Climatic Change

, Volume 152, Issue 2, pp 259–274 | Cite as

Coastal homeowners in a changing climate

  • Debra JavelineEmail author
  • Tracy Kijewski-Correa


As climate changes, coastal homeowners are potentially crucial actors in reducing the risks to property and human life from rising seas and increased hurricane activity. Absent strict, enforceable regulations mandating retrofitting of existing homes or major changes in homeowner insurance requirements, coastal resilience in a changing climate will largely reflect private, voluntary decisions of millions of individuals. However, research is scarce on the extent of structural vulnerabilities among US coastal homes and the mitigation measures that homeowners are taking or plan to take. Research devoted to disaster preparedness routinely neglects the specific actions of homeowners as consumers of structural mitigation products, despite the fact that such mitigation is the most cost-effective means to reduce losses. We attempt to fill this important gap with a new Coastal Homeowner Survey and indices designed to measure structural vulnerabilities and homeowner actions and intentions to address vulnerabilities. We conducted a pilot study of 662 respondents in one of the most frequently exposed US coastal communities, New Hanover County, North Carolina. We find that, on average, homes are minimally protected, with homeowners taking few actions to address structural vulnerabilities and not considering taking further action. We also find that the perceived cost of mitigation cannot sufficiently explain the lack of action, implying that other factors are at play. Subsequent research will use the remaining pilot survey data to analyze correlates of these indices to inform private and public sector stakeholders on how to incentivize risk reduction through structural mitigations.



The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of Notre Dame’s Environmental Change Initiative (ECI) and its Global Adaptation Index (ND-GAIN) for the pilot of the Coastal Homeowner Survey in North Carolina. The authors recognize the ongoing collaboration with the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety and with their partnering survey research firm, SSRS. The first author recognizes the support of the Andrew W. Mellon New Directions Fellowship for training in ecology and environmental law. The authors also thank discussants/participants at the Adapting to Climate Change Workshop at the University of Notre Dame, as well as the reviewers of this manuscript, for their feedback on this work.


  1. AAPOR (2015) Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. American Association for Public Opinion Research. Accessed 21 July 2018
  2. Allison M (2017) Are coastal areas ready for rising seas? Zillow, 18 October,
  3. Beatley T (2009) Planning for coastal resilience: best practices for calamitous times. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bichard E, Kazmierczak A (2012) Are homeowners willing to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change? Clim Chang 112:633–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bin O, Kruse JB (2006) Real estate market response to coastal flood hazards. Nat Hazards Rev 7(4):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bin O, Crawford TW, Kruse JB, Landry CE (2008) Viewscapes and flood hazard: coastal housing market response to amenities and risk. Land Econ 84(3):434–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brenkert-Smith H, Champ PA, Flores N (2006) Insights into wildfire mitigation decisions among wildland-urban interface residents. Soc Nat Resour 19:759–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Craig RK (2018) Coastal adaptation, government subsidized insurance, and perverse incentives to stay. Clim Change.
  9. DeWitt D (2015) The state that ‘outlawed climate change’ accepts latest sea-level rise report. WUNC 91.5 North Carolina Public Radio 4 MayGoogle Scholar
  10. Domonoske C (2017) Trump rolls back Obama-era flood standards for infrastructure projects. NPR 16 August,
  11. FEMA (2000) Coastal construction manual: principles and practices of planning, siting, designing, constructing, and maintaining residential buildings in coastal areas. Federal Emergency Management Agency, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  12. FEMA (2006) CRS credit for management of coastal erosion hazards, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Publications NFIP/CRS, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  13. FEMA (2010) Home builder’s guide to coastal construction technical fact sheet series. Rep. No. FEMA P-499, Federal Emergency Management Agency, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  14. FEMA (2014a) Hazard mitigation assistance (HMA) guidance on property acquisition and relocation for the purpose of open space. Federal Emergency Management Agency, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  15. FEMA (2014b) Preparedness in America: research insights to increase individual, organizational, and community action. Federal Emergency Management Agency, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  16. Ge Y, Peacock WG, Lindell MK (2011) Florida households’ expected responses to hurricane hazard mitigation incentives. Risk Anal 31(10):1676–1691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Herweijer C, Ranger N, Ward RET (2009) Adaptation to climate change: threats and opportunities for the insurance industry. Geneva Pap 34:360–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. IBHS (2008) Fortified for safer living: builders guide. Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. Accessed 21 July 2018
  19. IBHS (2012) Fortified home hurricane standards. Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. Accessed 21 July 2018
  20. IBHS (2015a) Rating the states: 2015: An assessment of residential building code and enforcement systems for life safety and property protection in hurricane-prone regions. Atlantic and Gulf Coast States. Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. MarchGoogle Scholar
  21. IBHS (2015b) Wilmington, NC FORTIFIED discount sheet. Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. Accessed 21 July 2018
  22. IBHS (2016) Regulatory framework for FORTIFIED insurance incentives. Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. Accessed 21 July 2018
  23. IBHS (2018) Rating the states: 2018: an assessment of residential building code and enforcement systems for life safety and property protection in hurricane-prone regions. Atlantic and Gulf Coast States. Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety. MarchGoogle Scholar
  24. Insurance Information Institute (2018) Facts + Statistics: U.S. catastrophes. Accessed 18 July 2018
  25. IPCC (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part a: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Field CB et al, eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–32Google Scholar
  26. Lindell MK, Hwang SN (2008) Households’ perceived personal risk and responses in a multihazard environment. Risk Anal 28(2):539–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lindell MK, Perry RW (2000) Household adjustment to earthquake hazard: a review of research. Environ Behav 32(4):461–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Löw P (2018) Hurricanes cause record losses in 2017 - the year in figures, Munich Re, April 1.
  29. Meldrum JR, Champ PA, Arziniack T, Renkert-Smith H, Barth CM, Falk LC (2014) Cost shared wildfire risk mitigation in Log Hill Mesa, Colorado: survey evidence on participation and willingness to pay. Int J Wildland Fire 23(4):567–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Montz BE, Tobin GA, Hagelman RR III (2017) Natural hazards: explanation and integration, 2nd edn. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. NHC. U.S. mainland hurricane strikes by state, 1851-2004. National Hurricane Center. (January 29, 2016)
  32. NIBS (2015) Developing pre-disaster resilience based on public and private incentivization. National Institute of Building Sciences, Multihazard Mitigation Council in conjunction with the Council on Finance, Insurance and Real Estate. October 29Google Scholar
  33. NIBS (2017) Natural hazard mitigation saves: 2017 interim report. National Institute of Building Sciences, Multihazard Mitigation Council. DecemberGoogle Scholar
  34. NRC (2010) Adapting to the impacts of climate change. National Research Council. The National Academies Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  35. NHERI (2017) Five-year science plan: multi-hazard research to make a more resilient world. Natural Hazards Engineering Research Infrastructure. National Science Foundation. JulyGoogle Scholar
  36. NOAA (2013) National coastal population report: population trends from 1970 to 2020. NOAA’s State of the Coast. March.
  37. Peacock WG (2003) Hurricane mitigation status and factors influencing mitigation status among Florida’s single-family homeowners. Nat Hazards Rev 4(3):149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peacock WG, Brody SD, Highfield W (2005) Hurricane risk perceptions among Florida’s single family homeowners. Landsc Urban Plan 73(2):120–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pielke RA Jr, Gratz J, Landsea CW, Collins D, Saunders MA, Musulin R (2008) Normalized hurricane damage in the United States: 1900–2005. Nat Hazards Rev February: 29–42Google Scholar
  40. Sanders RA (2010) Separating fact from fiction: insurance claims and building envelope failure. J Archit Tech 27(2)Google Scholar
  41. Smith AB, Matthews JL (2015) Quantifying uncertainty and variable sensitivity within the US billion-dollar weather and climate disaster cost estimates. Nat Hazards 1–23Google Scholar
  42. Spanger-Siegfried E, Fitzpatrick M, Dahl K. (2014) Encroaching tides: how sea level rise and tidal flooding threaten U.S. east and gulf coast communities over the next 30 years. Union of Concerned Scientists, October, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  43. Sweet WV, Dusek G, Obeysekera J, Marra JJ (2018) Patterns and projections of high tide flooding along the U.S. coastline using a common impact threshold. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 086.FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  44. Taylor AL, Dessai S, Bruine de Bruin W (2014) Public perception of climate risk and adaptation in the UK: a review of the literature. Clim Risk Manag 4-5:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. US Census Bureau. Historical census of housing tables. (January 29, 2016a)
  46. US Census Bureau. State & county quick facts. (January 29, 2016b)
  47. Vickery PJ, Skerlj PF, Lin J, Twisdale LA Jr, Young MA, Lavelle FM (2006) HAZUS-MH hurricane model methodology. II: damage and loss estimation. Nat Hazards Rev 7:94–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Walsh KJE, McBride JL, Klotzbach PJ, Balachandran S, Camargo SJ, Holland G, Knutson TR, Kossin JP, Lee T, Sobel A, Sugi M (2016) Tropical cyclones and climate change. WIREs Clim Change 7(1):65–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA
  2. 2.Environmental Change InitiativeUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA
  3. 3.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences and Keough School of Global AffairsUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA

Personalised recommendations