Assessing social equity of federal disaster aid distribution: A nationwide analysis.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2024-10-09 DOI:10.1111/risa.17660
Qing Miao, Meri Davlasheridze, Allison C Reilly
{"title":"Assessing social equity of federal disaster aid distribution: A nationwide analysis.","authors":"Qing Miao, Meri Davlasheridze, Allison C Reilly","doi":"10.1111/risa.17660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this study, we conduct the first comprehensive, nationwide assessment of social equity performance of multiple federal post- and pre-disaster assistance programs that differ in targeted recipients, project types, forms of aid, and funding requirements. We draw on the social equity and distributive justice theory to develop and test a set of hypotheses on the influence of program design and specificity on their aid distributional patterns and equity performance. The analysis uses panel data of about 3000 US counties to examine the relationship between a county's receipt of federal assistance and its recent disaster damage, socioeconomic, demographic, political, local government, and geographic characteristics in a two-stage random effects Tobit model. Expectedly, we find that post-disaster grants are largely driven by recent disaster damage, while damage is simultaneously influenced by local socioeconomic conditions. For all disaster programs, disproportionately more federal aid is allocated to populous counties. For programs geared toward state and local governments and targeting community recovery and mitigation, more aid is received by counties with better socioeconomic conditions. Conversely, for programs targeting individual relief and recovery, more aid is given to counties with lower incomes and greater social vulnerability. Results also indicate that counties located in high-risk regions receive greater outlays. These findings shed light on the varying degrees of social equity of federal disaster assistance programs tied to their cost-share requirement, funding caps, and inherent complexity of application procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.17660","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this study, we conduct the first comprehensive, nationwide assessment of social equity performance of multiple federal post- and pre-disaster assistance programs that differ in targeted recipients, project types, forms of aid, and funding requirements. We draw on the social equity and distributive justice theory to develop and test a set of hypotheses on the influence of program design and specificity on their aid distributional patterns and equity performance. The analysis uses panel data of about 3000 US counties to examine the relationship between a county's receipt of federal assistance and its recent disaster damage, socioeconomic, demographic, political, local government, and geographic characteristics in a two-stage random effects Tobit model. Expectedly, we find that post-disaster grants are largely driven by recent disaster damage, while damage is simultaneously influenced by local socioeconomic conditions. For all disaster programs, disproportionately more federal aid is allocated to populous counties. For programs geared toward state and local governments and targeting community recovery and mitigation, more aid is received by counties with better socioeconomic conditions. Conversely, for programs targeting individual relief and recovery, more aid is given to counties with lower incomes and greater social vulnerability. Results also indicate that counties located in high-risk regions receive greater outlays. These findings shed light on the varying degrees of social equity of federal disaster assistance programs tied to their cost-share requirement, funding caps, and inherent complexity of application procedures.

评估联邦灾害援助分配的社会公平性:全国性分析。
在本研究中,我们首次在全国范围内对多个联邦灾后和灾前援助项目的社会公平绩效进行了全面评估,这些项目在目标受助人、项目类型、援助形式和资金要求方面均有所不同。我们借鉴了社会公平和分配正义理论,就项目设计和特殊性对援助分配模式和公平绩效的影响提出了一系列假设并进行了测试。分析使用了美国约 3000 个县的面板数据,在两阶段随机效应 Tobit 模型中考察了一个县接受联邦援助的情况与其近期灾害损失、社会经济、人口、政治、地方政府和地理特征之间的关系。我们不出所料地发现,灾后补助金在很大程度上受近期灾害损失的影响,而灾害损失同时也受当地社会经济条件的影响。在所有灾害项目中,分配给人口众多县的联邦援助都不成比例地多。对于面向州政府和地方政府、以社区恢复和减灾为目标的项目,社会经济条件较好的县获得的援助较多。相反,对于以个人救济和恢复为目标的项目,收入较低和社会脆弱性较大的县获得的援助较多。结果还表明,位于高风险地区的县获得了更多的支出。这些发现揭示了联邦灾害援助项目在不同程度上的社会公平性,这与项目的成本分担要求、资金上限以及申请程序的内在复杂性息息相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信