Abstract

Traditionally, responsibility for land planning in the United States lies with local governments. However, a growing number of states over the past several decades have attempted to exert more influence on how local governments plan for development. This paper uses empirical data from natural hazard elements of 139 community plans in five states to assess whether such state mandates actually result in better local plans. We find that a state mandate not only achieves plans from communities that otherwise would not make a plan, but in addition those plans are of higher quality than plans made voluntarily in communities not under a mandate to plan. W e find that a state mandate substitutes for the absence of any positive political forces for planning and overcomes local political, economic and physical obstacles to planning. Further, the form of the mandate and the state level implementation effort makes a difference, so that some states' mandates achieve local plans of higher quality than those created in ...

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.