Browsing by Subject "flood mitigation"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Building underwater: Effects of community-scale flood management on housing development
    (Elsevier, 2022-09) Liu, Xian; Noonan, Douglas; School of Public and Environmental Affairs
    The Community Rating System (CRS) program was implemented by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in 1990 as an optional program to encourage communities to voluntarily engage in flood mitigation initiatives. This paper uses national census tract-level data from 1990 to 2010 to estimate whether CRS participation affects housing development patterns. Our results show that participating in the CRS is associated with reduced rates of new housing construction and mobile homes in flood-prone areas. When we separate flood mitigation activities under the CRS program into information-based and regulation-based activities, we find that regulatory approaches are more effective than informational approaches. These results show a general pattern, nationwide and across decades, of community-scale flood management efforts deterring housing development in flood-prone areas.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Flood Risk Management: Exploring the Impacts of the Community Rating System Program on Poverty and Income Inequality
    (2017) Noonan, Douglas S.; Sadiq, Abdul-Akeem A.
    Flooding remains a major problem for the United States, causing numerous deaths and damaging countless properties. To reduce the impact of flooding on communities, the U.S. government established the Community Rating System (CRS) in 1990 to reduce flood damages by incentivizing communities to engage in flood risk management initiatives that surpass those required by the National Flood Insurance Program. In return, communities enjoy discounted flood insurance premiums. Despite the fact that the CRS raises concerns about the potential for unevenly distributed impacts across different income groups, no study has examined the equity implications of the CRS. This study thus investigates the possibility of unintended consequences of the CRS by answering the question: What is the effect of the CRS on poverty and income inequality? Understanding the impacts of the CRS on poverty and income inequality is useful in fully assessing the unintended consequences of the CRS. The study estimates four fixed-effects regression models using a panel data set of neighborhood-level observations from 1970 to 2010. The results indicate that median incomes are lower in CRS communities, but rise in floodplains. Also, the CRS attracts poor residents, but relocates them away from floodplains. Additionally, the CRS attracts top earners, including in floodplains. Finally, the CRS encourages income inequality, but discourages income inequality in floodplains. A better understanding of these unintended consequences of the CRS on poverty and income inequality can help to improve the design and performance of the CRS and, ultimately, increase community resilience to flood disasters.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Is flood mitigation funding distributed equitably? Evidence from coastal states in the southeastern United States
    (Wiley, 2023-06) Tyler, Jenna; Entress, Rebecca M.; Sun, Pin; Noonan, Douglas; Sadiq, Abdul-Akeem; School of Public and Environmental Affairs
    The United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides funding to state and local governments as well as tribes and territories (SLTTs) through its Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) grant program to engage in flood risk management efforts. Although all communities are susceptible to flooding, flooding does not impact communities equally. This article contributes to FEMA's goal of addressing equity concerns by examining whether the FMA program is distributed equitably in counties located in eight coastal states in the United States. Using secondary data from OpenFEMA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and parcel-level flood risk data from First Street Foundation from 2016 to 2020, results indicate that socially vulnerable counties are less likely to receive FMA funding, and counties with greater average flood risk are more likely to receive FMA funding. The findings suggest that there is an opportunity for FEMA to improve the FMA program so that funding can be more equitably distributed, such as providing grant writing and application training and support to socially vulnerable communities, educating socially vulnerable communities about the benefits of the FMA program, and extending the application deadline for socially vulnerable communities impacted by flood events.