Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Socioeconomic implications of national flood insurance policy reform and flood insurance rate map revisions

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Flooding exacerbated by climate change has resulted in more mandatory community participation in the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The purpose of this research is social regulatory floodplain criteria that may have an impact on various socioeconomic factors at the county and sub-county level. Updated mapping can result in widespread changes to the NFIP Special Flood Hazard Area, while no socioeconomic vulnerability assessments are completed before changes in risk designation or subsidy elimination occurs. These changes can result in additional compulsory flood insurance policies, heightened policy costs, and ultimately produce socioeconomic barriers for lower-income residents. The objectives include demonstrating the potential nationwide implications of increasing community risk with these changes to national policy through a case study from Ada County, Idaho where FEMA began updating the floodplain maps in 2015. Ada County was chosen for being reflective of other communities that may be suffering similar impacts from NFIP policy. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach was employed using semi-structured interviews, spatial analysis, and the Spatially Explicit Resilience-Vulnerability (SERV) model to assess potential community impacts. Results indicate increased vulnerability in the revised floodplain. Total annual sales volume, employee numbers, industry sectors, and overall community vulnerability are higher in the revised floodplain. Interviews with community leaders corroborated these results. This case study provides a foundation for further research on the impacts of flood insurance on communities across the USA while discussing the social injustice of a national program that is likely promoting the upward distribution of wealth county by county.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adger WN (2006) Vulnerability. Global Environ Change 16(3):268–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Adger W, Huq S, Brown K, Conway D, Hulme M (2003) Adaptation to climate change in the developing world. Prog Dev Stud 3(3):179–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Adger WN, Quinn T, Lorenzoni I, Murphy C, Sweeney J (2013) Changing social contracts in climate-change adaptation. Nat Clim Change 3(4):330

    Google Scholar 

  • Bin O, Kruse JB, Landry CE (2008) Flood hazards, insurance rates, and amenities: Evidence from the coastal housing market. J Risk Insur 75(1):63–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Bin O, Polasky S (2004) Effects of flood hazards on property values: evidence before and after Hurricane Floyd. Land Econ 80(4):490–500

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkmann J, Cardona OD, Carreño ML, Barbat AH, Pelling M, Schneiderbauer S et al (2013) Framing vulnerability, risk and societal responses: the MOVE framework. Nat Hazards 67(2):193–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Burby RJ (2001) Flood insurance and floodplain management: the US experience. Environ Hazards 3:111–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton I, Huq S, Lim B, Pilifosova O, Schipper EL (2002) From impacts assessment to adaptation priorities: the shaping of adaptation policy. Clim Policy 2(2–3):145–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) (2015) The human cost of natural disasters: a global perspective. Retrieved from https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/PAND_report.pdf. Retrieved 14 Dec 2016

  • Collins T (2010) Marginalization, facilitation, and the production of unequal risk: the 2006 Paso del Norte floods. Antipode 42(2):258–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2009.00755.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins T, Grineski S, Chakraborty J (2018) Environmental injustice and flood risk: a conceptual model and case comparison of metropolitan Miami and Houston, USA. Reg Environ Change 18(2):311–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-017-1121-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Congressional Budget Office (CBO) (2017) NFIP: financial soundness and affordability. (2017). Retrieved from www.cbo.gov/publication/53028. Retrieved 1 July 2019

  • Corey CM, Deitch EA (2011) Factors affecting business recovery immediately after Hurricane Katrina. J Conting Crisis Manag 19(3):169–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter SL (1996) Vulnerability to environmental hazards. Prog Hum Geogr 20(4):529–539

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter SL, Barnes L, Berry M, Burton C, Evans E, Tate E, Webb J (2008) A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters. Global Environ Change 18(4):598–606

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter SL, Boruff BJ, Shirley WL (2003) Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Q 84(2):242–261

    Google Scholar 

  • Defourny J, Thorbecke E (1984) Structural path analysis and multiplier decomposition within a social accounting matrix framework. Econ J 94(373):111–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General (DHS-OIG) (2017) FEMA needs to improve management of its flood mapping programs. Retrieved from https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4066233/OIG-17-110-Sep17.pdf. Retrieved 2 July 2019

  • Doorn N (2015) The blind spot in risk ethics: managing natural hazards. Risk Anal 35(3):354–360. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA (2016) National Flood Insurance Program: Floodsmart.gov. Retrieved from https://nfipservices.floodsmart.gov/2016/w-16032. Retrieved 30 Jan 2017

  • FEMA (2011) National flood insurance program: Answers to questions about the NFIP. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1438-20490-1905/f084_atq_11aug11.pdf. Retrieved 22 Jan 2017

  • Frazier TG, Wood N, Yarnal B (2010) Stakeholder perspectives on land-use strategies for adapting to climate-change-enhanced coastal hazards: Sarasota, Florida. Appl Geogr 30(4):506–517

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier TG, Walker MH, Kumari A, Thompson CM (2013a) Opportunities and constraints to hazard mitigation planning. Appl Geogr 40:52–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier TG, Thompson CM, Dezzani RJ, Butsick D (2013b) Spatial and temporal quantification of resilience at the community scale. Appl Geogr 42:95–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier TG, Thompson CM, Dezzani RJ (2014) A framework for the development of the SERV model: a spatially explicit resilience-vulnerability model. Appl Geogr 51:158–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller A, Pincetl S (2014) Vulnerability studies: a bibliometric review. Prof Geogr 67(3):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2014.970835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füssel HM (2007) Vulnerability: a generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Global Environ Change 17(2):155–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Green R, Miles S, Levy J (2008) Quick response report: business recovery related to high-frequency natural hazard events. Nat Hazards Observer 200(197):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Guha-sapir D, Hoyois P, Below R (2013) Annual disaster statistical review 2013: The numbers and trends. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn DP, Brown JT (2018) Introduction to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Congressional Research Service

  • Howard JP (2016) Socioeconomic effects of the National Flood Insurance Program.

  • Infogroup (2016) Infogroup—Leader in high value data & multichannel marketing solutions

  • IPCC (2013) Summary for policymakers. In: Socker TF, et al. (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kousky C (2013) Addressing affordability in the national flood insurance program. Published Articles Papers 188:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunreuther H, Roth RJ (1998) Paying the price: the status and role of insurance against natural disasters in the United States. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lo AY (2013) The role of social norms in climate adaptation: mediating risk perception and flood insurance purchase. Global Environ Change 23(5):1249–1257

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald DN, Murdoch JC, White HL (2015) Uncertain hazards, insurance, and consumer choice: evidence from housing markets. Land Econ 63(4):361–371

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcshane M, Yusuf J (2019) Toward better management of flood losses: flood insurance in a wetter world. Public Works Manag Policy 24(1):88–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X18805500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nance E (2015) Exploring the impacts of flood insurance reform on vulnerable communities. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 13:20–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Polsky C, Neff R, Yarnal B (2007) Building comparable global change vulnerability assessments: the vulnerability scoping diagram. Global Environ Change 17(3–4):472–485

    Google Scholar 

  • Posey J, Rogers WH (2010) The impact of special flood hazard area designation on residential property values. Public Works Manag Policy 15(2):81–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Pralle S (2019) Drawing lines: FEMA and the politics of mapping flood zones. Clim Change 152(2):227–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2287-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers WH, Winter W (2009) The impact of foreclosures housing sales on neighboring authors. J Real Estate Res 31(4):456–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Shively D (2017) Flood risk management in the USA: implications of national flood insurance program changes for social justice. Reg Environ Change 17(6):1663–1672

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith AB (2018) 2017 US billion-dollar weather and climate disasters: a historic year in context. NOAA Climate. Gov. Retrieved from https://img.sauf.ca/pictures/2018-11-27/fc36fd9ec6febbc94cdea24b6bad0c9e.pdf. Retrieved 25 June 2019

  • Springer IMPLAN (2016) IMPLAN economic impact modeling. Retrieved from https://www.implan.com/

  • Strother L (2018) The national flood insurance program: a case study in policy failure, reform, and retrenchment. Policy Stud J 46(2):452–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler T, Fuchs S, Priest S, Doorn N (2018) Social justice in the context of adaptation to climate change—reflecting on different policy approaches to distribute and allocate flood. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner BL, Kasperson RE, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW, Christensen L et al (2003) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8074–8079

    Google Scholar 

  • US Census (2010) Quick facts: Ada County, Idaho. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/adacountyidaho/IPE120217. Retrieved 16 Dec 2016

  • Wisner B, Blaikie P, Cannon T, Davis I (2003) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters, 2nd edn. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu SY, Yarnal B, Fisher A (2002) Vulnerability of coastal communities to sea-level rise: a case study of Cape May County, New Jersey, USA. Clim Res 22(3):255–270

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the Emergency and Disaster Management Master’s Program in the School of Continuing Studies at Georgetown University for its support of this paper and members of Dr. Frazier’s research center who contributed to this project. Thanks to FEMA Region X for providing the data; the interview participants for their time and perspectives. Finally, all three authors want to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their time which led to an improved final product.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Georgetown University, 640 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC, 20001, USA

    Tim Frazier, Elizabeth E. Boyden & Erik Wood

Authors
  1. Tim Frazier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth E. Boyden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erik Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erik Wood.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Frazier, T., Boyden, E.E. & Wood, E. Socioeconomic implications of national flood insurance policy reform and flood insurance rate map revisions. Nat Hazards 103, 329–346 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-03990-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-03990-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation