(iPoster) Governance as a Conversion Mechanism in Flood Response

• In Event: Poster Sessions: Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence; Policy Challenges and Innovations; & Institutional Constraints and Government Performance in Multilevel Systems
  In Poster Session: Poster Session: Policy Challenges and Innovations

Abstract

Extreme floods are often framed as tests of emergency management capacity, but they are equally tests of public policy design. This paper examines why similar surges of civic engagement during disasters can yield sharply different outcomes in coordination capacity, distributional equity, and post-crisis legitimacy. Drawing on a comparative analysis of the 2021 Henan flood in China and the 2024 North Carolina flood triggered by Hurricane Helene, the study shows how policy architectures condition whether civic energy is translated into durable collective action or dissipates after short-term mobilization.

We advance a Governance–Social Capital Integration Framework centered on an institutional conversion problem. Disasters routinely generate social capital—neighbors mobilize, nonprofits activate, and informal volunteer networks fill gaps—but these resources do not automatically become effective policy capacity. Conversion depends on institutional scaffolding: policy-relevant interfaces, rules, and role structures that link formal emergency command systems with nonprofit, private-sector, and community actors under conditions of urgency and uncertainty.

The paper addresses three questions: (1) how centralized versus decentralized policy arrangements configure collaborative response networks and with what consequences for coordination and delivery capacity; (2) how these configurations shape social resilience and perceived legitimacy by matching—or failing to match—citizens’ expectations regarding equity and accountability; and (3) under what conditions social capital is converted into stable resilience rather than dissipating after initial mobilization.

Using a comparative qualitative design based on systematic secondary data and iterative thematic coding, we conduct within-case mapping and cross-case analysis of actor composition, coordination mechanisms, and information flows. The findings reveal mirrored strengths and vulnerabilities. In Henan, centralized policy instruments enabled rapid scale-up and strong delivery capacity through vertical mobilization, but constrained the institutional incorporation of independent NGOs and volunteers, narrowing bridging social capital and amplifying equity-related legitimacy tensions. In North Carolina, polycentric policy arrangements supported broader cross-sector interfaces and procedural inclusion, yet performance varied with local capacity, producing uneven outcomes under surge conditions.

The paper contributes to Public Policy scholarship by specifying a portable mechanism linking institutional design to coordination, equity, and legitimacy in crisis governance. It also speaks directly to APSA 2026’s theme, “Democracy Under Threat,” by demonstrating how crisis policy performance shapes state–society relations in high-stakes moments, when visible failures can deepen mistrust and credible delivery can help rebuild institutional confidence.

Authors

• Unregistered Participant

• Chul Hyun Park, University of Maryland, Baltimore County