Flood Mitigation for Pennsylvania’s Rural Communities: Community-Scale Impact of Federal Policies. Findings of the September 2017 report to the Center for Rural Pennsylvania
Start Date
11-11-2017 3:15 PM
End Date
11-11-2017 4:00 PM
Description
In the US, many flood mitigation actions and decisions are made at the municipal level, though subject to Federal and State-level rules, requirements, regulations, and incentive programs. Many communities throughout the U.S. actively seek to reduce flood safety threats and property damages to their residents, including by taking advantage of available federal and Commonwealth programs. However, different communities’ needs, geography, demography, preferences, and priorities are tremendously diverse, especially in a region like Pennsylvania where local government consists of some 2,500 separate counties, cities, boroughs, and townships – each responsible for their own decisions about many of the most crucial land use, building code, and mitigation activities. Therefore Federal and Commonwealth programs, designed to reach as many locations as possible, necessarily fail to accommodate the highly diverse conditions of local communities, and while those programs are intended to promote and support local efforts, in practice many of those programs inhibit or preclude some activities that would be best suited for some localities. This research highlights some of the ways in which programs succeed for some Pennsylvania communities, and ways in which they fail for some of those same communities, at meeting their local needs. Further, the research shows many communities are not aware of available resources, have expressed a need for increased resources and institutional support from those programs, and desire additional programs. The research focuses especially on FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program, a Federal program intended to provide disaster relief for individuals and firms who experience flood damages – but with premiums that vary from highly subsidized to full “actuarial” rates, and currently facing Congressional action to decide whether to remove all subsidies (with profound economic impacts on policy holders) or continue subsidies that seem to encourage overdevelopment in the floodplains of the nation. The research also focuses on the Community Rating System, a program intended to encourage communities, individuals, and firms to undertake more extensive mitigation beyond the bare minimum, but with such programmatic complexities that many communities fail to take full advantage.
Keywords
Pennsylvania, flood mitigation, rural communities, river communities, floods
Type
Presentation
Session
Flood Hydrology and Policy
Language
eng
Flood Mitigation for Pennsylvania’s Rural Communities: Community-Scale Impact of Federal Policies. Findings of the September 2017 report to the Center for Rural Pennsylvania
Elaine Langone Center, Gallery Theater
In the US, many flood mitigation actions and decisions are made at the municipal level, though subject to Federal and State-level rules, requirements, regulations, and incentive programs. Many communities throughout the U.S. actively seek to reduce flood safety threats and property damages to their residents, including by taking advantage of available federal and Commonwealth programs. However, different communities’ needs, geography, demography, preferences, and priorities are tremendously diverse, especially in a region like Pennsylvania where local government consists of some 2,500 separate counties, cities, boroughs, and townships – each responsible for their own decisions about many of the most crucial land use, building code, and mitigation activities. Therefore Federal and Commonwealth programs, designed to reach as many locations as possible, necessarily fail to accommodate the highly diverse conditions of local communities, and while those programs are intended to promote and support local efforts, in practice many of those programs inhibit or preclude some activities that would be best suited for some localities. This research highlights some of the ways in which programs succeed for some Pennsylvania communities, and ways in which they fail for some of those same communities, at meeting their local needs. Further, the research shows many communities are not aware of available resources, have expressed a need for increased resources and institutional support from those programs, and desire additional programs. The research focuses especially on FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program, a Federal program intended to provide disaster relief for individuals and firms who experience flood damages – but with premiums that vary from highly subsidized to full “actuarial” rates, and currently facing Congressional action to decide whether to remove all subsidies (with profound economic impacts on policy holders) or continue subsidies that seem to encourage overdevelopment in the floodplains of the nation. The research also focuses on the Community Rating System, a program intended to encourage communities, individuals, and firms to undertake more extensive mitigation beyond the bare minimum, but with such programmatic complexities that many communities fail to take full advantage.