Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 11, 2025

Evaluating Dryocosmus Kuriphilus-induced Damage on Castanea Sativa
Published on: August 30, 2018
Comparing predisaster mitigation grant spending with postdisaster assistance spending: Are mitigation investments
Katharina Renken1, Andrea M Jackman2, Mario G Beruvides3
1Senior Researcher, Kühne Logistics University GmbH, Hapag-Lloyd Center for Shipping and Global Logistics (CSGL), Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract:
This work is a companion paper to "Quantifying the Relationship Between Predisaster Mitigation Spending and Major Disaster Declarations for US States and Territories." Mitigation is a relatively new undertaking, especially for local jurisdictions, within the United States disaster policy. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) requires local jurisdictions to plan for and implement mitigative strategies in order to access federal grant funding options for emergency management. After DMA 2000 went into effect in the mid-2000s, a supporting study by the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council (MMC 2005) found that on average, mitigation projects yielded a benefit-cost ratio of 4:1 at the local level.1 This paper evaluates and compares predisaster mitigation spending and postdisaster assistance spend-ing at the state and FEMA Regional levels, hypothesizing that as mitigation spending increases, postdisaster spend-ing should decrease. The results however indicate the opposite, with most states showing increasing in both types of spending over time.
Related Concept Videos
Applications of GIS: Disaster Management and Emergency Response
Manipulation and Analysis
Design Example: Analyzing Capacity Contours for Flood Risk Assessment
Modeling and Similitude
Multiple Comparison Tests
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...

