Search

As natural disasters grow in frequency and intensity with climate change, limiting the populations and properties in harm’s way will be key to adaptation. This study evaluates one approach to discouraging development in risky areas—eliminating public incentives for development, such as infrastructure investments, disaster assistance and federal flood insurance. Using machine learning and matching techniques, we examine the Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS), a set of lands where these federal incentives have been removed. We find that the policy leads to lower development densities inside designated areas, increases development in neighbouring areas, reduces flood damages and alters local demographics. Our results suggest that the CBRS generates substantial savings for the federal government by reducing flood claims in the National Flood Insurance Program, while increasing the property tax base in coastal counties.

A recent study analyzed the impact of disclosing wildfire risks on housing prices in California. The researchers found that disclosing wildfire risk decreased the sale price of a single-family home by an average of 4.3 percent, with the negative effect being as high as 6 percent in Southern California. The study suggests that homebuyers do not fully incorporate the risk of wildfire into their purchasing decisions without disclosure. The findings support the need for increased disclosure of natural hazards and highlight the importance of risk-based insurance premiums. [Extracted from the article]

Sea level rise is causing problems for waste disposal infrastructure, particularly septic systems in coastal areas. Rising water tables can lead to system failures and contamination of soils and waterways. This issue is especially concerning in Maryland, where a significant number of homes rely on septic systems and are at risk of coastal flooding. Potential solutions include upgrading septic systems, connecting homes to public sewers, or relocating households to less flood-prone areas. However, addressing this problem requires considering justice, equity, and community involvement, as poorer households in marginalized communities are more vulnerable to the impacts of failing septic systems. Additional funding and research are needed to find cost-effective and equitable solutions to this growing problem. [Extracted from the article]

This article discusses the concept of cumulative impacts of pollution on environmental justice communities. Ana Baptista, an associate professor at the New School in New York City, explains that cumulative impacts refer to the combined exposure to multiple pollutants from various sources in a community. These impacts can disproportionately affect disadvantaged communities due to underlying socioeconomic and health conditions. The article also highlights the challenges faced by these communities in addressing cumulative impacts through regulatory processes and the efforts being made by state governments to address this issue. It specifically mentions the example of New Jersey, where a cumulative-impacts law has been passed. However, further research is needed to better understand and measure the true impact of cumulative impacts on communities. [Extracted from the article]

RFF researchers will measure the extent ofinequities in climate impacts and identify whobears the burden of weather extremes, floodrisks, and wildfire risks. The Climate Risks and Impacts Program atResources for the Future (RFF) aims to improveour understanding of climate change risks andimpacts across sectors and regions. The Climate Risks and Impacts Program atResources for the Future (RFF) aims to improveour understanding of climate change risks andimpacts across sectors and regions. [Extracted from the article]