Local plan implementation: assessing conformance and influence of local plans in the United States

Abstract

Attention to if and how plans are implemented is increasing. Among the conceptions of plan implementation used by scholars, plan conformance and plan performance are most prominent, though rarely have both been assessed in a single study. We assess plan conformance and a modified version of performance, which we call influence, for a sample of more than 100 local hazard mitigation plans developed in response to a national planning requirement in the United States. Our findings indicate that progress on implementation of the policies included in the plans (plan conformance) is moderate, but that the rate of progress varies widely by the type of policy and the state in which the local jurisdiction is located. The findings also indicate that coordination of hazard mitigation plans (plan influence) is strongest with other emergency management agency-led planning initiatives and weaker with planning initiatives led by other agencies. National officials interested in advancing local implementation of national goals need to consider the degree to which state and local governments are given autonomy to select and prioritize local policies included in plans, as well as constraints on coordination across planning initiatives.

Sustainability and Disaster Planning: What Are the Connections?

“…Municipal action around climate change adaptation and the building of resilient communities is tied to local experience with extreme events across various political contexts (Butler, Deyle, and Mutnansky ; Flyen et al ). Passage of disaster planning measures may only become politically feasible following an incident (Næss et al ), and many disaster plans remain unimplemented (Lyles, Berke, and Smith ). In rural areas, personal experience with weather extremes, such as drought, wildfires, changes in length of growing season, and flooding, are important drivers of perceptions, but may not shift opinions enough to cause action on topics such as climate change (Chatrchyan et al ; Millar, Boon, and King ; Takahashi et al ), especially when the rural discourse emphasizes a balance between economy and environment as well as questioning the impact of local action (Kessler, Parkins, and Huddart Kennedy ).…”

“…However, in the United States, absent a national policy on climate adaptation, local governments have failed to engage in more long‐term thinking about the future of their communities (Smith ). Differences in policy implementation can be seen from state to state with some places, such as Florida and Texas, focusing on specific municipal projects, while others, such as North Carolina, require that local governments take a more comprehensive approach (Lyles et al ). Many municipalities cannot determine which potential consequences of climate change should be prioritized in their adaptation plans without additional national guidance (Amundsen, Berglund, and Westskog ).…”

“…For example, environmental policy is increasingly handled through intergovernmental partnerships (Rabe ), and planners report that the inability to coordinate across jurisdictions undercuts sustainable development efforts (Filion et al ). Similarly, disaster resilience planning benefits from regional collaboration (Flyen et al ), but such efforts are relatively rare due to challenges of coordinating agencies from different jurisdictions (Lyles et al ).…”

“…These problems are magnified during emergencies (Allen, Karanasios, and Norman ), and integrating nongovernmental actors, important to successful emergency management (ICMA ; Waugh and Streib ), adds to the complexity of resiliency plans. The coordination of disaster plans tends to be stronger when headed by an emergency management agency rather than other agencies (Lyles et al ).…”

Exploring the Patterns and Mechanisms of Reclaimed Arable Land Utilization under the Requisition-Compensation Balance Policy in Wenzhou, China

“…The purpose of China's central government proposed the ALRB policy is to maintain the total amount of arable land and to ensure food security by reclaiming the same area of land to replenish arable land losses caused by urbanization. While local governments have limited incentives to preserve natural resources [52], they rely on the conversion of arable land to construction use to attract investment, fuel fiscal revenue, and achieve fast economic development [53]. Therefore, local governments continue to expropriate arable lands near cities for urbanization on a large scale, including many high-quality lands [8], and to seek replacements in border and less developed areas to meet the mandatory requirement, regardless of the location of reclaimed lands and regardless of whether they will be utilized.…”