Diane P. Horn wrote (15 December 2021) this CRS report on an interesting topic: 'FEMA Hazard Mitigation - A First Step Toward Climate Adaptation'.
Click on the graphics to enlarge them. Graphics are not necessarily placed where they actually occur in the document.
Download CRS_Report_ FEMA_Hazard_Mitigation_Climate Adaptaton_15Dec2021
Summary
With the increasing severity and frequency of natural disasters, attributed at least in part to climate change, policymakers often view mitigation funding as a way to control disaster-related spending. The importance of federal mitigation funding is illustrated by a recent study that looked at the impacts of 23 years of federal mitigation grants and found that for every $1 invested by federal grant programs, society as a whole saved $6 due to reduced future losses.FEMA has a lead role in guiding nationwide mitigation of extreme weather events, including those resulting from the impacts of climate change. In particular, FEMA administers the federal government’s most significant grant programs for pre-and post-disaster mitigation. FEMA has identified hazard mitigation as one of the main ways in which the agency will enhance resilience to the effects of climate change and lead federal climate change adaptation efforts.
FEMA funds mitigation measures through a number of programs:
-
the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP);
-
the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program (BRIC);
-
the Flood Mitigation Assistance grant program (FMA);
-
the STORM Act State Revolving Loan Program for Hazard Mitigation;
-
Public Assistance (PA); and
-
Individual Assistance (IA).
Three of these programs are available after a disaster (HMGP, PA, and IA), while the other three (BRIC, FMA, STORM Act) provide pre-disaster mitigation funding for use before an event occurs or in anticipation of an incident. Historically, post- disaster mitigation has received significantly more funding than pre-disaster mitigation. Between 1996 and 2019, approximately $1.86 billion was awarded for FMA grants, $1.92 billion was awarded for PDM grants (the predecessor to BRIC), and $22.4 billion was awarded in HMGP funding. Funding for pre-disaster mitigation has increased recently through the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-24) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58). Increased funding for pre-disaster mitigation is more essential in the context of climate change, as many projected climate impacts have yet to occur.
This report gives an overview of FEMA funding for mitigation, including issues related to equity, and suggests considerations for Congress that may enhance FEMA’s support for hazard mitigation and climate adaptation.
Introduction
Communities across the country are already experiencing the impacts of climate change. Additionally, many extreme weather and climate-related events are expected to become more frequent and more intense under climate change. The impacts of such events are estimated to have already cost more than $1.0 trillion (in 2021 dollars) since 1980.Catastrophic events pose a financial threat both to society as a whole and to the federal government, which has allocated increasing resources to disaster relief and recovery. In the United States, as in many countries, this can be attributed to a combination of factors: rapid expansion of population into areas that are susceptible to natural disasters, rising property values in hazardous areas, and climatological and environmental changes. Nearly one-third of the U.S. housing stock (about 35 million homes) is considered to be at high risk of a natural disaster,4 and most homes in the United States have some risk of climate change-induced hazard events. For example, in 2019, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated residential property losses from hurricane and tropical storm-related flooding to be approximately $20 billion per year (in 2017 dollars).
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has found that the rising number of natural disasters and increasing reliance on the federal government for response and recovery assistance is a key source of federal fiscal exposure. GAO has suggested in several reports that two related sets of actions—climate adaptation and pre-disaster mitigation—can enhance climate resilience by reducing risk. GAO has also suggested that enhancing resilience to climate change could reduce future damages from climate-related events, and recommended adjustments to natural or human systems in response to actual and expected climate change, and through hazard mitigation actions before a disaster.
FEMA administers several of the federal government’s primary hazard mitigation programs, making the agency a central part of the nation’s climate change adaptation strategy. While the agency lacks a statutory mission to combat change directly, many of FEMA’s mitigation activities are intended to reduce the impact of natural disasters, including those that may be exacerbated by climate change. FEMA has identified hazard mitigation as one of the main ways that the agency will address climate change. According to the FEMA Administrator, “Climate change is the crisis of this generation. Combating it requires mitigating future risks and reducing impacts.”
Mitigation measures can be funded by several programs: (1) any of the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant programs: the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities grant program (BRIC), the Flood Mitigation Assistance grant program (FMA), and the State Revolving Loan Program for Hazard Mitigation; (2) FEMA Public Assistance (PA) funding under Stafford Act Section 406; and (3) FEMA Individual Assistance (IA) funding under Stafford Act Section 408 (see Table 1).
Although all mitigation activities are essentially preparation for the next disaster, FEMA distinguishes between post-disaster mitigation funding, which is awarded after a specific incident, and pre-disaster mitigation funding, which is awarded in order to reduce future damage from an anticipated event. PA, IA, and HMGP are post-disaster funding, and require a form of disaster declaration: an emergency declaration, a major disaster declaration from the President, or a FireManagement Assistance Grant (FMAG) declaration. BRIC, FMA, and STORM Act funding represent pre-disaster mitigation funding. Applicants can request funding from these programs to reduce future risks without waiting for a disaster to occur.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery authorities for disaster recovery (CDBG-DR) and its mitigation variant (CDBG-MIT) and the Small Business Administration (SBA) Disaster Loan Program can also fund mitigation activities. These programs may work cooperatively with FEMA programs, but are outside the scope of this report.
Cutting to the chase...
Concluding Comments
As disasters become more frequent and more expensive, there is an increasing interest in reducing their impacts. The benefits of hazard mitigation—saving lives, protecting property, and reducing damage from future disasters—are widely accepted. However, GAO has found that federal investments in resilience could be more effective if post-disaster hazard mitigation were balanced with resources for pre-disaster hazard mitigation, as part of a comprehensive resilience investment strategy. The recent increases in funding for pre-disaster mitigation represent a significant step towards changing the balance between and pre- and post-disaster funding.
Fascinating!
Enjoy!
"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." - Albert Einstein
Recent Comments