Every $1 spent on hazard mitigation saves the nation $6 in future disaster costs, yet billions are still spent on recovery efforts

How prepared is the United States for the inevitable next disaster?

Hurricane Florence killed 50 and caused $22bn in damages last year; shortly after, Hurricane Michael killed 36 and left hundreds without homes. The California wildfires erupted the following month, destroying thousands of structures and leaving 89 dead. As climate change causes more intense superstorms and at a higher frequency, things are only likely to get worse.

Researchers, representatives, and residents have called for better preparation. A study released this year by the National Institute of Building Sciences found that every $1 spent on hazard mitigation saved the nation $6 in future disaster costs and, for years, severe storms have been heralded as the “wake-up call” – the disaster that will finally spur action. Yet last year, the federal government spent more than $300bn on disaster recovery.

After year of deadly wildfires, who will pick up the tab for natural disasters? Read more

So where are we going wrong?

If you ask a disaster specialist about preparation, expect the Netherlands to come up. The water-logged nation that sinks below sea level a little more each year has set a global standard for how to be ready; there hasn’t been a death from flooding in 65 years. Disasters, to the Dutch, are not abstract risks, but instead events that can be expected, planned for – and ultimately avoided – even when the waters rise.

The Dutchman Henk Ovink, appointed by his government as the world’s only water ambassador, has tried to inspire other countries to adopt that outlook and instruct on how to be ready for climate-driven catastrophes.

“We can’t prevent them from happening,” Ovink told CBS last September. “But the impact that is caused by these disasters we can decrease by preparing ourselves,” he added. “The storms are perhaps man-caused and you can debate that. But the catastrophes because of the storms? Those are manmade.”

In the US, according to Patrick Roberts, an associate professor at Virginia Tech and author of the book Disasters and the American State, there needs to be a shift in focus. Roberts believes too much pressure and reliance is put on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), when resources and preparation should start at the state and local levels.

“Fema isn’t the cavalry,” he says, explaining that the agency is often blamed for things beyond its control. “The roots of vulnerability to disaster are in communities. The neighbors, the residents, the city, the state – they are going to be the first to respond and they are going to do the bulk of the rebuilding.”

Fema isn't the cavalry. The roots of vulnerability to disaster are in communities Patrick Roberts

When the responsibility falls to federal agencies, or even when people look to the president during disasters, Roberts says there’s no accountability in the localities where response and preparation efforts take place.

The challenge for the nation, then, is to find ways to incentivize cash-strapped cities to front the finances for risk mitigation. For wealthier states with strong agencies like California, it might be feasible, but others may struggle.

Congress has worked to lighten the burden, recently passing measures to encourage investment into preparation plans. An additional $149m over the previous year’s $100m was appropriated in 2018 for risk mitigation and Fema launched its “Mitigation Moonshots” program which aims for fourfold investment increases across state local and federal agencies by 2023. In October, Donald Trump signed the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018, a bill that sets aside 6% of disaster funding for public infrastructure hazard mitigation and contains dozens of provisions aimed at streamlining shared recovery responsibilities and increasing capacity to handle catastrophic events around the country.

But it’s been difficult to get states to stick to their own plans.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Mexico Beach, Florida, was one of the towns hardest hit by Hurricane Michael. Photograph: Pool/Getty Images

The federal government requires states to complete threat and hazard identification and risk assessments (Thira) each year, a process that feeds into the National Preparedness System started under Barack Obama. But the program does little to ensure plans are enacted. One analyst interviewed about the process said Thira reports weren’t worth more than the paper they are printed on.

Roberts says oftentimes, after a consultant writes them up, the plans end up just sitting on a shelf. “I have looked at mitigation plans in Louisiana and Mississippi and in some counties nothing has been done because there is no money,” he says.

“How do you get localities and the private sector to prepare for uncertain disasters that might be far off, when they have a lot of immediate needs, including economic development?” Roberts says. “The pressures to cut corners are sometimes too strong and the payoff for preparing for uncertain disasters that might not be on that politician’s watch are too small.”

While some states lack the ability to implement their own strategies, many are also failing to adequately assess the finances they have available or what has been spent when disasters strike.

A report released by Pew Charitable Trusts in June highlighted how policy planning has been hampered by how poorly disaster spending is tracked, and how different the standards are between states.

“The big takeaway is it is very hard to manage what you don’t track,” says Anne Stauffer, the Pew director who led the study. “Where and how the dollar flows tells you what is being done, and when you are looking at disasters and the costs of disasters and disaster spending, there’s not just the immediate response, which makes the headlines, it is the long-term recovery – which can go on for years.”

The Pew research confirmed what stakeholders at all levels have experienced: the intergovernmental relationships involved are complex and messy. But costs are rising across all sectors, and eight of Fema’s most expensive years have occurred in the past decade.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Donald Trump meets with officials, including the Fema chief, Brock Long, right, after fires devastated Paradise, California. Photograph: Leah Millis/Reuters

That’s why some experts have called for more to be done on the federal level to shore up struggling states. Irwin Redlener, the director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness and author of the book Americans at Risk, says he is sick of seeing lessons go unlearned after every emergency.

“We as a society suffer from a massive case of shortsightedness,” he says. “After we have gone through the drama of the TV reporters in hip-boots, standing in the flooding waters holding on to their hats in the rain, then the cameras go away, the headlines go on to something else, and we forget about it,” he adds. “We hit that snooze alarm button and we drift back off into a state of complacency.”

While he agrees that Fema shouldn’t be seen as the first responder, he believes the federal government should play a bigger role in prevention.

There are also federal programs in dire need of attention. The National Flood Insurance Program, on which more than 5 million residents and businesses rely, has been deep in debt for years, despite regular bailouts. The program finances rebuilding in areas again and again, without assessing risk or incentivizing better preparation for the next flood. A 2017 CBO report found that the NFIP loses roughly $1.4bn a year, and the agency reportedly owes more than $20.5bn to the US Treasury.

The new abnormal: why fires like Paradise will happen again and again Read more

Fema’s flood maps, an important risk-assessment tool, are woefully inadequate and have come under criticism for years. According to a 2017 Department of Homeland Security audit, Fema’s mapping programs are plagued by mismanagement. Often obsolete risk assessments are provided to the public, making residents less likely to prepare, and the agency unable to assess accurate rates for coverage.

But solutions won’t be easy to finance, and currently there’s more political capital in protecting the public from ideologically driven fears.

The government shutdown, fueled by an impasse over President Trump’s demand for funding for his border wall, which he claims will curb migration into the US through Mexico, is now stretching into its fourth week with no end in sight. Furloughed federal firefighters have been stopped from clearing brush in the forests, in areas that will be increasingly fire-prone when the seasons change. Agencies that typically work on risk mitigation, detection and relief are closed down.

Redlener believes preparedness all comes down to political will and what’s required is a stronger dedication to using resources the right way. Politicians will have to make harder decisions and must be encouraged by their constituents. As climate change will cause ever-increasing costs, what’s on the line are lives and livelihoods.

“It is in the interest of our whole country to become more resilient, to deal with the underlying causes” he says, adding, “If we are unwilling to make basic investments, we will end up paying a terrible price.”