Social justice implications of US managed retreat buyout programs

Abstract

Global climate change poses significant risks to coastal and riverine communities. Managed retreat, the purposeful movement of people and infrastructure out of vulnerable floodplains, is one possible adaptation strategy. The USA has already engaged in a limited amount of retreat by providing federal funds to purchase and demolish or relocate vulnerable properties. As retreat programs are expected to expand in size and frequency to address the increased risks posed by climate change, a review of how such property acquisition programs have been implemented is timely. Specifically, decisions made by government officials regarding where to acquire properties have significant potential social justice implications, as buyouts could promote or reduce existing social inequities, but it is unclear how such decisions are being made. A review of eight US buyout programs suggests that buyouts, as practiced, lack transparency, which may increase public distrust of the process and reduce participation. Moreover, decisions often involve political motivations and rely on cost-benefit logic that may promote disproportionate retreat in low-income or minority communities, continuing historic patterns of social inequity. However, as low-income communities in the USA also tend to be highly vulnerable to climate-exacerbated hazards, a decision not to relocate may also promote disproportionate harm. The buyout programs reviewed provide examples of how to mitigate these concerns through increased transparency, emphasis on relocation, explicit focus on social inequality, longer-term and larger-scale holistic approaches, and participatory pre-disaster planning. Further research on past programs is needed to evaluate outcomes and processes to improve future adaptation efforts.

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

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    Rental properties and tenant rights in buyouts are another source of social justice concerns but are beyond the scope of this article.

References

  1. Alexander K, Ryan A (2012) Using a social functionalist framework to understand responses to projected sea level rise and managed retreat policies in Australia. Int J Clim Chang Impacts Responses 3:127–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Becker WS (1983) Come rain, come shine: A case study of a floodplain relocation project at Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin. Bureau of Water Regulation and Zoning, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI

  3. Binder SB, Greer A (2016) The devil is in the details: Linking home buyout policy, practice, and experience after hurricane Sandy. Polit Gov 4:97. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i4.738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Binder SB, Baker CK, Barile JP (2015) Rebuild or relocate? Resilience and postdisaster decision-making after hurricane Sandy. Am J Community Psychol 56:180–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-015-9727-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bolin RC, Bolton PA (1986) Race, religion, and ethnicity in disaster recovery. University of Colorado, Boulder, CO

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boyd E (2011) Community Development Block Grant funds in disaster relief and recovery. Congressional Research Service, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brady AF (2015) Buyouts and beyond: Politics, planning, and the future of Staten Island’s east shore after superstorm Sandy. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bukvic A, Owen G (2016) Attitudes towards relocation following hurricane Sandy: Should we stay or should we go? Disasters 41:101–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Campanella R (2002) Time and place in New Orleans: Past geographies in the present day. Pelican Publishing Co., Gretna

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chetty R, Hendren N (2018) The impacts of neighborhoods on intergenerational mobility I: Childhood exposure effects. Q J Econ 133:1107–1162. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjy007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Conrad DR, McNitt B, Stout M (1998) Higher ground: A report on voluntary buyouts in the nation’s floodplains. National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Crompton JL (2005) The impact of parks on property values: Empirical evidence from the past two decades in the United States. Manag Leis 10:203–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/13606710500348060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. David E, Mayer J (2007) Comparing costs of alternative flood hazard mitigation plans: The case of Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin. J Am Plann Assoc 50(1):22–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. de Vries DH, Fraser JC (2012) Citizenship rights and voluntary decision making in post-disaster U.S. floodplain buyout mitigation programs. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 30:1–33

    Google Scholar 

  15. de Vries DH, Fraser JC (2017) Historical waterscape trajectories that need care: The unwanted refurbished flood homes of Kinston’s devolved disaster mitigation program. J Pol Ecol 24:932–949. https://doi.org/10.2458/v24i1.20976

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dyckman CS, St. John C, London JB (2014) Realizing managed retreat and innovation in state-level coastal management planning. Ocean Coast Manag 102:212–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.09.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. FEMA (2001) Mitigation case studies: Surviving and building better: The new Grand Forks, North Dakota. FEMA, Washington, D.C.

  18. FEMA (2007) Hazard mitigation assistance (HMA) guidance on property acquisition and relocation for the purpose of open space. FEMA, Washington, D.C.

  19. FEMA (2015) Hazard mitigation assistance guidance. FEMA, Washington, D.C.

  20. FEMA (2016) Mitigation best practices: Buyouts a win-win for Harris County and residents. FEMA, Washington, D.C.

  21. FEMA (2017) Fact sheet: Elevating your flood damaged home to avoid future damage. FEMA, Washington, D.C.

  22. Flavelle C (2016) The toughest climate dilemma: Who gets saved? Bloom. View

  23. Fothergill A (2004) Heads above water: Gender, class, and family in the Grand Forks flood. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY

  24. Fraser JC, Elmore R, Godschalk DD, Rohe W (2003) Implementing floodplain land acquisition programs in urban localities. University North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fraser JC, de Vries D, Young H (2006a) Mitigating repetitive loss properties. University North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fraser JC, Doyle MW, Young H (2006b) Creating effective flood mitigation policies. Eos 87(27):265–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Freudenberg BR, Calvin E, Tolkoff L, Brawley D (2016) Buy-in for buyouts: The case for managed retreat from flood zones. Lincoln Institute, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  28. Furman Center (2013) Sandy’s effects on housing in new York City. Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy. New York University, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  29. Godschalk D, Beatley T, Berke P, Brower D, Kaiser E (1999) Natural hazard mitigation: Recasting disaster policy and planning. Island Press, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  30. GOSR (2015) NY Rising buyout and acquisition program policy manual, Version 3.0. Governor’s Office of Storm Recovery. Albany, NY

    Google Scholar 

  31. GOSR (2016) Build it Back Progress Update, October 2016. Governor’s Office of Storm Recovery, Albany, NY

  32. Gotham KF (2014) Reinforcing inequalities: The impact of the CDBG program on post-Katrina rebuilding. Hous Policy Debate 24:192–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2013.840666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Gotham KF, Greenberg M (2014) Crisis cities: Disaster and redevelopment in New York and New Orleans. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  34. Greer A, Binder SB (2016) A historical assessment of home buyout policy: Are we learning or just failing? Hous Policy Debate Online. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2016.1245209

  35. Grisez Kweit M, Kweit RW (2007) Participation, perception of participation, and citizen support. Am Polit Res 35:407–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X06296206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hallegatte S, Green C, Nicholls RJ, Corfee-Morlot J (2013) Future flood losses in major coastal cities. Nat Clim Chang 3:802–806. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hauer ME, Evans JM, Mishra DR (2016) Millions projected to be at risk from sea-level rise in the continental United States. Nat Clim Chang 6:5. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2961

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. HCFCD (2017) Voluntary home buyout. Harris Couty Flood Control Dist. https://www.hcfcd.org/our-programs/property-acquisition-program/voluntary-acquisition/voluntary-home-buyout/

  39. Hood C, Heald D (eds) (2006) Transparency: The key to better governance? In: Proceedings of the British Academy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

  40. HUD (2015) National Disaster Resilience Competition: Phase 2 fact sheet. HUD, Washington, D.C.

  41. HUD (2017a) CDBG-DR Eligibility Requirements. https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-dr/cdbg-dr-eligibility-requirements/

  42. HUD (2017b) CDBG-DR: Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program. https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/cdbg-dr/

  43. IPCC (2013) 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, UK

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kabisch N, Qureshi S, Haase D (2015) Human-environment interactions in urban green spaces—a systematic review of contemporary issues and prospects for future research. Environ Impact Assess Rev 50:25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2014.08.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kates RW, Colten CE, Laska S, Leatherman SP (2006) Reconstruction of New Orleans after hurricane Katrina: A research perspective. PNAS 103:14653–14660. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0605726103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kelman S (1981) Cost benefit analysis: An ethical critique. Regulation 5:33

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kick EL, Fraser JC, Fulkerson GM et al (2011) Repetitive flood victims and acceptance of FEMA mitigation offers: An analysis with community-system policy implications. Disasters 35:510–539. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2011.01226.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Kim HC, Karp CA (2012) When retreat is the better part of valor: A legal analysis of strategies to motivate retreat from the shore. Sea Grant Law Policy J 5:169–209

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kind J, Wouter Botzen WJ, Aerts JCJH (2017) Accounting for risk aversion, income distribution and social welfare in cost-benefit analysis for flood risk management. WIREs Clim Chang 8:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kousky C (2014) Managing shoreline retreat: A US perspective. Clim Chang 124:9–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1106-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Mahler J (2012) How the coastline became a place to put the poor. New York Times

  52. Martinich J, Neumann J, Ludwig L, Jantarasami L (2013) Risks of sea level rise to disadvantaged communities in the United States. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-011-9356-0

  53. McCann MO (2006) Case study of floodplain acquisition/relocation project in Kinston, NC after Hurricane Fran (1996) and Hurricane Floyd (1999). University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC

    Google Scholar 

  54. McGhee D (2017) Were the post-Sandy Staten Island buyouts successful in reducing national vulnerability? Duke University

  55. Menoni S, Pesaro G (2008) Is relocation a good answer to prevent risk? Disaster Prev Manag An Int J 17:33–53. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653560810855865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Mileti DS (1999) Disasters by design: A reassessment of natural hazards in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Mountain BG (1995) How a public/privae partnership transformed the flood-damaged Levee District 8 in Louisa County, Iowa, into the Horseshoe Bend Division, Mark Twain National Wildlife Refuge. Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, Des Moines, IA

  58. Muñoz CE, Tate E (2016) Unequal recovery? Federal resource distribution after a Midwest flood disaster. Int J Environ Res Public Health 13(5):507. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13050507

  59. Neal WJ, Bush DM, Pilkey OH (2005) Managed retreat. In: Schwartz ML (ed) Encyclopedia of coastal science. Springer, Netherlands, pp 602–606

    Google Scholar 

  60. Nussbaum MC (2000) The costs of tragedy: Some moral limits of cost-benefit analysis. J Legal Stud 29:1005–1036. https://doi.org/10.1086/468103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. O’Grady B (2014) FEMA updates its benefit cost analysis toolkit. Secur. Notes Assoc. State Drink. Water Adm

  62. Oliver-Smith A (1990) Post-disaster housing reconstruction and social inequality: A challenge to policy and practice. Disasters J Disaster Stud Manag 14:7–19

    Google Scholar 

  63. Paavola J, Adger WN (2006) Fair adaptation to climate change. Ecol Econ 56:594–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Peloso ME, Caldwell MR (2011) Dynamic property rights: The public trust doctrine and takings in a changing climate. Stanford Environ Law J 30:51–120

    Google Scholar 

  65. Phillips B, Stukes PA, Jenkins P (2012) Freedom Hill is not for sale-and neither is the Lower Ninth Ward. J Black Stud 43:405–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934711425489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Rakow LF (2005) Why did the scholar cross the road? Community action research and the citizen-scholar. In: Priest SH (ed) Communication impact: Doing research that matters. Rownman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  67. Rakow LF, Belter B, Dyrstad H et al (2003) The talk of movers and shakers: Class conflict in the making of a community disaster. South Commun J 69:37–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10417940309373277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Rivlin G (2015) Why the plan to shrink New Orleans failed. FiveThirtyEight

  69. SAMHSA (2017) Greater impact: How disasters affect people of low socioeconomic status. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Support Administration, Rockville, MD

  70. Sarmiento C, Miller TE (2006) Inequities in flood management protection outcomes. American Agricultural Economics Association. http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/21042/1/sp06sa08.pdf

  71. Shelby A (2008) Red River rising: The anatomy of a flood and the survival of an American city. Minnesota Historical Society Press, Saint Paul, MN

    Google Scholar 

  72. Siders AR (2013a) Managed coastal retreat: A legal handbook on shifting development away from vulnerable areas. Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia University, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  73. Siders AR (2013b) Anatomy of a buyout: New York post-Superstorm Sandy. 16th Annual Conference on Litigating Takings Challenges to Land Use and Environmental Regulations, New York, NY

  74. Tate E, Strong A, Kraus T, Xiong H (2016) Flood recovery and property acquisition in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Nat Hazards 80:2055–2079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-2060-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Thomas DSG, Twyman C (2005) Equity and justice in climate change adaptation amongst natural-resource-dependent societies. Glob Environ Chang 15:115–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Tobin G (1992) Community reponse to floodplain relocation in Soldiers Grove, Wisconsin. Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters 80:87–96

    Google Scholar 

  77. Upton J (2017) When Atlantic City floods, low-income neighborhoods are left underwater. Clim, Cent

    Google Scholar 

  78. Wilcox R (2007) Housing in post-Katrina New Orleans: Legal rights and recourses for displaced African American residents. Northwest J Law Soc Policy 2:105–124

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a Morgridge Family Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellowship and the Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources (E-IPER) at Stanford University. Alex Brady, Robin Bronen, Cassandra Brooks, Amanda Cravens, Kristen Green, Miyuki Hino, Monica McCann, Devon McGhee, Christine Muñoz, and Jesse Reiblich provided comments that improved this manuscript, as did participants at the Notre Dame Climate Adaptation Workshop, led by Debra Javeline, Aseem Prakash, and Nives Dolsak.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. R. Siders.

Additional information

This article is part of a Special Issue on "Adapting to Water Impacts of Climate Change" edited by Debra Javeline, Nives Dolšak, and Aseem Prakash.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 17 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siders, A.R. Social justice implications of US managed retreat buyout programs. Climatic Change 152, 239–257 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2272-5

Download citation