Skip to main content
SearchLoginLogin or Signup

Flood Zones: Dismantling Socioeconomic and Racial Disparities in Climate Preparedness

Infrastructure improvements combined with increased representation and climate literacy are the first steps to mitigating the disproportionately negative effects of climate change.

Published onJan 08, 2024
Flood Zones: Dismantling Socioeconomic and Racial Disparities in Climate Preparedness
·

Flood Zones: Dismantling Socioeconomic and Racial Disparities in Climate Preparedness

Climate change—the concept of long-term changes in temperature and atmospheric conditions—is not a new phenomenon. For thousands of years, Earth’s overall temperature has been naturally rising, fueled by planetary alignment and changes in the sun’s rays. However, over the past century, conversations have begun to surround the concept of anthropogenic climate change, or human-caused climate change. This influence from human activities has expedited the process of the greenhouse effect, impacting the speed and intensity of shifts in weather patterns. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or the IPCC, reports that “human activities are responsible for approximately 1.1°C of warming since 1850-1900.”1 This panel has also released a warning that the next 20 years will showcase at least 1.5°C of warming, impacting ecosystems worldwide. This is extremely serious, as such changes in warming can influence a myriad of ecological processes, resulting in “intense droughts, water scarcity, severe fires, rising sea levels, flooding, melting polar ice, catastrophic storms, and declining biodiversity.”2 The consequences are deadly, impacting human populations, trade, animal vitality and consequent food production, natural disasters, and countless other spheres of existence.

Climate preparedness refers to the process of adapting to climate change and modifying behavior to prevent, as well as mitigate, the effects of changing weather patterns. Climate preparedness measures could include implementing storm drains, planting vegetation accustomed to warm and dry conditions, as well as building rescue equipment for natural disaster relief. This is imperative in reducing the destructive effects of climatic variation. Communities can be given the appropriate resources to combat severe weather changes, such as earthquakes, flooding, or droughts. Alongside efforts to reduce climate change and warming altogether, it is both responsible and prudent to prepare for the effects, which may be irreversible. Climate preparedness can most certainly differ among communities, and it is therefore important to assess risk and investigate vulnerability to appropriately modify adaptation strategies according to need.

However, just as individual communities require distinct strategies for recovery, each community also requires unique resources. For example, coastal regions or areas that lie at a low elevation are more likely to face natural disasters than a more elevated area. Regional disparities and the ability to combat natural disasters can also denote socioeconomic and racial differences. The Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, released a report entitled “Climate Change and Social Vulnerability in the United States: A Focus on Six Impacts,” which analyzes the impact of climate change on four communities: low-income individuals, racial minorities, those without a high-school diploma, and individuals 65 and older. The study found that Black and Hispanic Americans were most likely to live in areas projected to have the highest levels of climate change impacts, including 2°C of warming and 50 cm global sea level rise.3 The report also showed that low-income Americans were 25% more likely to live in areas projected to have the highest projected losses of labor due to 2°C of warming.4

The results of this report are salient in illustrating how the climate crisis impacts Americans differently. Low-income communities often fundamentally lack the appropriate resources and funding to be able to recuperate after a climate disaster. In the aftermath of a disaster with over one hundred fatalities, 1% of residents can be forced below the poverty line.5 This notably indicates either an inability to migrate, forcing poorer residents to stay in a disaster-stricken area and face more expenses, or an overall transition of the population into poverty. Additionally, substandard infrastructure in impoverished and minority communities faces a higher risk of destruction and induces elongated recovery timelines. A study on the residential proximity to industrial sources of pollution also found that low-income and minority families are more likely to live near such noxious sources of air pollution, resulting in a higher risk of exposure to toxic chemical leaks.6 Cultural and language barriers further segregate minority families, isolating them from climate preparedness and, consequently, safety.

Recently, the impacts of Hurricane Harvey in Houston, TX, illustrate the effects of this phenomenon. Discriminatory housing policies unfairly deprived low-income and minority families of the same resources afforded to richer, white residents. Houston’s housing crisis forced low-income citizens into unsafe and inadequate housing situations. “Some of the only subsidized housing in the area was built in one of our many 100-year floodplains, designated as high-risk zones for flooding by the Federal Emergency Management Agency,” explains Tawny Tidwell, a political activist in Houston.7,8 This is not a new phenomenon. Black and Hispanic Americans are overwhelmingly more likely to reside in areas with insufficient resources or conditions. After the Civil War, in many urban communities, certain neighborhoods were marked as “high-risk”, with a high likelihood to lose value; these neighborhoods were disproportionately home to Black Americans. This process, known as redlining, created an unfair perception that a neighborhood that housed Black individuals would indicate diminishing property value. Redlining now refers to a myriad of race-based exclusionary housing policies, the results of which are still disastrous today. Due to years of such discrimination and deep-seated systemic inequality, Houston remains one of the most racially segregated cities in America.9 As a result, different groups face fundamentally disparate housing conditions and resources. Even more potent is a lack of access to affordable risk aversion, such as flood insurance, among low-income and minority communities. Many are unaware that it is a necessity until it is too late. When these Americans struggle to put food on the table, homeowners insurance and emergency kits seem like unnecessary expenses.

These disparities in climate preparedness fundamentally illustrate the importance of civic engagement and the need for lawmakers to listen to constituents. Legislators in Congress currently boast a median net worth of $1 million, indicating that perhaps our lawmakers may be out of touch with or ignorant of the more readily observable and detrimental impacts of climate change.10 However, creating equitable climate preparedness is not a simple endeavor. It requires an involved approach towards amplifying the voices of those affected most.

A powerful piece of legislation would take three steps towards this. The first step is dismantling the systemic inequalities that bleed so deeply within low-income and minority communities. One way to achieve this is to ensure that safety precautions are implemented equitably throughout an area. For example, a standard form of drainage can be established throughout the region to ensure that low-income communities are not provided with haphazard forms of disaster control while higher-income communities are protected. Furthermore, reinforcing existing infrastructure is extremely important in ensuring that communities can withstand the effects of coastal flooding or a hurricane. This can also be achieved by demolishing buildings built in high-risk zones and rebuilding them in shielded areas.

Another fundamental step is incorporating a lens focused on equity when drafting such legislation. When tackling natural disasters and the consequences of climate change, it is imperative to include a clause dedicated to the dissemination in underprivileged communities. Featuring a panel of representative members who will be directly affected by the legislation or issuing a public referendum can allow for notice and comment prior to passage. Referendums can be produced in multiple languages in order to maximize responses and widen reach. Representation and meaningful discourse can allow for citizens’ interests to be directly represented in the lawmaking process.

Education is the third aspect of this legislation and another integral way to improve the resilience of a community. Climate literacy is a powerful tool to combat resource limitations. One way to accomplish this is through advertisements. Short, informative clips on climate change and preparedness created by the EPA or FEMA can be aired on YouTube and TikTok as public service announcements. 15-second videos in English and Spanish will reach a wide audience and allow for an increase in salience for climate preparedness. Such an effort could be part of a larger policy for national outreach and civic education, including television advertisements, EPA-run outreach events, etc.

Ultimately, policy efforts to increase climate preparedness and decrease disparity require a holistic approach. However, infrastructure improvements combined with increased representation and climate literacy are important steps towards reform. By opening the door to improvement, further enrichment and progress will result.

Comments
0
comment
No comments here
Why not start the discussion?