Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  4 / 200 Next Page
Show Menu
Previous Page 4 / 200 Next Page
Page Background






Faerman, 2008; Emerson & Nabatchi, 2015; Emerson,

Nabatchi, & Balogh, 2012; Fleishman, 2009; Gazley, 2008;

Kapucu, Garayev, & Wang, 2013; McGuire & Silvia, 2010;

Pfeffer & Salancik, 2003; Somers & Svara, 2006; Thomson &

Perry, 2006). However, O’Toole (1997) reminds public

administration scholars to also pay attention to network types

and their variations. If selecting collaboration types is a strategic

action to be taken by a local government to maximize its diverse

advantages, one may reasonably assume that the drivers behind

each type of collaboration maybe different.

To test the likelihood of collaboration in different network

types, this study proposes a framework that illustrates the

drivers of three types of collaboration in local EM in the United

States: vertical collaboration, horizontal-interlocal collabo-

ration, and horizontal-intersectoral collaboration. The empirical

analysis is based on qualitative data collected from interviews

with emergency mangers from Florida counties and cities in

answer the following research questions: (1) What factors drive

local governments to collaborate vertically and horizontally in

local EM? Are there different rationales behind each type of

collaboration? and (2) How are the different types of

collaboration conducted in local EM?

II. The History of Emergency Management

in the United States

Ward and Wamsley (2007) chronicle the history of U.S.

EM development and point out that efforts made by the U.S.

federal government to assist communities affected by natural

disasters can be traced back to the 1800s. However, at that time,

the federal government had limited involvement, and neighbors,

religious groups, and civic communities were expected to take

more responsibility than the federal government.