Union of Concerned Scientists Inc.

01/27/2025 | News release | Distributed by Public on 01/27/2025 06:00

The Perils of Ignoring Racial Equity in Disaster Relief and Recovery Are Costly

While watching the latest disaster movie is a pastime for many, living through extreme weather and climate disasters is painfully difficult for the people affected. It is made more difficult by a President who scorns disaster victims, as President Trump did to Puerto Ricans after Hurricane Maria, and spreads disinformation, as he did to Californians during the recent Los Angeles wildfires.

Now President Trump has revoked Executive Order 13985 (Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government) and Executive Order 14008 (Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad), with far-reaching implications for people in disaster areas, including how racial equity is addressed in disaster relief and recovery. Revoking these orders sends the US in the wrong direction as we face increasing danger from extreme events, such as Hurricane Helene in North Carolina.

Watching the administration unravel racial equity programs at federal agencies is its own disaster-in-the-making, on top of disasters guaranteed to come-like a disaster movie layered on a horror flick that the entire country will eventually experience.

If this was a movie, here is how it would play out.

(Spoiler alert: ignoring racial equity in disaster resilience will cost all of us more and lead to increasingly unfair burdens on already underserved communities.)

THE PREQUEL: Ignorance is not bliss

One important job of the federal government is to distribute billions of dollars to address the impacts of climate and other disasters. This function will be even more important with new executive orders that promote fossil fuels and end policies that reduce heat trapping emissions to limit the impacts of climate change.

To ensure the most effective use of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars for disaster response, recovery, and resilience, it makes sense to pre-position resources in the areas of highest need. Some communities-such as low-wealth communities or communities of color-are disproportionately impacted by disasters, in part because of historical or systemic disparities. A laser-like focus on assessing social inequities is thus essential for understanding where the highest areas of need are and to evaluate whether they are being assisted adequately. In short, matching disaster policy to social needs requires assessment of racial equity.

SCENE 1: The inequity avalanche

When racial equity is ignored, disaster policies exacerbate existing inequities. Policies based solely on "merit" fail to recognize the steeper hill being climbed by historically underserved communities granted less access to resources, information, and decision processes.

After Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005, Black residents returned to the city more slowly than White residents. Research by Elizabeth Fussell and her colleagues suggests that the racial disparity was explained by housing damage, rather than by socioeconomic status or other demographic characteristics. Put plainly, Black residents' delayed return occurred because they suffered more severe housing damage, which occurred because they tended to live in areas that experienced greater flooding. A higher concentration of Black residents in the lower-lying parts of the city exists because of historical patterns of land development and residential segregation that resulted from the racist system of redlining. Without a focus on racial equity, disaster policies don't just leave these communities behind, they in fact compound the health, environmental, and economic challenges being faced.

SCENE 2: The communication breakdown

Effective risk communication is crucial for disaster resilience. However, when racial equity is censored, communication efforts fall flat. Without a deep understanding of the social, economic, health, environmental, and cultural context in which a disaster is unfolding, critical information may not reach those who need it most. We saw this recently in Los Angeles with fire evacuation notices not reaching the unhoused population.

Not including racial equity considerations in the planning and implementation of risk communications ignores basic science, which in turn costs lives and money. The latest resilience research and practice emphasizes a multifaceted, "adaptive systems" approach to risk communication and decision making. This approach recognizes diverse perspectives, experiences, education levels, languages, and technological skills and the need for evidence-based deliberations before, during, and after disasters. We must first acknowledge and understand this diversity to be able to highlight the most effective pathways to disaster mitigation and resilience.

SCENE 3: The phantom of the funding

When federal funds for disaster resilience are distributed based on formulas that do not account for unique challenges, an uneven distribution of resources results, with some communities receiving more support than others. One example is FEMA's flood mitigation grant program, which requires a cost-share by the community applying for the grant. Low-income neighborhoods and communities of color are less able to meet the match requirement, so FEMA has invested significantly more in wealthier, White neighborhoods (which reduces insurance costs and increases property values in those areas). If the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 blueprint is implemented, the cost-share requirement for communities will climb steeply.

Analyses of OpenFEMA data has found that disaster assistance funds are often distributed inequitably (controlling for total damages), such that as the percentage of racial and ethnic minority populations increase, the amount of assistance decreases. This disparity is set to increase with the new administration's revocation of environmental justice directives.

SCENE 4: The resilience mirage

When racial equity is not integrated into disaster resilience policies, the concept of resilience itself becomes a mirage-an illusion of safety and preparedness that doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

True resilience includes everyone, particularly those who have been historically marginalized. The pattern of impacts from events such as Hurricane Katrina reveal that response strategies that may seem comprehensive on paper, in fact leave certain groups disproportionately affected. Integrating racial equity into disaster resilience policies is essential to ensure that all communities are genuinely supported and protected in times of crisis.

GRAND FINALE: A call to action

So, what's the moral of this cautionary tale? Integrating racial equity considerations into disaster resilience policymaking is not a luxury-it's a necessity. By addressing the systemic inequalities that contribute to the disproportionate burdens borne by already underserved communities, we can develop policies that enhance resilience for everyone.

To our decision makers: It's time to embrace the robust scientific evidence already available and ensure that disaster resilience efforts are inclusive, fair, and effective.

And to our readers: Stay informed, stay engaged, and keep reminding your elected officials that you care about the use of sound science in policymaking.