No description available.

This dissertation examines the relationship between economic resilience, disaster experience, and smart growth policies at the local government level. The study is based upon three research questions that examine spatial distribution of economic resilience in Florida cities, and examines the impact of disaster experience, and smart growth policies adopted by local governments on economic resilience. Based upon the bounce-forward approach (Cowell, 2013; Klein et al. 2003), economic resilience is defined using three dimensions—economic stability, economic equity, and economic diversity. The spatial analysis is conducted by mapping economic resilience scores across 780 Census Designated Places in Florida through standard deviation method of classification, and conducting cluster-outlier analysis. Results suggest difference in economic resilience within coastal and inland communities—with higher scores mostly situated inland. East Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida were identified as high economic resilience clusters, and Northwest Florida was identified as low resilience cluster. Impact of disaster experience, and smart growth policies on economic resilience was examined based upon logic of focusing events by Birkland (1997, 2010). Data was collected from the U.S. Census, the National Climatic Data Center, and the Energy Sustainable Florida Communities Survey conducted by Florida State University in 2009. Results suggest significant association between disaster experience of communities and their level of economic resilience, highlighting the importance of community learning in building capacity for resilience after disasters. The results also highlight the need of balancing mitigation and adaptation strategies. Mixed-use development policies, green building certification, and energy savings policies were found to have a significant positive impact on economic resilience.

No description available.

Governments are responsible for administrative arrangements dealing with disasters. Effective policies play a vital role in mitigating the impact of disasters and reducing likely losses of life and property. Yet, it had been noted that such losses were increasing, raising questions about efficacy of government policies and the factors that made them effective. This study adopted a comparative method, responding to a long-standing demand of disaster research, for examining the record in India. There were noticeable differences among its states, with some having undertaken comprehensive reform in an all-hazards approach, while others continued with old policies. This research studied four states with the objective of identifying variables that were critical in undertaking policy reform for building capacities. The roles of economic resources, democratically decentralized institutions, political party systems and focusing events were examined. Findings revealed that these factors had varying impact on state capabilities. Economic resources were an inevitable part of disaster management, but did not necessarily translate into policy reform. Panchayati Raj Institutions, which were democratically decentralized bodies, displayed tremendous potential. However, their role was limited mostly to the response phase, with states severely circumscribing their involvement. The nature of political party systems was able to explain policy reform to an extent. Cohesive systems in Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Orissa correlated with administrative capacities, unlike in fragmented Bihar. However, anti-incumbency sentiments and strong community mobilization impacted contestation more than electoral salience of public goods. The most nuanced and significant explanation was provided by experience of focusing events. States that suffered major disasters revealed unmistakable evidence of double-loop learning, leading to comprehensive policy reform and capacity building. This research provides empirical support to theory about the role of focusing events and organizational learning in policy reform. Methodologically, it underscores the importance of the comparative approach, and its successful application in a federal framework. The significance of this research is most for policy makers and practitioners, as it serves to alert them on the need for reform without waiting for the next big disaster to catch them unprepared.

D’origine anglo-saxonne, le lobbying, en tant que stratégie d’influence du décideur politique ou des politiques publiques est une pratique connue dans le monde entier. Le Burkina Faso, en Afrique de l’Ouest, ne fait pas exception à la règle. On observe en effet des organisations non gouvernementales (ONG) utiliser les techniques du lobbying pour promouvoir des causes nobles, à savoir la bonne gouvernance socio-politique, la lutte contre la corruption, l’accès gratuit des personnes vivant avec le VIH aux médicaments essentiels génériques et la promotion de l’hygiène/assainissement aux populations rurales défavorisées. Mais comment les actions de communication sont-elles mises en place ? Et comment peut-on les observer et les analyser du point de vue des Sciences de l’information et de la Communication, en général, et de la Communication des organisations, en particulier ? Notre méthode d’investigation est qualitative et inscrite dans une approche constructiviste. Un guide d’entretien semi-directif nous a aidé à interroger quatre groupes d’ONG, chaque groupe étant composé de quatre structures, soit 16 entretiens au total conduits. L’analyse thématique appliquée au contenu des entretiens, confrontée à d’autres sources d’information comme les articles de presse, nous confirme plusieurs choses. D’une part, il apparaît que les médias sont utilisés comme médiateurs entre Organisations de la société civile – auxquelles les ONG sont rattachées – et groupe des gouvernants. D’autre part, l’étude révèle que la maîtrise de l’information est capitale dans l’exercice de l’influence politique et que la mise en réseau (ou la construction de relations) avec des alliés joue en faveur des structures engagées dans les actions. Ensuite, il ressort le fait que le pouvoir en place, qui n’est pas totalement démocratique, est sensible à la fois aux stratégies de négociation et de confrontation avec les opérateurs de la société civile. Enfin, notre travail laisse voir que les événements focalisant l’attention publique sont des accélérateurs des processus de régulation sociale et politique. / Lobbying, which originates from an anglo-saxon culture, is nowadays widely known as influential efforts oriented towards policy makers and public policies. Burkina Faso, in West Africa, does not depart from this general rule. In effect, one can observe Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) using lobbying techniques to promote great causes including, for instance, good governance in the social-political area, the fight against corruption, the free access to antiretroviral drugs to people living with HIV/AIDS, the promotion of hygiene and sanitation services to disadvantaged rural populations. But how exactly are communications actions put in place? And how can one observe and analyze them from the standpoint of the “Sciences de l’Information et de la Communication” (Public Relations) in general, and the organizational communication, in particular? Our investigation method is qualitative based and constructivist. A semi-structured interview guide has helped collect data from 4 groups of NGOs, each composed of 4 entities, which makes a total of 16 people interviewed. The thematic analysis of the content of all interviews, faced with other sources of information including the media clippings, gave us confirmation of many things. First, we learnt that the media are being used as mediators between Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) – to which NGOs are attached – and the governing body. Secondly, it appears that the control of information is critical to exerting political influence and that networking (or coalition building) with allied people or organizations is also instrumental. Another finding shows that the regime in place, which is not totally democratic, (at the time the study was performed), is open to both negotiation and confrontation strategies with CSOs. Lastly, our study shows that “focusing events” on public opinion are accelerators of social and political regulation process.