**PowerPoint 26.19** Federal Disaster Response during the 1980s and
1990s

### PowerPoint 26.20 A Change in Focus for Post-Disaster Recovery {#powerpoint-26.20-a-change-in-focus-for-post-disaster-recovery-1 .unnumbered}

**PowerPoint 26.21** Federal Disaster Response in the late 1990s

**PowerPoint 26.22** Post September 11^th^

**PowerPoint 26.23** Federal Disaster Assistance: A Moral Hazard?

**PowerPoint 26.24** State Regulatory Tools for Hazard Areas

**PowerPoint 26.25** Local Land Use Management Tools

**PowerPoint 26.26** Disaster Resilient Local Communities

**PowerPoint 26.27** Issues of Regional Concern

**PowerPoint 26.28** Forms of Regional Governance

**PowerPoint 26.29** Elements of Success in Regional Governance

**Remarks:**

### [The Role of Government in Management of the Coastal Zone]{.underline}

-   "**Indiscriminate development** on the coastline has created a
    **multitude of problems**. Development located on or seaward of
    protective dunes is much more vulnerable to storms and encroachment
    by an eroding coastline.

    -   Such development even exacerbates these problems by damaging the
        beach and dune system, causing increased erosion, and
        potentially damaging adjacent lands as well. Structures that are
        not designed or built to withstand coastal hazards not only
        subject the owners to the threat of loss of life and property,
        but also create a hazard to others when parts of the structure
        are driven by wind or water.

    -   In addition, coastal structures can interfere with visual access
        and public use of the shoreline. In some areas, development has
        also displaced or disrupted vital nesting areas for endangered
        sea turtles.

    -   Finally, poorly designed and located coastal construction has
        led to major expenditures of public funds for flood and disaster
        relief. It is clear that the needs and public purposes served by
        strict coastal construction regulation go far beyond the normal
        purposes and advantages created by orderly land use planning and
        regulation in inland areas" (Christie).

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   The **need for government intervention** in the coastal zone
        would seem to be apparent. How good a job is done with our
        multi-layered, patchwork system may be debatable, but many
        (although not all, by any means) would agree that unregulated
        development in our fragile and hazardous coastal areas would
        entail great public harm.

-   There are **two broad approaches** that have been taken to regulate
    development on beaches, dunes and barrier islands.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.13 Approaches to Government Regulation** **of
> Coastal Development\]**

-   First, because government subsidies have stimulated coastal growth,
    **withholding governmental support for development** on barriers and
    beaches may provide an indirect means of controlling development.

-   In addition, growth can be regulated directly through **land use
    planning** and by **restricting or prohibiting structures** that
    will contribute to destruction of habitat or erosion of the shore or
    that will be located in unsafe or unstable areas (Christie).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   These approaches are carried out by federal, state and local
    governments in the coastal zone. The **US coastal management
    framework** is clearly one of **shared management** between the
    various levels.

    -   The **federal government** plays a major role in coastal
        management through **programs, taxation** and **spending**. The
        federal government also supplies the vast majority of **disaster
        relief** following hazard events and provides federally-backed
        **flood insurance**.

    -   However, most of the responsibility for **direct regulation** of
        development in the coastal zone lies with **coastal states and
        localities** (Beatley).

-   The **role of government** in **emergency management** (coastal and
    otherwise) is also **divided** among federal, state and local
    governments.

    -   The Constitution tasks the states with responsibility for public
        health and safety -- hence responsibility for public risks --
        with the federal government in a secondary role. The federal
        role is to help when the state, local, or individual entity is
        overwhelmed... Based on this strong foundation, the validity of
        emergency management as a government function has never been in
        question. ... But as events occurred, as political philosophies
        changed, and as the nation developed, the federal role in
        emergency management steadily increased (Haddow and Bullock).

# Federal Government {#federal-government .unnumbered}

# Evolution of Emergency Management at the Federal Level {#evolution-of-emergency-management-at-the-federal-level .unnumbered}

-   The **role of the federal government** in emergency management **has
    evolved** over the years from distant observer to immediate
    responder, principal financier of disaster costs, and, more
    recently, champion of hazard mitigation (Platt).

######  {#section .unnumbered}

-   Between **1800 and 1950**, there was a **slow trickle of federal
    involvement** in emergency management functions, but there was **no
    national policy** for responding to natural or human-caused
    disasters (Haddow and Bullock, *and following*).

> **\[PowerPoint 26.14 Ad Hoc Federal Response to Early Disasters\]**

-   Catastrophes ravaged portions of the nation periodically, such as:

    -   the New Madrid, Missouri Earthquakes of 1811-1812

    -   the Chicago Fire of 1873

    -   the Johnstown, Pennsylvania Dam Break in 1889

    -   the Galveston Hurricane of 1900

    -   the San Francisco Earthquake and Fire of 1906

    -   the Miami Hurricane of 1926

    -   the Lower Mississippi Flood of 1927

    -   the New England Hurricane of 1938

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Deaths from such disasters numbered in the hundreds, and sometimes
    in the thousands. Costs in present-day dollars ran into the billions
    of dollars. **Response to these disasters was ad hoc**, organized by
    local groups, funded by charities and some local and state monies.

-   Any **mitigation** that took place was carried out by individual
    property owners or local governments in a **piecemeal fashion**
    (Platt).

> **\[PowerPoint 26.15 Federal Disaster Response in the 1930s\]**

-   During the **1930s**, federal agencies began to make **disaster
    loans** available for repair and reconstruction of public facilities
    following disaster.

-   **The Flood Control Act of 1934** gave the **US Army Corps of
    Engineers** increased authority to design and build flood control
    projects.

    -   This act reflected a philosophy that man could control nature,
        thereby eliminating the risk of floods. Although this program
        would promote economic and population growth patterns along the
        nation's rivers, history has proven that this attempt at
        emergency management was shortsighted and costly.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Simultaneously, there was a **gradual acceptance of government
    intervention** in the use of land by **private landowners**, as
    *zoning* became a judicially accepted method of ensuring compatible
    land uses.

    -   Yet zoning and other building regulations were **not used to
        limit building in hazard areas**. Very few local governments
        restricted land uses in flood or coastal hazard areas.

**\[PowerPoint 26.16 Federal Disaster Response in the 1950s\]**

-   During the **1950s**, the era of the **Cold War** presented the
    principal disaster risk as the potential for nuclear war and nuclear
    fallout.

    -   The 1950s was a quiet time for **large-scale natural
        disasters**, although three significant hurricanes did occur:

        -   *Hurricane Hazel*, a Category 4 hurricane inflicted
            significant damage in Virginia and North Carolina in 1954;

        -   *Hurricane Diane* hit several mid-Atlantic and northeastern
            states in 1955; and

        -   *Hurricane Audrey*, the most damaging of the three storms,
            struck Louisiana and North Texas in 1957.

    -   Congressional response to these disasters followed a familiar
        pattern of **ad hoc legislation** to provide increased disaster
        assistance funds to the affected areas.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.17 Federal Disaster Response in the 1960s\]**

-   In **1961**, the **Office of Emergency Preparedness** was created to
    deal with natural disasters.

    -   As the 1960s progressed, the US would be struck by a **series of
        major natural disasters.**

        -   the *Ash Wednesday Storm*, a nor'easter that caused
            significant damage along the Atlantic coast

        -   the *Prince William Sound* *earthquake* set off a *tsunami*
            along the Pacific Coast

        -   *Hurricane Betsy* and

        -   *Hurricane Camille* killed and injured hundreds of people
            and caused millions of dollars in damage.

    -   The lack of insurance against such large-scale disasters
        prompted the passage of the national Flood Insurance Act of
        **1968,** creating the **National Flood Insurance Program
        (NFIP)**. The NFIP was unique in its day, as it called upon
        local governments to undertake community-based mitigation
        activities to lessen flood risk.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.18 Federal Disaster Response in the 1970s\]**

-   By the **1970s**, more than **100 federal agencies** bore some
    responsibility for risk and disasters. These agencies were scattered
    among the civil and defense departments -- each operating on its
    **own turf and with its own agenda**.

    -   In **1979,** President Carter created the **Federal Emergency
        Management Agency**, to which were transferred many of the
        responsibilities of other agencies. Integrating the diverse
        programs, operations, policies and people into a cohesive
        operation was a mammoth task, fraught with political,
        philosophical, and logistical problems.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.19 Federal Disaster Response During the 1980s and
> 1990s\]**

-   During the late **1980s** and early **1990s,** the **role of the
    federal government**, and its spending priorities, in emergency
    management was **called into question**, particularly the continued
    existence of FEMA.

    -   In 1989, **Hurricane Hugo** slammed into North and South
        Carolina. It was the worst hurricane in a decade, with over \$15
        billion in damages and 85 deaths. FEMA was slow to respond.

    -   Soon after Hugo, the **Loma Prieta Earthquake** rocked
        California, with record damages, but fewer deaths.

    -   In 1992, **Hurricane Andrew** proved to be the costliest
        disaster to date, devastating Florida and Louisiana;

    -   **Hurricane** **Iniki** soon followed, creating havoc in Hawaii.

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   **FEMA, and the entire emergency management system failed**.
        People wanted, and expected, government to be there to help in
        their time of need. FEMA seemed incapable of carrying out
        essential government function of emergency management.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.20 A Change in Focus for Post-Disaster Recovery\]**

-   President Clinton nominated **James Lee Witt** to be **Director of
    FEMA**, who initiated sweeping reforms inside and outside the
    agency.

    -   His reforms were quickly tested during the **Midwest floods of
        1993**. The floods called into question the value of some of the
        flood control measures initiated long ago by the Army Corps of
        Engineers.

    -   **FEMA's successful response** to these floods brought the
        opportunity to change the focus of post-disaster recovery by
        initiating the **largest voluntary buyout and relocation
        program** to date in an effort to move people out of the
        floodplain and out of harm's way.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Throughout the next several years, FEMA and its state and local
    partners would face every possible natural hazard, including

    -   killer tornadoes

    -   ice storms

    -   floods

    -   hurricanes

    -   wildfires

    -   drought

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   When President Clinton elevated the **Directorship of FEMA to
        cabinet level** status, the value and importance of emergency
        management, and the federal role in that management were
        recognized.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.21 Federal Disaster Response in the late 1990s\]**

-   In the years following, **FEMA** steadfastly **increased its
    emphasis on disaster mitigation** -- breaking the cycle of
    destruction and rebuilding that had been the norm.

    -   FEMA encouraged **disaster-resistant communities**, whereby the
        community would promote sustainable economic development,
        protect and enhance its natural resources, and ensure a better
        quality of life for its citizens.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.22** **Post September 11^th\]^**

-   Following the terrorist attacks of September 11^th^, 2001, President
    Bush created the **Department of Homeland Security**.

-   FEMA is now housed in the Department's Emergency Preparedness and
    Response Directorate

# Disaster Assistance: A Moral Hazard? {#disaster-assistance-a-moral-hazard .unnumbered}

-   There is no doubt that **relief and insurance payments** made after
    a major disaster can **reduce the adverse economic impacts** and
    **ease reconstruction and recovery** (Burby).

-   The aid that is delivered by the federal government has been called
    the "the **cornucopia of federal disaster assistance**" (Platt).

    -   Most, if not all, local governments, private businesses and
        individual homeowners do not have the financial wherewithal to
        compensate for the massive losses than can occur following a
        catastrophic event.

    -   Research has shown that communities that have received disaster
        aid have recovered fully, and that no adverse effects are
        experienced years later (Burby).

-   However, **problems** have also been associated **with disaster
    aid**. It is often provided in an **ill-prepared**,
    **uncoordinated** manner, so that short-term suffering can be acute
    (Burby).

> **\[PowerPoint 26.23** **Federal Disaster Assistance: A Moral
> Hazard?\]**

-   In addition to the concerns with the administrating of disaster aid,
    some pose the question of whether federalizing the cost of disasters
    **might make matters worse**, rather than lighten the overall
    burden.

    -   "Has the availability of federal disaster assistance, flood
        insurance, and other benefits **inadvertently contributed to a
        false sense of security**...? Are more people likely to invest
        in property in hazardous locations in the belief that, if worse
        comes to worst, the federal government will hold them relatively
        harmless"? (Platt).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   This is the problem known in the insurance industry as "***moral
    hazard***" (Platt).

    -   Some have theorized that **federal disaster assistance** has
        become **counterproductive** by replacing rather than
        supplementing non-federal efforts. If the federal government is
        the sole provider of recovery assistance in case of a major
        disaster, then individuals, businesses and communities have
        **little incentive to take initiatives** **to reduce** personal
        and local **hazards** (Platt, citing White House document of
        1973).

-   The **benefits provided** by the federal government have often been
    provided **without significant strings** attached to reduce
    vulnerability to future losses to the same property or community.

-   "'If state and local governments believe that the federal government
    will meet their needs in every disaster, they have less incentive to
    spend scarce state and local resources on disaster preparedness,
    mitigation, response and recovery. This not only raises the costs of
    disasters to federal taxpayers, but also to our society as a whole
    as **people are encouraged to take risks they think they will not
    have to pay for'**" (Platt, quoting House Natural Disasters Task
    Force report of1994).

# State Government {#state-government .unnumbered}

# Encouraging Coastal Development {#encouraging-coastal-development .unnumbered}

-   The federal government is not alone in its role of encouraging and
    enabling intense development along the coastline.

-   The **states**, along with the federal government, have **vast
    programs** intended to **foster growth and development** in coastal
    areas, and to cover hazard losses for existing development.

    -   While most flood insurance is federally-backed, many states do
        provide **state dollars for disaster assistance**, either as a
        supplement to federal monies that flow following a
        presidentially declared disaster, or in the case of a smaller
        scale hazard event, the state may declare a state-level disaster
        triggering the payment of state funds for disaster relief.

    -   Many coastal states also have massive **highway programs**,
        which often include the construction of bridges and causeways
        that link hither-to inaccessible barrier islands to the
        mainland, greatly increasing their developability.

    -   States may also provide **sewage treatment and water supply
        facility funding** to localities. While such programs are often
        targeted at improving the quality of life of impoverished or
        rural areas (which include many of the less developed coastal
        counties in some states), they also foster development in areas
        that may be vulnerable to natural hazards.

# State Coastal Management Programs {#state-coastal-management-programs .unnumbered}

-   Coastal states are interested primarily in controlling coastal
    management initiatives within their jurisdiction by ensuring that
    any federal coastal policies remain flexible and allow individual
    states discretion over policy implementation (Beatley).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Nearly every coastal state has a **coastal management program** of
    some sort that regulates development in the coastal zone. The
    federal Coastal Zone Management Act provides funding and other
    incentives for states to develop and administer coastal programs
    according to guidelines set out in the act. State participation is
    voluntary, and the states are given great flexibility in their
    approaches to coastal management (Christie).

> **\[PowerPoint 26.24 State Regulatory Tools for Hazard Areas\]**

-   The coastal states have implemented a **variety of regulatory
    tools** to control and manage coastal development and development in
    hazard areas.

    -   Many states **directly regulate certain areas**, such as
        environmentally sensitive areas, wetlands, water resource areas,
        or dunes

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   **Coastal setbacks** are another very important tool in coastal
        regulation. Through various means of measurement, these policies
        create a zone along the shoreline where development is
        regulated, or even prohibited. With varying degrees of success,
        these state-imposed setbacks eliminate buildings in the most
        hazardous oceanfront areas.

    -   A few coastal states have enacted **legislation that limits
        public provision of infrastructure** into hazardous or
        environmentally sensitive coastal areas (Florida's Coastal Zone
        Protection Act, for example).

    -   Many states have enacted **mandatory building codes** that are
        applicable throughout the state. These codes often include
        chapters that pertain to the special conditions in high-hazard
        areas of the coast, such as high wind zones, erosion zones, etc.
        A few of these allow local modifications to the building code,
        usually only if the modification imposes stricter building
        standards.

    -   Some states also **mandate local planning**, with varying
        degrees of specificity in the types of issues to be covered in
        local plans. Some of these mandated plans must consider natural
        hazards as a required element, but such a mandate is by no means
        universal, even among the coastal states.

# Local Government {#local-government .unnumbered}

-   Most **states have delegated responsibility** for land use
    management and regulation to the **local governments**.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.25 Local Land Use Management Tools\]**

-   Typically, coastal localities have authority (and indeed in a few
    states are required) to adopt at least basic **land use management
    tools**, some of which may be used to address natural hazards:

    -   comprehensive land use plans

    -   zoning and subdivision ordinances

    -   capital improvement programs

    -   historic district regulations

    -   land acquisition programs

    -   targeted taxation assessments

    -   impact fees

    -   annexation programs

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   But herein lies a central conflict:

        -   *On the one hand*, local governments must govern land use
            for the public good. **Protecting the public health** and
            safety is a **paramount duty** of local government.

            -   **Regulations** targeted at **reducing damage** to
                property and suffering of people due to natural hazards
                are necessary to carry out this duty.

        -   *On the other hand*, local governments are also responsible
            for providing a whole host of **services to their
            citizens**, such as:

            -   schools

            -   fire and police protection

            -   social services

            -   water and sewer

            -   roads

            -   parks and recreation

        -   State and federal governments provide some funding for these
            services, but much of the **financial burden** still falls
            on the local government.

        -   A **major source of revenue** for local governments lies in
            their land -- **property taxes** represent a significant
            portion of most local budgets. **Developed property is more
            valuable**, and therefore, more lucrative in terms of local
            taxes.

    -   Add to this the fact that **many coastal areas are already
        highly developed**, and we can begin to realize some of the
        conflicting interests at the local level. Keeping structures and
        people out of the way of harmful coastal hazards is not easily
        done when investments have already been made and buildings are
        built.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   While these concerns of a local government are only natural and
    understandable, it is vital that communities understand that the
    interests of protecting public health and safety and promoting sound
    growth and development are not mutually exclusive.

**\[PowerPoint 26.26 Disaster Resilient Local Communities\]**

-   By ensuring that the **property tax base** is located in **safe
    areas** and is designed to **withstand the impacts** of natural
    hazards, a local community can grow in a **sustainable** manner.

-   A **disaster-resilient community** is one that is more
    **economically secure** and **financially stable**.

# Regional Governance {#regional-governance .unnumbered}

-   One of the **problems associated with the fragmentation** that
    exists among levels of government -- both in terms of coastal
    management and hazards management -- is that many issues and
    concerns that warrant government attention do not lend themselves to
    traditional planning and management mechanisms. The **area impacted
    by natural hazards often transcends political boundaries** and the
    hazards themselves do not conform to our artificial and arbitrary
    regulatory and administrative jurisdictions.

-   Regional entities based on **ecosystem boundaries** or
    **multi-jurisdictional collaborations** (river basin,
    watershed-based, or councils of government type organizations) may
    be the solution, although in practice they have had limited success
    for land use planning purposes.

> **\[PowerPoint 26.27 Issues of Regional Concern\]**

-   **Regions** are **geographic areas** that **share common issues**
    of:

    -   public policy

    -   administration

    -   resource management

    -   pollution control

    -   economic development

    -   other social, political, or environmental concerns

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   for which no government body exists.

    -   The organization of a regional management institution provides
        an entity that **focuses on the region's needs**, studies them,
        and tries to meet them or move others to do so (So et al)

> **\[PowerPoint 26.28 Forms of Regional Governance\]**

-   There are **many different approaches** to implementing regional or
    ecosystem management.

    -   In some areas, management has been undertaken by a **regulatory
        agency**. This may take the form of a free-standing body
        spanning state borders, or it may operate within a state
        government, either as a separate entity or as a division of an
        existing state department or agency.

        -   Such regulatory agencies are usually created by the
            legislatures of the state(s) and may be given **both
            regulatory and enforcement powers.**

    -   Other regional management bodies are more **administrative** in
        nature, and may perform coordinating functions or act as
        advisory boards to state and/or local governments (Beatley).

    -   Many states have legislation that enables localities to
        voluntarily form **councils or federations** to study regional
        resources and problems, and to promote cooperative arrangements
        and coordinated action among their member governments.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The **success** of such regional organizations in tackling concrete
    problems such as development in coastal hazard areas has been
    **spotty at best**.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   "Some observers have argued that fragmentation among levels of
    government within a federal system is a fact of life that cannot be
    changed... The **function of regional entities** in governing land
    use in areas prone to natural hazards is likely to remain
    **limited** to broad-brush planning, intergovernmental coordination,
    and capacity-building functions of providing information, education,
    and technical assistance to local governments" (May and Deyle).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Special purpose regional organizations have been **more successful**
    when they have been **granted authority to directly implement** or
    compel implementation of their plans and policies (May and Deyle)

> **\[PowerPoint 26.29 Elements of Success in Regional Governance\]**

-   Other key **elements of success** of regional entities include

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   fiscal autonomy

-   legal flexibility in interpreting their mandates

-   professionalism among staff

-   clear goals for the agencies

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The proper mix of political, organizational, and environmental
    conditions is also instrumental in facilitating regional initiatives
    (May and Deyle).

-   *Example:* The **Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida**,
    adopted in 1995, contains specific and extensive guidance on natural
    hazard reduction. The plan presents an overall vision for south
    Florida that emphasizes achieving a livable, sustainable and
    competitive regional community (Godschalk, et al).

**Course Developer References:**

Beatley, Timothy, et al. 2002. *An Introduction to Coastal Zone
Management*. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Christie, Donna R. and Richard G. Hildreth. 1999. *Coastal and Ocean
Management Law in a Nutshell,* 2^nd^ edition. St. Paul, MN: West
Publishing.

City, Christopher. June 2000. "Duty and Disaster: Holding Local
Governments Liable for Permitting Uses in High-Hazard Areas." *North
Carolina Law Review*, Vol. 78, No. 5.

French, Steven P. May, 2002. "Incorporating Resilience in Private Sector
Project Planning and Review" in Raymond J. Burby, ed. *Building Disaster
Resilient Communities Instructor Guide*. Federal Emergency Management
Agency Emergency Management Institute.

Godschalk, David R., et al. 1999. *Natural Hazard Mitigation: Recasting
Disaster Policy and Planning.* Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Haddow, George D. and Jane A. Bullock. 2003. *Introduction to Emergency
Management*. Burlington, MA: Butterworh-Heinemann.

May, Peter J. and Robert E. Deyle. 1998. "Governing Land Use in
Hazardous Areas with a Patchwork System," in Raymond J. Burby, ed.
*Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-Use
Planning for Sustainable Communities*. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry
Press.

McDowell, Bruce D. 1986. "The Evolution of American Planning." In Frank
So, Irving Hand, Bruce D. McDowell, eds. *The Practice of State and
Regional Planning*. Chicago: American Planning Association.

Paterson, Robert G. 1998. "The Third Sector: Evolving Partnerships in
Hazard Mitigation," in Raymond J. Burby, ed. *Cooperating with Nature:
Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-Use Planning for Sustainable
Communities*. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press.

Platt, Rutherford H. 1999. *Disasters and Democracy: The Politics of
Extreme Natural Events.* Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Schwab, Anna K. and David J. Brower.1996. *An Introduction to Law for
Planners*. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: unpublished.

So, Frank S., Irving Hand, and Bruce D. McDowell (eds). 1986. *The
Practice of State and Regional Planning*. Chicago: American Planning
Association.

Wright, Robert R. and Morton Gitelman. 2000. *Land Use in a Nutshell*,
4^th^ edition. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.