I need help formulating an answer to the question below.
During a forum titled Cities and Megacities at Risk (sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Stanford University's John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, and the World Seismic Safety Initiative, on Capitol Hill on January 21, 1998) Kendra Briechle, International City/County Management Association, reported the results of a recent study on Needs, Barriers, and Opportunities to Mitigation in Local Government.
The survey indicated many governments are confused about mitigation, and most perceive a lower risk for their area than actually exists. In addition, smaller governments generally have fewer tools for mitigation, including a lack of capacity and enforceable building codes.
1. Why do many local governments perceive a lower risk of a disaster for their communities than actually exists?
2. Do you believe that your community may down-play disaster risks?
Many local governments perceive a lower risk of a disaster for communities than actually exist for several reasons. A primary cause is the lack of funding available for planning for disasters. At the conference, Ms. Briechle discussed tools for mitigation, "including a lack of capacity and enforceable building codes" (American Geological Institute, 1998). While these are important, they cost money. Mr. Sherman, spoke at the conference about his experience with Intel, citing "downsizing, mergers, and the emphasis on quarterly profits" (American Geological ...
This solution discusses why many local governments perceive a lower risk of a disaster than actually exists, and if my community has this issue. It gives a detailed answer and APA formatted reference.