Intergovernmental relationships after disaster: state and local government learning during flood recovery in Colorado

References

• Aakre, S., Banaszak, I., Mechler, R., Rübbelke, D., Wreford, A., & Kalirai, H. (2010). Financial adaptation to disaster risk in the European Union. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 15(7), 721–736.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albright, E. A. (2011). Policy change and learning in Hungary: An advocacy coalition approach. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 485–511.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albright, E. A., & Crow, D. A. (2015). Learning processes, public and stakeholder engagement: Analyzing responses to Colorado’s extreme flood events of 2013. Urban Climate, 14, 79–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albright, E. A., & Crow, D. A. 2019. Beliefs about climate change in the aftermath of extreme flooding. Climatic Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584019024612
   Google Scholar
• Albright, E. A., & Crow, D. A. Under Review as Revise and Resubmit. Extreme events and policy learning: How communities recover, adapt, and learn. Policy Studies Journal.
   Google Scholar
• Aldrich, D. P., & Ono, Y. (2016). Local politicians as linking social capital: An empirical test of political behavior after Japan’s 3/11 disasters. Natural Hazards, 84(3), 1637–1659.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anton, T. J. (1997). New federalism and intergovernmental fiscal relationships: The implications for health policy. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 22(3), 691–720.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bea, K. (2010). Federal Stafford Act disaster assistance: Presidential declarations, eligible activities, and funding. Library of congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, T. E., & Plowman, D. A. (2009). Experiencing rare and unusual events richly: The role of middle managers in animating and guiding organizational interpretation. Organization Science, 20(5), 909–924.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker, C. (2009). Disaster recovery: A local government responsibility. Public Management, 91(2), 6–12.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, C. J., & Howlett, M. (1992). The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change. Policy Sciences, 25(3), 275–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkland, T. A. (1997). After disaster: Agenda setting, public policy and focusing events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Birkland, T. A. (2004). Learning and policy improvement after disaster. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(3), 341–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkland, T. A. (2006). Lessons of disaster: Policy change after catastrophic events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Birkland, T. A., & Warnement, M. K. (2014). Focusing events in disasters and development. In Disaster and development (pp. 39–60). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Boin, A., & Rhinard, M. (2008). Managing transboundary crises: What role for the European Union? International Studies Review, 10(1), 1–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolleyer, N. (2006). Intergovernmental arrangements in Spanish and Swiss federalism: The impact of power-concentrating and power-sharing executives on intergovernmental institutionalization. Regional & Federal Studies, 16(4), 385–408.
   Google Scholar
• Busenberg, G. J. (2001). Learning in organizations and Public policy. Journal of Public Policy, 21(2), 173–189.
   Google Scholar
• Cameron, D., & Simeon, R. (2002). Intergovernmental relations in Canada: The emergence of collaborative federalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 32(2), 49–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conlan, T. J. (2006). From cooperative to opportunistic federalism: Reflections on the half-century anniversary of the commission on intergovernmental relations. Public Administration Review, 66(5), 663–676.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conlan, T. J., Posner, P. L., & Rivlin, A. M. (2009). Intergovernmental management for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Larrue, C., Bruzzone, S., Lévy, L., Gralepois, M., Schellenberger, T., Trémorin, J. B., … Thuilier, T. (2016). Analysing and evaluating flood risk governance in France: from state policy to local strategies. ffhalshs01981420f. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01981420/document
   Google Scholar
• Crow, D. A., Albright, E. A., Ely, T., Koebele, E., & Lawhon, L. (2018). Do disasters lead to learning? Financial policy change in local government. Review of Policy Research, 35(4), 564–589.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crow, D. A., Dixon, L., Koebele, E. A., Kroepsch, A., Schild, R., & Huda, J. (2015). Information, resources, and management priorities: Agency outreach and mitigation of wildfire risk in the west. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 6(1), 61–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Voog, D., Paterson, J., & Huitema, D. (in press). Exogenous factors in collective policy learning: The case of municipal flood risk governance in the Netherlands. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donahue, A. K., Eckel, C. C., & Wilson, R. K. (2014). Ready or not? How citizens and public officials perceive risk and preparedness. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(4 suppl), 89S–111S.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, T. A., & Sobel, R. S. (2003). The political economy of FEMA disaster payments. Economic Inquiry, 41(3), 496–509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerber, B. J. (2007). Disaster management in the United States: Examining key political and policy challenges. Policy Studies Journal, 35(2), 227–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, T., & Spit, T. (2016a). Implementing the European flood risk management plan. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 59(2), 360–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, T., & Spit, T. (2016b). Legitimizing differentiated flood protection levels–consequences of the European flood risk management plan. Environmental Science & Policy, 55, 361–367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heikkila, T., & Gerlak, A. K. (2013). Building a conceptual approach to collective learning: Lessons for public policy scholars. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 484–512.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooghe, L., Marks, G., & Marks, G. W. (2001). Multi-level governance and European integration. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kettl, D. F. (2007). System under stress: Homeland security and American politics (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kincaid, J., & Stenberg, C. W. (2011). ‘Big questions’ about intergovernmental relations and management: Who will address them? Public Administration Review, 71(2), 196–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koebele, E., Crow, D. A., Dixon, L., Schild, R., Kroepsch, A., & Clifford, K. (2015). Wildfire outreach and citizen entrepreneurs in the wildland-urban interface: A cross-case analysis in Colorado. Society & Natural Resources, 28(8), 918–923.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krause, R. M. (2011). Policy innovation, intergovernmental relations, and the adoption of climate protection initiatives by US cities. Journal of Urban Affairs, 33(1), 45–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leavitt, H. J. (1962). Applied organizational change in industry: Structural, technological and humanistic approaches, Carnegie Institute of Technology, Graduate School of Industrial Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Liesbet, H., & Gary, M. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin Moe, T., & Pathranarakul, P. (2006). An integrated approach to natural disaster management: Public project management and its critical success factors. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 15(3), 396–413.
   Google Scholar
• Marks, G., & Hooghe, L. (2004). Contrasting visions of multi-level governance. In I. Bache & M. Flinders (Eds.), Multi-level governance (pp. 15–30). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marks, G., Hooghe, L., & Blank, K. (1996). European integration from the 1980s: State-centric v. multi-level governance. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(3), 341–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May, P. J. (1992). Policy learning and failure. Journal of Public Policy, 12(4), 331–354.
   Google Scholar
• May, P. J., & Burby, R. J. (1996). Coercive versus cooperative policies: Comparing intergovernmental mandate performance. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15(2), 171–201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonnell, S., Ghorbani, P., Desai, S., Wolf, C., & Burgy, D. M. (2018). Potential challenges to targeting low-and moderate-income communities in a time of urgent need: The case of CDBG-DR in New York State after Superstorm Sandy. Housing Policy Debate, 28(3), 466–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGuire, M. (2006). Intergovernmental management: A view from the bottom. Public Administration Review, 66(5), 677–679.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGuire, M., & Silvia, C. (2010). The effect of problem severity, managerial and organizational capacity, and agency structure on intergovernmental collaboration: Evidence from local emergency management. Public Administration Review, 70(2), 279–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Moss, M., Schellhamer, C., & Berman, D. A. (2009). The Stafford Act and priorities for reform. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 6(1), 1547–7355. https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1538
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nohrstedt, D., & Nyberg, L. (2015). Do floods drive hazard mitigation policy? Evidence from Swedish municipalities. Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography, 97(1), 109–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nohrstedt, D., & Weible, C. M. (2010). The logic of policy change after crisis: Proximity and subsystem interaction. Risk, Hazards & Crisis, 1(2), 1–32.
   Google Scholar
• O'Donovan, K. (2017). Policy failure and policy learning: Examining the conditions of learning after disaster. Review of Policy Research, 34(4), 537–558.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Painter, M. (1996). The Council of Australian governments and intergovernmental relations: A case of cooperative federalism. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 26(2), 101–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paudel, Y., Botzen, W. J., & Aerts, J. C. (2015). Influence of climate change and socio-economic development on catastrophe insurance: A case study of flood risk scenarios in the Netherlands. Regional Environmental Change, 15(8), 1717–1729.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, A., Porter, K., Dash, N., Bouabid, J., Huyck, C., Whitehead, J., … Tierney, K. (2007). Benefit-cost analysis of FEMA hazard mitigation grants. Natural Hazards Review, 8(4), 97–111. Retrieved from http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2007)8:4(97)
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, C. B., & Barbee, D. G. (1985). Disaster recovery and hazard mitigation: Bridging the intergovernmental gap. Public Administration Review, 45, 57–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sabatier, P. A. (1999). Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sabatier, P. A., & Weible, C. M. (2007). The advocacy coalition framework: Innovations and clarifications. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (2nd ed., pp. 189–220). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, G. P. (2012). Planning for post-disaster recovery: A review of the United States disaster assistance framework. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, G. P., & Wenger, D. (2007). Sustainable disaster recovery: Operationalizing an existing agenda. In H. Rodriguez, E. L. Quarentelli, & R. R. Dynes (Eds.), Handbook of disaster research (pp. 234–257). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• The Stafford Act, as amended and emergency management-related provisions of the Homeland Security Act, as amended, FEMA 592. (2016).
   Google Scholar
• Surminski, S., Aerts, J. C., Botzen, W., Hudson, P., Mysiak, J., & Pérez-Blanco, C. D. (2015). Reflections on the current debate on how to link flood insurance and disaster risk reduction in the European Union. Natural Hazards, 79(3), 1451–1479.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2017). National response framework. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/117791
   Google Scholar
• Vulturius, G. (2013). Policy change and policy learning for enhanced flood policies at local, subnational, and EU level. In E. C. H. Keskitalo (Ed.), Climate change and flood risk management: Adaptation to extreme events at the local level (pp. 121–149). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar