1. Effective Hazard Mitigation: Are Local Mitigation Strategies Getting the Job Done? Jane E. Rovins, MPH, CEM, FPEM Tulane University 11 th FEMA Higher Education Conference Emmitsburg, MD June 2008

2. Can planning mitigate this?

3. Hazard Mitigation Reduction of vulnerability and susceptibility to loss (life and property) as a result of a disaster

4. Planning Previous planning studies –Urban planning –Land use plans –Comprehensive plans Little agreement in the planning community on what makes a good plan Always a good thing

5. Mitigation Planning Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council study Godschalk 409 study Issues –Literature found to be lacking –Warrants more research

6. Purpose To investigate whether continued investment in mitigation planning under the current framework is effective in protecting vulnerable populations and preventing future loss of property as a result of a disaster

7. Variables Counties declared Declaration date Disaster type Governor / President Median home value Median household income Plan status Population –Disabled –Elderly –Under 5 years Property damage Unemployment

8. Study Area Local Mitigation Strategies State mandated Rule 9G 22 Variety of events Variety of size Availability of data

9. PLAN STATUS Approved PlanNo Plan Mean DAMAGE TOTALS 30,000,000.00 20,000,000.00 10,000,000.00 0.00 U.S. Dollars

10. Hazard Summary Hazard# of Events# of Declared Counties % Fire 16711.9 Flood/Severe Storm 46411.4 Hurricane 1131656.3 Tropical Storm 76411.3 Tornado 110.2 Winter Storm/Freeze 1498.7

11. Hazard Summary (cont.) HazardPer Capita Damage Plan - NOPlan - YES Fire $69.34661 Flood/Severe Storm $62.32604 Hurricane $123.2869247 Tropical Storm $24.723331 Tornado $21.8901 Winter Storm/Freeze $25.92445

13. Findings Median Home Value – no significant relationship Income and education support mitigation Political affiliation Plan Status

14. Rebuilding Damage Are Local Mitigation Strategies Getting the Job Done?

15. Recommendations Policy –Require mitigation –Plan quality –Incorporation

16. Future Research Effectiveness of DMA plans Other hazards Review process Cost effectiveness

17. Conclusion

18. Jane E. Rovins, MPH, CEM, FPEM jane.rovins@gmail.com Questions?