To date, there has been limited research conducted on disaster aid allocation across multiple regions and disasters within the United States. In addition, there is a paucity of research specifically connecting social indicators of vulnerability to public assistance grants aimed at restoring, rebuilding, and mitigating against future damages in disasters. Given these gaps, this article inquires as to whether the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) public assistance program is characterized by procedural inequities, or disparate outcomes for counties with more socially vulnerable populations. Specifically, this article analyzes county-level FEMA’s Public Assistance distribution following major disaster declarations, while controlling for damages sustained, population, household counts, and FEMA Region. Results indicate that FEMA’s Public Assistance program operates well when accounting only for disaster losses across the years, however, findings also show that county social conditions influence funding receipt. Although socioeconomic characteristics were significant drivers of assistance spending, additional vulnerability indicators related to county demographic and built environment characteristics were also important drivers of receipt. Cases of both procedural inequity and equity are highlighted, and implications for equitable disaster recovery are discussed along with recommendations.

No abstract

No abstract

This case study analyzes how climate adaptation actors in coastal Louisiana undermine the justice concerns of coastal communities comprising Native American, Black, Southeast Asian, Hispanic, and working-class people. The homes, livelihoods, and cultures of these environmental justice (EJ) communities are threatened not only by climate disasters and ecological degradation, but also by adaptation projects proposed and backed by the state and federal governments and restoration nonprofit organizations. Drawing on 74 in-depth interviews, I analyze discourses from adaptation actors (government staff, scientists, engineers, and restoration advocates) and from coastal community leaders. Findings from the case study reveal how climate adaptation actors reference a socially constructed “bigger picture” to justify negative externalities of coastal projects while also undermining community concerns regarding their own survival. Findings also show how members of coastal communities discuss their survival, resist harmful narratives, and assert their indispensability. I conclude by connecting these themes to critical EJ research, particularly the racist underpinnings of utilitarian environmental decision making. This case study demonstrates the need to examine institutional actors' resistance to integrating justice into climate adaptation planning and action.

No abstract