IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rjpaxx/v80y2014i4p310-323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptive Planning for Disaster Recovery and Resiliency: An Evaluation of 87 Local Recovery Plans in Eight States

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Berke
  • John Cooper
  • Meghan Aminto
  • Shannon Grabich
  • Jennifer Horney

Abstract

Problem, research strategy and findings: A pre-disaster recovery plan that considers how a community should be redeveloped is a logical first step to support resiliency during high uncertainty and rapid change, yet limited attention has been given to recovery plans. In this study, we evaluate local disaster recovery planning in eight southeastern states and find that such planning receives limited public support: Less than one-third of vulnerable local jurisdictions had a recovery plan, and those plans received low plan quality scores. Unfunded state mandates produce weaker plans than plans in other states without mandates. We find that a collaborative network of stakeholders initially intent on reordering priorities results in stronger plans. Takeaway for practice: Local recovery planning should be designed to operate under conditions of high uncertainty. Local jurisdictions can choose plan design options that reflect how they build capability for recovery planning: 1) standalone community-wide recovery plan; 2) comprehensive land use plan; 3) emergency management plan; and 4) small area recovery plan. Because recovery planning lacks a public constituency, and is new to most local jurisdictions, the stand-alone community-wide recovery plan design option is the most effective at building local commitment. This option involves a plan-making process that concentrates time, effort, and resources focused on a building a network of stakeholders who likely have the greatest responsibility in rebuilding efforts because they care most about the impacts of a disaster.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Berke & John Cooper & Meghan Aminto & Shannon Grabich & Jennifer Horney, 2014. "Adaptive Planning for Disaster Recovery and Resiliency: An Evaluation of 87 Local Recovery Plans in Eight States," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 80(4), pages 310-323, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rjpaxx:v:80:y:2014:i:4:p:310-323
    DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2014.976585
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01944363.2014.976585
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01944363.2014.976585?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mingming Xiang & Wei Zhao & Jiao Chen, 2018. "A Comparison of Different Reconstruction Modes and Adaptive Evaluation Systems for Community Recovery Following the Wenchuan Earthquake," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Aparna Kumari & Tim G. Frazier, 2021. "Evaluating social capital in emergency and disaster management and hazards plans," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 109(1), pages 949-973, October.
    3. Susan Cutter, 2016. "The landscape of disaster resilience indicators in the USA," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 80(2), pages 741-758, January.
    4. Lei He & Ziang Xie & Yi Peng & Yan Song & Shenzhi Dai, 2019. "How Can Post-Disaster Recovery Plans Be Improved Based on Historical Learning? A Comparison of Wenchuan Earthquake and Lushan Earthquake Recovery Plans," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Lorenzo Fabian & Mattia Bertin, 2021. "Italy Is Fragile: Soil Consumption and Climate Change Combined Effects on Territorial Heritage Maintenance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Sierra C. Woodruff, 2016. "Planning for an unknowable future: uncertainty in climate change adaptation planning," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 445-459, December.
    7. Xinyu Fu & Bowen Sun & Kathryn Frank & Zhong-Ren Peng, 2019. "Evaluating sea-level rise vulnerability assessments in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 393-415, August.
    8. Clemente J. Navarro-Yáñez & María-Jesús Rodríguez-García & María José Guerrero-Mayo, 2020. "Evaluating the Quality of Urban Development Plans Promoted by the European Union: The URBAN and URBANA Initiatives in Spain (1994–2013)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 215-237, May.
    9. Qiuqin Zhang & Tianzhu Zhang & Xiang Liu, 2018. "Index System to Evaluate the Quarries Ecological Restoration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-11, February.
    10. Heather Rosenberg & Nicole A. Errett & David P. Eisenman, 2022. "Working with Disaster-Affected Communities to Envision Healthier Futures: A Trauma-Informed Approach to Post-Disaster Recovery Planning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-8, February.
    11. Eric E. Calloway & Nadine B. Nugent & Katie L. Stern & Ashley Mueller & Amy L. Yaroch, 2022. "Lessons Learned from the 2019 Nebraska Floods: Implications for Emergency Management, Mass Care, and Food Security," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-17, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rjpaxx:v:80:y:2014:i:4:p:310-323. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rjpa20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.