One step forward, two steps back: Flood management policy in the United States

Abstract

After reviewing two core flood hazard mitigation policies within the United States – the 100-year standard and the National Flood Insurance Program – this discussion focuses upon policy recommendations for improving flood hazard mitigation in the US. In the end, it is found that flood hazard mitigation policy within the US, while full of good intentions, has unintentionally produced many hurdles. These hurdles are detailed and recommendations designed to overcome them are suggested.

Notes

1. That said, I fully recognise that such a policy would have to be sympathetic to issues of social justice. Lower-income communities are at times located on floodplains precisely because those areas can be the least desirable to live in given their vulnerability to floods (Steinburg, 2000).

2. States can require drivers within their borders to have various levels of automobile insurance. Something similar could be required of all structure owners on a state-by-state basis. Admittedly, this is a highly contentious proposal that would ruffle the feathers of free-market conservatives (although, in fairness, the status quo is enormously burdensome on taxpayers). While I have not the space here to discuss this suggestion further, I believe it deserves future consideration, particularly when coupled with vertically oriented actuarial tables that distinguish between numerous flood-level events.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Michael S. Carolan

I would like to thank the editors and referees for their thoughtful critiques and comments (and in particular one referee who offered an especially critical review that I found immensely informative). While they deserve many thanks, any errors must be attributed to the author.