Natural disasters, public housing, and the role of disaster aid

Abstract

It has been widely recognized that socially disadvantaged populations are highly vulnerable to natural disasters. Nonetheless, little is known about how disasters affect housing affordability, particularly for those who depend on public housing. Using a national sample of counties over the period 2005-2016, this study examines the effects of flooding and federal disaster aid on the provision of public housing across the United States. We estimate a panel fixed-effects model with an instrumental variable to account for the endogeneity of disaster aid. Results show that severe floods reduce the number of public housing units, prolong the average waiting time, and increase tenant-paid rents for public housing. Meanwhile, we find that the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Public Assistance (PA) aid can help restore the supply of public housing and lower the rents paid by tenants in the aftermath of flood events. Our findings suggest that natural disasters place particularly high stress on the socially vulnerable, and post-disaster aid can alleviate some of the adverse impact of disasters on those who depend on public housing.

Do wildfires exacerbate COVID-19 infections and deaths in vulnerable communities? Evidence from California

“…In previous wildfire seasons, devastating wildfires in California forced more than one million people to evacuate between 2017 and 2019 ( Wong et al, 2020 ). Public shelters and housing resources, whether intended for emergency use or not, are critical after natural disasters ( Davlasheridze and Miao, 2021 ). In the case of wildfires, evacuation and/or sheltering in safe places can help residents decrease their chances of breathing in wildfire smoke ( Cova et al, 2009 ; Whittaker et al, 2017 ; Wong et al, 2020a , 2021 ).…”

COVID‐19 emergency policies, financial security, and social equity: Worldwide evidence

“…One of the most comprehensive indicators currently in use is FEMA's National Risk Index, which identifies communities' risk scores on 18 natural hazards across the United States. Despite these efforts, empirical policy research addressing the distributional impacts of emergency responses has remained relatively scant until recently (e.g., Billings et al, 2022;Davlasheridze & Miao, 2021a, 2021bDomingue & Emrich, 2019;Emrich et al, 2020). Also, while an equitable distribution of government resources is critical for emergency administration, understanding how policy efficacy differs across population groups is equally essential for designing equitable policy packages (Frederickson, 2005).…”

“…One of the most comprehensive indicators currently in use is FEMA's National Risk Index, which identifies communities' risk scores on 18 natural hazards across the United States. Despite these efforts, empirical policy research addressing the distributional impacts of emergency responses has remained relatively scant until recently (e.g., Billings et al, 2022; Davlasheridze & Miao, 2021a, 2021b; Domingue & Emrich, 2019; Emrich et al, 2020).…”

“…Others have evaluated program design and implementation, focusing on the differential impacts of disaster relief programs on various socioeconomic groups. This body of research has uncovered that disadvantaged groups are often less likely to receive government funding and assistance during recovery (Billings et al, 2022; Davlasheridze & Miao, 2021a, 2021b; Emrich et al, 2020).…”

Post-Disaster Recovery Challenges of Public Housing Residents: Lumberton, North Carolina After Hurricane Matthew

“…Therefore, recovery can be seized as an opportunity to address such vulnerabilities and build back affordable housing to close the historic gaps in needs and improve its quality. Disasters are also shown to reduce the number of available public housing units, increase the average waiting time for getting units, and increase the paid-rent portion for the tenants (Davlasheridze and Miao 2021). Nevertheless, recovery studies rarely focus on the vulnerabilities of public housing residents and the inadequacy of recovery policies in shaping the housing recovery of public housing residents.…”