Federal relief for local governments following natural disasters is provided under the assumption that without aid disasters may overwhelm local resources thus slowing recovery. Using loss data for a sample of counties experiencing disasters in the mid-1980s, this paper provides evidence that changes in the financial condition of local governments was not unproved by receiving federal aid. Additionally, the paper shows that the initial financial impacts of disasters may be negative, but that within two years the net effect is positive.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BurbyRaymond J., CiglerBeverly A., FrenchSieven P., KaiserEdward J., KartezJack, RoenigkDale, WeistDana, and WhittingtonDale. 1991. Sharing Environmental Risks: How to Control Governments’ Losses in Natural Disasters.Boulder, Colorado: Wesiview Press.
2.
ChangSemoon. 1983. “Disasters and Fiscal Policy: Hurricane Impact on Municipal Revenue.” Urban Affairs Quarterly18: 511–523.
3.
DacyDouglas C., and KunreutherHoward. 1969. The Economics of Natural Disasters.New York, New York: Free Press.
4.
DearbornPhillip M.1978. “Urban Fiscal Studies,” Pp. 156–164 in State and Local Government Finance and Financial Management: A Compendium of Current Research, edited by PetersonJohn E., SpainCatherine Lavigne, and LaffeyMartharose F.Washington, D.C.: Government Finance Research Center.
5.
FergusonRonald F., and LaddHelen F.. 1986. “Measuring the Fiscal Capacity of U.S. Cities.” Pp. 141–168 in Measuring Fiscal Capacity, edited by ReevesH. ClydeBoston: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
6.
FriesemaH. Paul, CaporasoJames, GoldsteinGerald, LineberryRobert, and McClearyRichard. 1979. Aftermath: Communities after Natural Disasters, Beverly Hills, California: Sage.
7.
GrovesSanford M., and ValenteMaureen Godsey. 1986. Evaluating Financial Condition: A Handbook for Local Government.Washington, D.C.: International City Management Association.
8.
HaasJ. Eugene, KatesRobert W., BowdenMartyn (eds.). 1977. Reconstruction Following Disaster.Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
9.
HughesJesse W., and LaverdiereRaymond. 1986. “Comparative Local Government Financial Analysis.” Public Budgeting and Finance6: 23–33.
10.
LaPlanteJosephine M.1983. “Recovery Following Disaster: Policy Issues and Dimensions.” Pp. 217–236 in Managing Disaster: Strategies and Policy Perspectives, edited by ComfortLouise K.Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.
11.
RossJohn P., and GreenfieldJames. 1980. “Measuring the Health of Cities.” Pp. 89–110 in Fiscal Stress and Public Policy, edited by LevineCharles H., and RubinsIreneBeverly Hills, California: Sage.
12.
RubinClaire B., YezerAnthony M., HussainQaizar, and WebbAnne. 1986. Summary of Major Natural Disaster Incidents in the U.S., 1965–1985. Special Publication # 17, Boulder, Colorado: Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information Center.
13.
SettleAllan. 1990. “Disaster Assistance: Securing Presidential Declarations.” Pp. 33–56 in Cities and Disaster, edited by SylvesR., and WaughW.Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.
14.
WrightJames D., RossiPeter H., WrightSoma R., and Weber-BurdinEleanor. 1979. After the Clean-Up: Long-Range Effects of Natural Disasters.Beverly Hills, California: Sage.
15.
WrightJames D., and RossiPeter H. (eds.). 1981. Social Science and Natural Hazards.Cambridge. Massachusetts: Abt Books.
16.
YezerAnthony M., and RubinClaire B.. 1987. The Local Economic Effects of Natural Disasters. Working Paper #61, Boulder, Colorado: Institute of Behavioral Sciences. University of Colorado.
