Federalism, Law, and the Ethics of Disaster Evacuations

• Published date: 29 October 2012
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1521-6136(2012)0000017007
• Date: 29 October 2012
• Pages: 65-81
• Author: Tanya L. Settles

FEDERALISM, LAW, AND THE

ETHICS OF DISASTER

EVACUATIONS

Tanya L. Settles

ABSTRACT

Purpose This study explores the relationship between federal, state,

and local governments in regard to evacuation policies. The issue of

evacuation enforcement by force is explored from a practical as well as

moral perspective, and the overarching question of whether mandatory

evacuation policy is merely symbolic is examined. Last, implications of

policy making for vulnerable and marginalized populations is explored,

and the question of whether criminalization of failure to comply with

evacuation orders carries ill effects for certain segments of the popula-

tion is examined.

Design/methodology/approach This chapter first evaluates the legal

logistics and policy foundation of evacuation orders at the national and

state level. The chapter then explores the implications for local govern-

ments, notably first responders in implementing evacuation policy.

Finally, policy recommendations related to improvements to existing

evacuation policy for all levels of government are offered.

Disasters, Hazards and Law

Sociology of Crime, Law and Deviance, Volume 17, 6581

Copyright r2012 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited

All rights of reproduction in any form reserved

ISSN: 1521-6136/doi:10.1108/S1521-6136(2012)0000017007

65

Findings There is a gap in public policy between the expectations of

the federal government and the implementation of evacuation policy at

the local and state level. Policy and law changes that improve the ability

of local governments to more effectively warn communities about the

risks of noncompliance should occur in a way that minimizes the social

disparities inherent in existing policy schemes.

Originality/value of paper Evacuation policy is often considered as

an afterthought to disaster planning and does not rise to the top of any

government agenda until after a catastrophic event. This chapter

encourages policy makers to be more proactive in developing evacuation

policy that capitalizes on the effects of federalism to minimize the risks

associated with natural and human-caused hazards.

INTRODUCTION

Government led efforts to move people out of harm’s way in the event of

an impending disaster be it hurricane, fire, or some human-precipitated

event, unquestionably increases the odds that lives can be saved and expo-

sure to hazards can be minimized. Most people, both inside and outside

government would agree that the responsibility to issue an evacuation

order lies with a government entity, but there is considerable confusion as

to which government entity state, local, or federal, that has the authority

to issue such an order. There is even greater confusion as to whether any

government has enforcement authority to compel individuals to leave pri-

vate homes.

In recent years, particularly since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and the

Post Katrina Act of 2006, some of the ambiguity around which level of

government and authority has, in general, been greatly reduced. However,

there remains a wide chasm in policy related to evacuations and the legal

enforcement of such, even though evacuations immediately preceding and

during an emergency episode are considered to be of enormous importance

both by the government authorities that order them and the individuals

who are impacted by such orders. While there were few positives associ-

ated with the overall governmental response to Katrina, much was learned

that has shaped policy, and in particular, evacuation policy. Even still, in

light of a compelling public safety interest, government agencies often

cannot force people out of their homes. Sometimes, this occurs because

governments lack the authority to implement a truly and legitimately

66 TANYA L. SETTLES