Building hazard resilience through collaboration: the role of technical partnerships in areas with hazardous liquid and natural gas transmission pipelines

Environment and Planning A

Volumn 47, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 1063-1080

  Osland, Anna Christine ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b Anna Osland Consulting   (United States)

Author keywords

collaboration; emergency management; hazard mitigation; land use planning; natural gas and petroleum transmission pipelines

Indexed keywords

GAS PIPELINE; HAZARD MANAGEMENT; LAND USE PLANNING; METROPOLITAN AREA; NATURAL GAS; OIL PIPELINE; STAKEHOLDER;

GREENSBORO; NORTH CAROLINA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84940023845     PISSN: 0308518X     EISSN: 14723409     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0308518X15592307     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. D.Alexander (2005) “Towards the development of a standard in emergency planning”. Disaster Prevention and Management14: 158–175.
2. C.AnsellA.Gash (2008) “Collaborative governance in theory and practice”. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory18: 543–571.
3. M.BaldassareC.Hoene (2002) “Coping with homeland security: perceptions of city officials in California and the United States”. Congress of Cities and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT: Public Policy Institute of California.
4. P.R.BerkeM.BackhurstM.DayN.EricksenL.LaurianJ.CrawfordJ.Dixon (2006a) “What makes plan implementation successful? An evaluation of local plans and implementation practices in New Zealand”. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design33: 581–600.
5. P.R.BerkeD.R.GodschalkE.J.KaiserD.Rodriguez (2006b) Urban Land Use Planning, Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
6. T.Birkland (1998) “Focusing events, mobilization, and agenda setting”. Journal of Public Policy18: 53–74.
7. Bjørnmose J, Roca F, Turgot T, Hansen D S, 2009, “An assessment of the gas and oil pipelines in Europe “, I Policy Department A: Economic and Scientific Policies, Research and Energy, Directorate General for Internal Policies, Brussels, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/note/join/2009/416239/1POL-ITRE_NT%282009%29416239_EN.pdf
8. A.BoinP.LagadecE.Michel-KerjanW.Overdijk (2003) “Critical infrastructures under threat: learning from the anthrax scare”. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management11: 99–104.
9. D.BooherJ.Innes (2002) “Network power in collaborative planning”. Journal of Planning Education and Research21: 221–236.
10. C.BouissouS.DescourriereN.Dechy (2004) “Control of major accident hazards involving land transmission pipelines”. Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Loss Prevention and Safety Promotion in the Process Industry, Prague, 4217–4223.
11. N.Britton (2002) “A new emergency management for the new millennium?”. Australian Journal of Emergency Management16: 44–54.
12. S.BrodyJ.KangS.Bernhardt (2010) “Identifying factors influencing flood mitigation at the local level in Texas and Florida: the role of organizational capacity”. Natural Hazards52: 1–18.
13. R.J.Burby (2006) “Hurricane Katrina and the paradoxes of government disaster policy: bringing about wise governmental decisions for hazardous areas”. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science604: 171–191.
14. R.J.BurbyP.J.May (1997) Making Governments Plan: State Experiments in Managing Land Use, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
15. Burke G, Dearen J, 2010, “Aging gas pipe at risk of explosion nationwide”, Associated Press, http://www.homeland1.com/disaster-preparedness/articles/880312-Aging-gas-pipe-at-risk-of-explosion-nationwide/
16. I.BurtonR.W.KatesG.F.White (1993) The Environmental as Hazard, New York: Guilford Press.
17. R.Chaskin (2001) “Building community capacity: a definitional framework and case studies from a comprehensive community initiative”. Urban Affairs Review36: 291–323.
18. L.Comfort (2002) “Rethinking security: organizational fragility in extreme events”. Public Administration Review62: 98–107.
19. B.S.Cooper (2003) “Policy issues in encroachment and pipeline rights of way”. National Academies Transportation Research Board Committee for Pipelines and Public Safety, Washington, DC: American Petroleum Institute and Association for Oil Pipe Lines.
20. M.CottonP.Devine-Wright (2012) “Making electricity networks ‘visible’: industry actor representations of ‘publics’ and public engagement in infrastructure planning”. Public Understanding of Science21: 17–35.
21. Davis P M, Diaz J M, Gambardella F, Sanchez-Garcia E, Uhlig F, 2013, “Performance of European cross-country oil pipelines, Statistical summary of reported spillages in 2012 and since 1971”, Conservation of Clean Air and Water in Europe, Brussels, https://www.concawe.eu/content/default.asp?PagelD=569
22. EGIG (2011) Gas Pipeline Incidents, 8th Report of the European Gas Pipeline Incident Data Group, Groningen: European Gas Pipeline Incident Data Grouphttp://www.egig.eu/uploads/bestanden/96652994-c9af-4612-8467-9bc6c2ed3fb3.
23. Federal Trade Commission, 2006, “Investigation of gasoline price manipulation and post-Katrina gasoline price increases”, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DC
24. B.FischhoffP.SlovicS.Lichtenstein (2000) “Weighing the risks: which risks are acceptable?”. In: P.Slovic (ed.) Perceptions of Risk, London: Earthscan, pp. 121–136.
25. R.FisherW.UryB.Patton (1991) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in, New York: Penguin Books.
26. A.FleischmannC.Pierannunzi (1990) “Citizens, development interests, and local land-use regulation”. The Journal of Politics52: 838–853.
27. J.Forester (1989) Planning in the Face of Power, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
28. B.J.GerberD.B.CohenB.CannonD.PattersonK.Stewart (2005) “On the front line: American cities and the challenge of homeland security preparedness”. Urban Affairs Review41: 182–210.
29. D.Godschalk (2003) “Urban hazard mitigation: creating resilient cities”. Natural Hazards Review4: 136–143.
30. D.R.GodschalkE.J.KaiserP.R.Berke (1998) “Integrating hazard mitigation and local land use planning”. In: R.J.Burby (ed.) Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-use Planning for Sustainable Communities, Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press, pp. 85–118.
31. B.GoldsteinW.Butler (2010) “Expanding the scope and impact of collaborative planning”. Journal of the American Planning Association76: 238–249.
32. B.Gray (1985) “Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration”. Human Relations38: 911–936.
33. C.GrovesM.MundayN.Yakovleva (2013) “Fighting the pipe: neoliberal governance and barriers to effective community participation in energy infrastructure planning”. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy31: 340–356.
34. W.Guijt (2004) “Analyses of incident data show US, European pipelines becoming safer”. Oil and Gas Journal102: 68–73.
35. Y.Haimes (1999) “The role of the society for risk analysis in the emerging threats to critical infrastructures”. Risk Analysis19: 153–157.
36. Hall S, 2005, “North Carolina transmission pipeline miles by county”, Office of Pipeline Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Safety Administration #US |Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
37. P.Healey (1998) “Building institutional capacity through collaborative approaches to urban planning”. Environment and Planning A30: 1531–1546.
38. J.Innes (1992) “Group processes and the social construction of growth management: Florida, Vermont, and New Jersey”. Journal of the American Planning Association58: 440–453.
39. J.E.Innes (1996) “Planning through consensus building: a new view of the comprehensive planning ideal”. Journal of the American Planning Association62: 460–472.
40. J.E.Innes (1998) “Information in communicative planning”. Journal of the American Planning Association64: 52–63.
41. J.Innes (2004) “Consensus building: clarifications for the critics”. Planning Theory3: 5–20.
42. J.InnesD.Booher (1999) “Consensus building and complex adaptive systems”. Journal of the American Planning Association65: 412–423.
43. N.KazaM.P.Curtis (2014) “The land use energy connection”. Journal of Planning Literature29: 355–369.
44. T.Koontz (2005) “We finished the plan, so now what? Impacts of collaborative stakeholder participation on land use policy”. Policy Studies Journal33: 459–481.
45. M.K.LindellR.W.Perry (2004) Communicating Environmental Risk in Multiethnic Communities, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. L.W.LylesP.BerkeG.Smith (2013) “Do planners matter? Examining factors driving incorporation of land use approaches into hazard mitigation plans”. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management57: 792–811.
47. P.May (1991) “Reconsidering policy design: policies and publics”. Journal of Public Policy11: 187–206.
48. P.J.MayR.E.Deyle (1998) “Governing land use in hazardous areas with a patchwork system”. In: R.J.Burby (ed.) Cooperating with Nature: Confronting Natural Hazards with Land-use Planning for Sustainable Communities, Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press, pp. 57–82.
49. M.B.MilesA.M.Huberman (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. D.S.Mileti (1999) Disasters by Design, A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States, Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
51. Muhr T, 2007, “ATLAS.ti 5.2: The QDA Software. Version 5.2”, ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin
52. G.G.NollM.S.Hildebrand (2004) Pipeline Emergencies, Chester, MA: Red Hat Publishing.
53. NTSB (2010) Preliminary Report: San Bruno (CA) Pipeline Rupture Accident, Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Board.
54. Office of Pipeline Safety (2010) Building Safe Communities: Pipeline Risk and its Application to Development Decisions, Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration.
55. A.C.Osland (2013) “Using land-use planning tools to mitigate hazards: hazardous liquid and natural gas transmission pipelines”. Journal of Planning Education and Research33: 141–159.
56. G.Papadakis (1999) “Major hazard pipelines: a comparative study of onshore transmission accidents”. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries12: 91–107.
57. Parfomak P, 2006, “Pipeline safety and security: federal programs”, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, Washington, DC, pp 1-14
58. Pates J, 1996, “Out of sight, out of mind: what every local government should know about pipeline safety”, International Municipal Attorneys Association, Little Rock, AR
59. L.Pearce (2003) “Disaster management and community planning, and public participation: how to achieve sustainable hazard mitigation”. Natural Hazards28: 211–228.
60. PHMS A Office of Pipeline Safety, 2010, “Incident statistics” #US |Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Washington, DC, http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat/library/data-stats/incidents
61. C.PraterM.Lindell (2000) “Politics of hazard mitigation”. Natural Hazards Review1: 73–82.
62. C.Reddick (2007) “Homeland security preparedness and planning in US city governments: a survey of city managers”. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management15: 157–167.
63. L.SchweitzerE.HowardI.Doran (2008) “Planners learning and creating power”. Journal of Planning Education and Research28: 50–61.
64. P.SlovicB.FischhoffS.LichtensteinB.CorriganB.Combs (1977) “Preference for insuring against probable small losses: insurance implications”. Journal of Risk and Insurance44: 237–258.
65. P.SlovicB.FischhoffS.Lichtenstein (2000) “Rating the risks”, in. In: P.Slovic (ed.) The Perception of Risk, London: Earthscan, pp. 104–120.
66. C.Starr (1969) “Social benefit versus technological risk”. Science165: 1232–1238.
67. L.SusskindJ.Cruikshank (2006) Breaking Robert's Rules: The New Way to Run Your Meetings, Build Consensus, and Get Results, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
68. Transportation Research Board, 2004, “Transmission pipelines and land use: a risk informed approach”, Special Report 281, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, pp 1-122
69. US Bureau of the Census, 2000, “Census 2000 Summary File 3” #US |Department of Commerce #US |Census Bureau, Washington, DC
70. US General Accounting Office, 2002, “Pipeline safety and security: improved workforce planning and communication needed”, General Accounting Office, Washington, DC
71. E.WengerW.Snyder (2000) “Communities of practice: the organizational frontier”. Harvard Business Review78: 139–146.
72. R.Yin (2003) Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.