Evaluation of Alternative Approaches to Code Enforcement: Learning from Field Experience

9311857 Burby对于威慑和合作的方法都可以提出可信的论点，但目前我们对各机构在多大程度上使用威慑或合作执法技术知之甚少，也不知道它们的前因及其对提高合规性的影响。文献中的大部分讨论都是规范性和轶事性的，主要集中在联邦监管计划上。因此，我们显然有必要开始研究地方政府执行建筑法规的经验策略。本研究有五个主要目的：(1)确定震慑和合作执法技术在受地震危害地区执行建筑规范方面的使用程度；(2)分离出有利于使用每种方法的机构和社区特征；(3)根据守则执行人员的看法和实际经验，记录每种方法的优缺点；(4)将威慑和合作执法的成功和不成功经验的相关因素分离出来（换句话说，在什么情况下，威慑和合作执法的效果好或不好？）；(5)评估这些发现对联邦和州努力促进更有效地执行地震法规条款以及未来联邦和州减灾计划的影响。这些目标将通过全国调查和社区案例研究来实现。＊＊＊

9311857 Burby Credible arguments can be made for both deterrent and cooperative approaches to code enforcement, but at present we know relatively little about the extent to which agencies are using deterrent or cooperative enforcement techniques, or about their antecedents and their consequences for improved compliance. Much of the discussion in the literature is normative and anecdotal, and focused mainly on federal regulatory programs. Thus, there seems to be a clear need to begin examining empirically strategies local governments are using to enforce building codes. This research has five main aims: (1) to determine the degree to which deterrent and cooperative enforcement techniques are being used in enforcing building codes in areas subject to seismic hazards; (2) to isolate agency and community characteristics that facilitate the use of each approach; (3) to document the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, based on the perceptions and actual experiences of code enforcement personnel; (4) to isolate factors associated with successful and unsuccessful experiences with deterrent and cooperative enforcement (in other words, in what circumstances does each work well and less well?); and (5) to assess the implications of these findings for federal and state efforts to foster more effective enforcement of the seismic provisions of codes and for future federal and state hazard mitigation programs. These goals will be accomplished through a national survey and community case studies. ***