The practice of mitigation provides long-term, pre-disaster planning that involves the expenditure on structural and non-structural ideas for reducing the impacts of disaster occurrences. According to Haddow and Bullock (2008), mitigation is a strategic plan that provides a means of response and data recovery tools in case of a hazard (Haddow & Bullock, 2008). Mitigation differs from other emergency management disciplines as it offers a lasting solution to risks rather than providing a short, immediate recovery response to hazards. In addition, mitigation involves a broad spectrum of players outside of the traditional emergency management circle.
There are several tools for mitigation. Design and Construction Applications provides one of the most cost-effective ways of addressing risk. This process is governed by building codes, design and architectural criteria, soil and landscaping consideration. In addition, it offers numerous opportunities, for example, the use of fire retardant material such as slate instead of wood for roofing. The main disadvantage is that codes that require rehabilitation of existing potential-hazardous structures are rarely implemented due to the high cost. Financial incentives are one of the upcoming areas of mitigation. Several ways are being employed to reduce the risk of hazards such as creation of new special tax assessments, bonds and tax increment to pay for mitigation. For example, the repetitive flooding of Oklahoma led the community to pass small tax increases to pay for flood mitigation activities. The initiative helped reduce the economic losses of future floods. The disadvantage was the overtaxing of the locals. In addition; the community saw the revenue collected as an additional burden on the taxpayer.
Insurance can be used as a mitigation tool. If properly planned, insurance can offer an alternative to funding of disaster management apart from the government.