(1) (The Unified New Orleans Plan, ND).
Before an attempt is made both for the comparative analysis of the scenarios, and also for assessing the eventual outcomes they (scenarios) would be having on New Orleans, it would immensely help in having a brief understanding of them. An apt analysis would be possible only when the salient points of each of the scenarios are taken into active consideration.
Re-pair: This scenario is essentially driven by the market-centric perspective, which is already in vogue in several parts of New Orleans, since the year 2006. “Re-pair” is heavily dependent on existing disaster management funds released by programs and agencies such as SBA (Small Business Administration), PA (FEMA Public Assistance Program) and LRA (Louisiana Recovery Authority), amongst many others. This scenario leaves no scope for obtaining further funding from either the state or federal agencies, though comprehensive implementation of prevalent programs and policies is ensured. Under “Re-pair”, there would be no significant enhancements in the various anti-flood measures, beyond those (measures) already stipulated. For the subsequent decade, repairs would be carried out to all the facilities such as schools, public utilities, health care centers, etc, ravaged by the floods, only to the extent ensuring that they are the same as what they were, prior to Katrina. The facilities would not be additionally strengthened. Under the scenario, the rate of growth of population would be at a snail’s pace, and the same is not expected to touch the levels present before the floods. To put the matter in a nutshell, enhanced quality of existence and topmost service standards are not possible under “Re-pair”. (1) (The Unified New Orleans Plan, ND).
Re-habilitate: This particular scenario can be considered to be an