{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0208, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0064, 'mean_word_length': 6.067796610169491, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Naturally Resilient to Natural Hazards? Urban–Rural Disparities in Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Assistance

ABSTRACT The American public generally sees its rural communities as autonomous and self-sufficient—inherently resilient. Accordingly, research on federally funded hazard mitigation has disproportionately focused on urban areas, as rural communities rebuild largely by themselves. Our exploratory research challenges this overarching narrative on rural communities by examining disparities in the mitigation process—specifically, the amount of Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) assistance awarded per recipient and the duration of HMGP projects—between urban and rural counties from 1989 to 2018. Our analysis reveals vast inequities in the distribution and duration of HMGP assistance between urban and rural counties. Controlling for characteristics of the mitigated properties and corresponding counties, social and physical vulnerability, and climate change factors, we find (a) the amount of HMGP assistance awarded per recipient is higher in urban counties, and (b) projects are completed more quickly in rural counties. Ultimately, our findings indicate that the current structure of the HMGP leaves rural counties in the dust.