Relationships Between Removal of Infrastructure Subsidies and Coastal Development: The Impact of the U.S. Coastal Barrier Resources Act

University Of North Carolina At Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill NC

Investigators

Abstract

This research project will determine whether the withdrawal of federal infrastructure subsidies is an effective way to discourage urban development in environmentally fragile or risk-prone areas. The project will use the 1982 U.S. Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) as a kind of "natural experiment" to examine how and why rates and type of urban development have differed depending on whether the coastal areas were affected by the act, which eliminated federal funding for infrastructure in designated coastal areas along the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico without prohibiting development. The project will enhance general knowledge about the factors influencing development and redevelopment of coastal areas by identifying the interrelated and conflicting motivations of different organizations involved in the urban development process. It will address theoretical debates about future legal frameworks that could mirror the CBRA to protect wetlands, floodplains, endangered species habitat, and other areas experiencing severe future risk from changing environmental conditions. Project findings will be shared with policy makers and coastal managers through a professional toolkit that will explain results and suggest best practices for coastal development and infrastructure decisions. Findings also will be transformed into educational materials for use in high schools across North Carolina and the U.S. Urban development relies on numerous factors, including federal assistance with infrastructure development, whether through roads, utilities, or other major investments. Although the CBRA attempted to reduce incentives for development in areas that were extremely vulnerable to natural hazards, such as areas subject to hurricanes or storm surges development still has occurred in these areas. The investigators will focus on the key tension created by the CBRA, as increased infrastructure costs may be offset by local permitting and infrastructure funding as well as premiums placed on seclusion promoted by the act. They will seek to ascertain to what extent development has occurred in coastal areas where public infrastructure, disaster relief, and flood insurance subsidies have been withdrawn. They will examine how these development rates compare to coastal areas with continued subsidies, and they will identify whether there are economic or population growth thresholds for which withdrawal of federal funding has no effect on development rates, and they will assess how local land-use, infrastructure, and permitting decisions interact with and possibly offset restrictions on federal subsidies. The investigators will evaluate the rates, types, and intensities of residential development in units affected by the CBRA and adjoining, non-affected areas throughout Alabama, Delaware, Florida, North Carolina, and South Carolina. They will use a quasi-experimental framework based on a matched pair analysis to understand the impacts of various factors. Focused case studies will then explore why some units affected by the CBRA have developed and others have not.