8 / 200
8
E
UR
A
MERICA
manage limited resources effectively and deal with various
emergencies.
Based on the perspectives of federalism and hazard policies
in the U.S., it is recommended that governments engaging in EM
adopt a shared governance approach and work jointly to deal
with disasters (Mushkatel & Weschler, 1985). Central authority
plays a role on providing monetary support and policy
guidelines while local jurisdictions offer “compelling advantages
in terms of tailoring the provision of certain public services to
local tastes” (Oates, 2004: 44). McEntire and Dawson (2007)
further argued that although a multi-level political structure
brings redundancy in implementing policy, it allows disaster-
stricken communities to seek assistance from nearby
jurisdictions or from state and federal agencies. These
characteristics of federalism give local governments
opportunities to vertically connect with different levels of the
government to seek monetary support and other resources when
facing disasters.
Emergencies are often not confined by jurisdictional
boundaries (McGuire & Silvia, 2010). Floods, earthquakes,
tornadoes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters usually cause
damages across administrative borders. Local governments with
similar geographies, climates, or socioeconomic status
particularly need to share a cross-border view to organize their
EM plans. Therefore, cross-jurisdictional collaboration is
necessary when dealing with natural or man-made disasters.
IV. Three Types of Local Emergency
Management Collaboration
In the case of local EM, flexible collaboration in both
vertical and horizontal contexts is essential, especially when
responding to large-scale disasters (Drabek, 1990). This study
focuses on three types of collaboration and studies their