This article examines the conditions under which local jurisdictions make effective use of U.S. homeland security resources. It analyzes how resources, institutional context, and governance influence local performance on one homeland security policy dimension—communications interoperability. Governance maturity, nested institutions, and the existence of formal rules are key variables affecting the relationship between resources and performance at the local level. Cities with advanced, multilevel, and formal governance arrangements are more effective at using Urban Area Security Initiative funds to improve their interoperability performance. But current policy approaches slight corresponding demands for shared leadership and cross-sector collaborations.
Agranoff, Robert, and Michael McGuire .2001. Big questions for public network management research. Journal of Public Management Research and Theory11:295-327.
2.
Ancona, D., T.W. Malone, W.J. Orlikowski, and P.M. Senge.2007. In praise of the incomplete leader . Harvard Business Review85 (2): 92-100.
3.
Barrett, Devlin.2007. US works to fix emergency communications. Washington Post, July 18.
4.
Bingham, Lisa Blomgren, and Rosemary O’Leary .2006. Parallel play, not collaboration: Missing questions, missing connections. Public Administration Review66:161-67.
5.
Birkland, Thomas.1997. After disaster: Agenda setting, public policy, and focusing events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
6.
Bryson, John M., Barbara C. Crosby, and Melissa Middleton Stone.2006. The design and implementation of cross-sector collaborations: Propositions from the literature. Public Administration Review66:44-55.
7.
Burnett, Sara, and Kara Spak.2005a. Gas masks, a treadmill, and T-shirts: In suburbs, homeland security spending is all over the map. Daily Herald, September 12.
8.
---. 2005b. Many towns don’t know where security dollars go . Daily Herald, September 12.
9.
Carey, Carol.2007. Emergency communications: Taking command. Government Security, February 1.
10.
Caruson, Kiki, and Susan MacManus.2007. Designing homeland security policy within a regional structure: A needs assessment of local security concerns . Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management4:7.
11.
Clarke, Susan E., and Erica Chenoweth .2006. The politics of vulnerability: Constructing local performance regimes for homeland security. Review of Policy Research23:95-114.
12.
Coafee, Jon, and D.M. Wood.2006. Security is coming home: Rethinking scale and constructing resilience in the global urban response to terrorist risk. International Relations20:503-17.
13.
Coats, R. Morris, and Robert D. Tollison .2006. Terrorism and pork-barrel spending. Public Choice127:275-87.
14.
Collier, Stephen J., and Andrew Lakoff.2008. Distributed preparedness: The spatial logic of domestic security in the United States. Environment and Planning: Society and Space26:7-28.
15.
Comfort, Louise, Kilkon Ko, and Adam Zagorecki.2004. Coordination in rapidly evolving disaster response systems: The role of information. American Behavioral Scientist48: 295-313.
16.
Comfort, Louise K.2005. Risk, security, and disaster management. Annual Review of Political Science8:335-56.
17.
Congressional Research Services.2006. State and local homeland security: Unresolved issues for the 109th Congress . Washington, DC: Congressional Research Services.
18.
de Souza Briggs, Xavier.2002. The will and the way: Local partnerships, political strategy and the well-being of America’s children and youth. KSG Faculty Research Working Papers, no. RWP01-050, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
19.
Eisinger, Peter.2006. Imperfect federalism: The intergovernmental partnership for homeland security. Public Administration Review66:537-45.
20.
Gaston, E.L.2007. Taking the gloves off of homeland security: Rethinking the federalism framework for responding to domestic emergencies. Harvard Law and Policy Review1:519-32.
21.
Gerber, Brian, David B. Cohen, Brian Cannon, Dennis Patter-son, and Kendra Stewart.2005. On the frontline: American cities and the challenge of homeland security preparedness. Urban Affairs Review41:182-210.
22.
Graham, S., ed. 2004. Cities, war, and terrorism: Towards an urban geopolitics. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
23.
Hallett, Tim, and Marc J. Ventresca .2006. How institutions form: Loose coupling as mechanism in Gouldner’s patterns of industrial bureaucracy . American Behavioral Scientist49:908-24.
24.
Howitt, Arnold M.2002. Promoting regional collaboration. In Beyond the Beltway: Focusing on hometown security, ed. Juliette Kayyem and Arnold M. Howitt, 28-31. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government’s Executive Session on Domestic Preparedness .
25.
Jenkins, William O.2006. Collaboration over adaptation: The case for interoperable communications in homeland security. Public Administration Review66:319-21.
26.
Kayyem, Juliette, and Arnold M. Howitt, eds. 2002. Beyond the Beltway: Focusing on hometown security. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government’s Executive Session on Domestic Preparedness.
27.
Kettl, Donald.2003a. Contingent coordination: Practical and theoretical puzzles for homeland security. American Review of Public Administration33:253-77.
28.
---. 2003b. The states and homeland security: Building the missing link. New York: Century Foundation .
29.
King, Gary, Michael Tomz, and Jason Wittenberg .2000. Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science44:347-61.
30.
Kroenig, Matthew, and Jay Stowsky .2006. War makes the state, but not as it pleases: Homeland security and American anti-statism. Security Studies15:225-70.
31.
Martinez, M. Cecilia, William Firestone, Melinda Mangin, and Terrie Polovsky .2005. Leadership alignment: The challenge of distributed leadership. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, Montreal, April.
32.
McCabe, Barbara C., and Richard C. Feiock .2005. Nested levels of institutions: State rules and city property taxes. Urban Affairs Review40:634-54.
33.
Meyer, David S.2003. Political opportunity and nested institutions. Social Movement Studies2:17-35.
34.
Moynihan, Donald P.2008. Combining structural forms in the search for policy tools: Incident command systems in U.S. crisis management. Governance21:205 -229.
35.
National League of Cities.2005. Research report: The state of America’s cities. Washington, DC: NLC.
36.
National Task Force on Interoperability.2003 . Why can’t we talk? Working together to bridge the communications gap to save lives. http://www.safecomprogram.gov/NR/rdonlyres/322B4367-265C-45FB-8EEA-BD0FEBDA95A8/0/Why_cant_we_talk_NTFI_Guide.pdf .
37.
Olsen, Johan P.2009. Change and continuity: An institutional approach to institutions of democratic government. European Political Science Review1:3-32.
38.
Ostrom, Elinor.1990. Governing the commons. Cambridge , UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Ostrom, Elinor, Roy Gardner, and James Walker.1994. Rules, games and common pool resources . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
40.
Perrow, Charles.2007. The next catastrophe: Reducing our vulnerabilities to natural, industrial, and terrorist disasters. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41.
Pierre, Jon, ed. 2000. Debating governance: Authority, steering, and democracy. Oxford , UK: Oxford University Press.
42.
Prante, Tyler, and Alok K. Bohara .2008. What determines homeland security spending? An econometric analysis of the Homeland Security Grant Program. Policy Studies Journal36:243-56.
43.
Reddick, Christopher G.2008. Collaboration and homeland security preparedness: A survey of U.S. city managers. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management5:22.
44.
Roberts, Patrick.2008. Dispersed federalism as a new regional governance for homeland security. Publius38:416-43.
45.
Savitch, Hank V.2007. Cities in a time of terror: Space, territory, and local resilience. New York: M.E. Sharpe .
46.
Scavo, Carmine, Richard C. Kearney, and Richard J. Kilroy Jr.2007. Challenges to federalism: Homeland security and disaster response. Publius38:81-110.
47.
Shrestha, Manoj, Zhirong Zhao, and Richard Feiock.2007. Embedded governments: Cooperation in the supply of local public goods. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association annual meeting, Chicago, August-September.
48.
State of Ohio.2008. Statewide communications interoperability plan. Columbus, OH: Statewide Interoperability Executive Committee.
49.
Stone, Clarence N.1989. Regime politics. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
50.
---. 1998. Introduction: Urban education in political context. In Changing urban education, ed. C. N. Stone, 1-22. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
51.
Thacher, David.2005. The local role in homeland security. Law and Society Review39:635-76.
52.
Tierney, Kathleen J.2005. Recent developments in U.S. homeland security policies and their implications for the management of extreme events. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Urban Disaster Reduction, Kobe, Japan, January.
53.
Timmons, Richard.2007. Interoperability: Stop blaming the radio. Homeland Security Affairs3:1-17.
54.
U.S. Conference of Mayors.2004. Third mayors’ report to the nation: Tracking federal homeland security funds sent to the 50 state governments. Washington, DC : U.S. Conference of Mayors.
55.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).2006. National baseline survey findings show significant levels of interoperability across the nation. Press release, December 8. http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1165602262541.shtm.
56.
---. 2007a. DHS announces $1.7 billion in homeland security grants . Press release, July 18. http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1184781799950.shtm.
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).2003. Homeland security: Challenges in achieving interoperable communications for first responders. GAO-04-231T. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04231t.pdf.
59.
---. 2004. Homeland security: Federal leadership and intergovernmental cooperation required to achieve first responder interoperable communications . GAO-04-470. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04740.pdf .
60.
---. 2005. Results-oriented government: Practices that can help enhance and sustain collaboration among federal agencies. GAO-06-15. http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d0615high.pdf.
61.
---. 2007. First responders: Much work remains to improve communications interoperability. GAO 07-301. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07301.pdf .
62.
Wise, Charles R.2006. Organizing for homeland security after Katrina: Is adaptive management what’s missing?Public Administration Review66:302-18.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
