Environment Systems and Decisions

, Volume 38, Issue 1, pp 118–139 | Cite as

Regional resilience trust funds: an exploratory analysis for leveraging insurance surcharges

  • Jesse M. KeenanEmail author


This paper explores the financial viability of a series of state trust funds designed to strategically provide financial products to support interventions advanced in the name of climate change adaptation and resilience in the New York metropolitan region. This paper evaluates the proposition that the regional resilience trust funds (RRTFs) could be feasibly capitalized by a surcharge on insurance (Proposition A). Second, the paper evaluates the proposition that the RRTF could sustainably support a range of grants and financial products that could accommodate 100% of states’ unmet resilience needs (Proposition B). The findings of this research support an affirmation of the feasibility of the RRTF pursuant to Proposition A. Consistent with Proposition B, this paper provides evidence in support of a sustainable portfolio strategy that can ultimately be operated independent of the insurance surcharges. However, with the exception of Connecticut, under the modeled assumptions, the RRTFs could not could fulfill 100% of the unmet resilience needs. This paper provides a broader strategic understanding of how investment products and portfolios can be designed to operate in the uncertainties associated with climate change.


Climate change Finance Resilience Adaptation Insurance Trust funds 



This research was supported by a grant from the Regional Plan Association (USA).

Supplementary material

10669_2017_9656_MOESM1_ESM.jpg (266 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (JPG 266 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM2_ESM.jpg (1013 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (JPG 1013 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM3_ESM.jpg (592 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (JPG 592 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM4_ESM.jpg (743 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (JPG 743 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM5_ESM.jpg (728 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (JPG 729 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM6_ESM.jpg (683 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (JPG 684 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM7_ESM.jpg (282 kb)
Supplementary material 7 (JPG 282 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM8_ESM.jpg (281 kb)
Supplementary material 8 (JPG 282 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM9_ESM.jpg (286 kb)
Supplementary material 9 (JPG 287 kb)
10669_2017_9656_MOESM10_ESM.jpg (288 kb)
Supplementary material 10 (JPG 289 kb)


  1. Adaptation Fund (2017) About the adaptation fund.
  2. Adeniyi O, Perera S, Collins A (2016) Review of finance and investment in disaster resilience in the built environment. Int J Strateg Prop Manag 20(3):224–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. André C, Boulet D, Rey-Valette H, Rulleau B (2016) Protection by hard defence structures or relocation of assets exposed to coastal risks: contributions and drawbacks of cost-benefit analysis for long-term adaptation choices to climate change. Ocean Coast Manag 134:173–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Angeler D, Allen C, Garmestani A, Gunderson L, Linkov I (2016) Panarchy use in environmental science for risk and resilience planning. Environ Syst Decis 36:225–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atteridge A (2009) Policy brief: private sector finance and climate change adaptation. Stockholm Environment Institute Stockholm, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  6. Ayyub BM (2014) Systems resilience for multihazard environments: definitions, metrics, and valuation for decision making. Risk Anal 34(2):340–355. doi: 10.1111/risa.12093 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berrang-Ford L, Ford JD, Paterson J (2011) Are we adapting to climate change? Glob Environ Change 21:25033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brand FS, Jax K (2007) Focusing on the meaning (s) of resilience: resilience as a descriptive concept and a boundary object. Ecol Soc 12(1):23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown K (2012) Policy discourses of resilience. In: Pelling M, Manuel-Navarrete D, Redclift M (eds) Climate change and the crisis of capitalism: a chance to reclaim self, society and nature. Routledge, London, pp 37–50Google Scholar
  10. Burton CG (2015) A validation of metrics for community resilience to natural hazards and disasters using the recovery from Hurricane Katrina as a case study. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 105(1):67–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carpenter S, Walker B, Anderies JM, Abel N (2001) From metaphor to measurement: resilience of what to what? Ecosystems 4(8):765–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carpenter SR, Arrow KJ, Barrett S, Biggs R, Brock WA, Crépin AS, Li CZ (2012) General resilience to cope with extreme events. Sustainability 4(12):3248–3259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. City of New York (2013) Special initiative for rebuilding and resiliency, chapter 19, funding. Office of the Mayor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. City of New York (2016) Action plan incorporating amendments 1–12 for CDBG-DR funds. Office of the Mayor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Connecticut Department of Housing (2015) Community development block grant disaster recovery program: substantial amendment to the action plan. Retrived from
  16. Connecticut Department of Housing (2016) Community development block grant disaster recovery program substantial amendment to the action plan. State of Connecticut, HartfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Creswell JW (2013) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 4th edn. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  18. Cutter SL (2016) The landscape of disaster resilience indicators in the USA. Nat Hazards 80:741–758. doi: 10.1007/s11069-015-1993-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davidson J, Jacobson C, Lyth A, Dedekorkut-Howes A, Baldwin C, Ellison J, Holbrook N, Howes M, Serrao-Neumann S, Singh-Peterson L, Smith T (2016) Interrogating resilience: toward a typology to improve its operationalization. Ecol Soc 21(2), Art 27.
  20. Davies T (2015) Developing resilience to naturally triggered disasters. Environ Syst Decis 35:237–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dowd K (2000) Adjusting for risk: an improved sharpe ratio. Int Rev Econ Finance 9(3):209–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eliasson I (2000) The use of climate knowledge in urban planning. Landsc Urb Plan 48(1):31–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ellen IG, Yager J, Hanson M, Bosher L (2016) Planning for an uncertain future: can multicriteria analysis support better decision making in climate planning? J Plan Educ Res 36(3):349–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2016) Draft interagency concept for community resilience indicators and national-level measures. mitigation framework leadership group draft concept paper. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington.
  25. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2017) Establishing a deductible for FEMA’s public assistance program: a proposed rule. 82 F.R:4064–4097Google Scholar
  26. Fenton A, Wright H, Afionis S, Paavola J, Huq S (2014) Debt relief and financing climate change action. Nat Clim Change 4(8):650–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Floodplains by Design (2016) A new approach.
  28. Fox-Lend C, Bates M, Linkov I (2015) A matrix approach to community resilience assessment: an illustrative case at Rockaway Peninsula. Environ Syst Decis 35:209–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fridahl M, Linnér BO (2016) Perspectives on the green climate fund: possible compromises on capitalization and balanced allocation. Clim Dev 8(2):105–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Galletta A (2013) Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: from research design to analysis and publication. NYU Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gilbert GW (2010) Disaster resilience: a guide to the literature. NIST Special Publication #1117, National Institute of Standards and Technology, GaithersburgCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Glasserman P (2013) Monte Carlo methods in financial engineering, vol 53. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Goetzmann W, Ingersoll J, Spiegel M, Welch I (2007) Portfolio performance manipulation and manipulation-proof performance measures. Rev Financial Stud 20(5):1503–1546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Goldsmith J, Vermeule A (2002) Empirical methodology and legal scholarship. Univ Chic Law Rev 69(1):153–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gray DE (2013) Doing research in the real world. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  36. Greenwood R, Seasholes MS, Biery D (2015) The portfolio improvement rule and the CAPM. Harvard Business School, Technical Note: N9-216-027 (Revised February 2016). Harvard Business School, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Gunderson LH (2000) Ecological resilience—in theory and application. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:425–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hallegatte S (2009) Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change. Glob Environ Change 19(2):240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hallegatte S, Shah A, Brown C, Lempert R, Gill S (2012) Investment decision making under deep uncertainty—application to climate change. World Bank Policy research working paper no. 6193. World Bank, Washington.
  40. Hallegatte S, Green C, Nicholls RJ, Corfee-Morlot J (2013) Future flood losses in major coastal cities. Nat Clim Change 3(9):802–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hart C (1998) Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. Holling CS (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Horstmann B (2011) Operationalizing the adaptation fund: challenges in allocating funds to the vulnerable. Clim Policy 11(4):1086–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Horton R, Bader D, Kushnir Y, Little C, Blake R, Rosenzweig C (2015) New York City panel on climate change 2015 report, chapter 1: climate observations and projections. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1336(1):18–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Horton R, Rosenzweig C, Solecki W, Bader D, Sohl L (2016) Climate science for decision-making in the New York metropolitan region. In: Parris AS, Garfin GM, Dow K, Meyer R, Close SL (eds) Climate in context: science and society partnering for adaptation. Wiley, New York, pp 51–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jacobs B, Lee C, Watson S, Dunford S, Coutts-Smith A (2016) Adaptation planning process and government adaptation architecture support regional action on climate change in New South Wales, Australia. In: Leal W (ed) Innovation in climate change adaptation. Springer International Publishing, Zurich, pp 17–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Keenan JM (2015) Adaptive capacity of commercial real estate firms in New York City to urban flooding. J Water Clim Change 6(3):486–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Keenan JM (2017) From climate change to national security: an analysis of the obama administration’s federal resilience mandates and measures. Nat Hazards Rev. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000273 Google Scholar
  49. Kemp AC, Hill TD, Vane CH, Cahill N, Orton PM, Talke SA, Hartig EK (2017) Relative sea-level trends in New York city during the past 1500 years. Holocene. doi: 10.1177/0959683616683263 Google Scholar
  50. Klein RJ, Nicholls RJ, Thomalla F (2003) Resilience to natural hazards: how useful is this concept? Glob Environ Change Part B Environ Hazards 5(1):35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Knight-Lenihan S (2016) Benefit cost analysis, resilience and climate change. Clim Policy 16(7):909–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Knowlton K, Lynn L, Goldberg RA, Rosenzweig C, Hogrefe C, Rosenthal JK, Kinney PL (2007) Projecting heat-related mortality impacts under a changing climate in the New York City region. Am J Public Health 97(11):2028–2034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Larkin S, Fox-Lent C, Eisenberg DA, Trump BD, Wallace S, Chadderton C, Linkov I (2015) Benchmarking agency and organizational practices in resilience decision making. Environ Syst Decis 35(2):185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lebel L, Anderies J, Campbell B, Folke C, Hatfield-Dodds S, Hughes T, Wilson J (2006) Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1): 19.
  55. LePore A (ed) (2016) The future of disaster management in the US: rethinking legislation, policy, and finance. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  56. Liesiö J, Salo A (2012) Scenario-based portfolio selection of investment projects with incomplete probability and utility information. Eur J Oper Res 217(1):162–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Liesiö J, Mild P, Salo A (2008) Robust portfolio modeling with incomplete cost information and project interdependencies. Eur J Oper Res 190(3):679–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Liu S, Connor J, Butler JRA, Jaya IKD, Nikmatullah A (2016) Evaluating economic costs and benefits of climate resilient livelihood strategies. Clim Risk Manag 12:115–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Long D (2014) An investor’s perspective on climate adaptation. In: The national workshop on large landscape conservation. Network for Landscape Conservation, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  60. Masson V, Marchadier C, Adolphe L, Aguejdad R, Avner P, Bonhomme M, Bretagne G, Briottet X, Bueno B, de Munck C, Doukari O (2014) Adapting cities to climate change: a systemic modelling approach. Urb Clim 10:407–429. doi: 10.1016/j.uclim.2014.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Matyas D, Pelling M (2015) Positioning resilience for 2015: the role of resistance, incremental adjustment and transformation in disaster risk management policy. Disasters 39(s1):s1–s18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mechler R (2016) Reviewing estimates of the economic efficiency of disaster risk management: opportunities and limitations of using risk-based cost–benefit analysis. Nat Hazards 81(3):2121–2147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mechler R, Czajkowski J, Kunereuther H, Michel-Kerjan E, Botzen W, Keating A, McQuistan C, Cooper N, O’Donnell I (2014) Making communities more flood resilient: the role of cost benefit analysis and other decision-support tools in disaster risk reduction. Zurich Flood Resilience Alliance/The Wharton School, the University of Pennsylvania, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  64. Meerow S, Newell JP, Stults M (2016) Defining urban resilience: a review. Landsc Urb Plan 147:38–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Menoni S, Molinari D, Parker D, Ballio F, Tapsell S (2012) Assessing multifaceted vulnerability and resilience in order to design risk-mitigation strategies. Nat Hazards 64(3):2057–2082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Moodys (2016) Research & ratings: issurer research. Retrived from
  67. Müller B (2009) International adaptation finance: the need for an innovative and strategic approach. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science, vol. 6 (11). IOP Publishing, Bristol, p 112008Google Scholar
  68. Multihazard Mitigation Council (2005) Natural hazard mitigation saves: an independent study to assess the future savings from mitigation activities volume 2 study documentation. National Institute of Building Sciences, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  69. National Institutes of Standards and Technology (2015a) Community resilience planning guide for buildings and infrastructure systems, vol 1. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington. doi: 10.6028/NIST.SP.1190v1 Google Scholar
  70. National Institutes of Standards and Technology (2015b) Community resilience planning guide for buildings and infrastructure systems, vol 2. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington. doi: 10.6028/NIST.SP.1190v2 Google Scholar
  71. Nelson DR (2011) Adaptation and resilience: responding to a changing climate. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change 2(1):113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (2016) Action plan amendment number 18—substantial amendment. State of New Jersey, TrentonGoogle Scholar
  73. Olsson L, Jerneck A, Thoren H, Persson J, O’Byrne D (2015) Why resilience is unappealing to social science: theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience. Sci Adv 1(4):e1400217. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1400217 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pauw WP, Klein RJ, Vellinga P, Biermann F (2016) Private finance for adaptation: do private realities meet public ambitions? Clim Change 134(4):489–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Peng C, Yuan M, Gu C, Peng Z, Ming T (2017) A review of the theory and practice of regional resilience. Sustain Cities Soc 29:86–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Persson A, Remling E (2014) Equity and efficiency in adaptation finance: initial experiences of the adaptation fund. Clim Policy 14(4):488–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Preston BL, Mustelin J, Maloney MC (2015) Climate adaptation heuristics and the science/policy divide. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 20(3):467–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Reddy T, Zhanje S, Taylor T (2011) Adaptation fund: a fund to satisfy Africa’s needs?. Institute for Security Studies, Corruption & Governance Programme (ISS), NairobiGoogle Scholar
  79. Rodin J (2014) The resilience dividend: being strong in a world where things go wrong. Public Affairs, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  80. Rosenthal JK, Kinney PL, Metzger K (2014) Intra-urban vulnerability to heat-related mortality in New York City, 1997–2006. Health Place 30:45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Sikula N, Mancillas J, Linkov I, McDonagh J (2015) Risk management is not enough: a conceptual model for resilience and adaptation-based vulnerability assessments. Environ Syst Decis 35:219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Stadelmann M, Michaelowa A, Roberts JT (2013) Difficulties in accounting for private finance in international climate policy. Clim Policy 13(6):718–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Stadelmann M, Persson Å, Ratajczak-Juszko I, Michaelowa A (2014) Equity and cost-effectiveness of multilateral adaptation finance: are they friends or foes? Int Environ Agreem Politics Law Econ 14(2):101–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. State of New York (2016) Bond sale schedule. Divison of the Budget, State of New York, Albany, NYGoogle Scholar
  85. Tanner T, Surminski S, Wilkinson E, Reid R, Rentschler J, Rajput S, Lovell E (2016) The triple dividend of resilience: a new narrative for disaster risk management and development. In: Surminksk S, Tanner T (eds) Realising the ‘triple dividend of resilience’. Springer International Publishing, Zurich, pp 1–29Google Scholar
  86. Teodorescu H (2015) Defining resilience using probabilistic event trees. Environ Syst Decis 35:279–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit (USCRT) (2016) Funding opportunities.
  88. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2011) National preparedness goals. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington.
  89. Vajjhala S (2017) Personal interview, 23 Sep 2017Google Scholar
  90. Vella K, Butler WH, Sip N, Chapin T, Murley J (2016) Voluntary collaboration for adaptive governance: the southeast Florida regional climate change compact. J Plan Educ Res 36(3):363–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Watkiss P, Hunt A, Blyth W, Dyszynski J (2015) The use of new economic decision support tools for adaptation assessment: a review of methods and applications, towards guidance on applicability. Clim Change 132(3):401–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. White House (2016) Standards and finance to support community resilience. Executive Office of the President, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  93. Wildlife Conservation Society (2017a) The climate adaptation fund: program information.
  94. Wildlife Conservation Society (2017b) The climate adaptation fund: 2017 grants program applicant guidance document.
  95. Wise RM, Fazey I, Smith MS, Park SE, Eakin HC, Van Garderen EA, Campbell B (2014) Reconceptualising adaptation to climate change as part of pathways of change and response. Glob Environ Change 28:325–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Zhou H, Wang J, Wan J, Jia H (2010) Resilience to natural hazards: a geographic perspective. Nat Hazards 53(1):21–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of DesignHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations