Rethinking Disaster Response for a More Resilient Future

If it seems like disasters are coming faster, hitting harder and costing more, you are right. The number of disasters costing a billion dollars or more has risen sharply. From 1980-2019, an average of nine billion-dollar (adjusted for inflation) disasters occurred annually, but from 2020-2024, that number increased to 23. More than statistics, these numbers represent a significant toll—loss of life, damage to habitats, loss of home and security, and loss of economic stability.

Just last month, the Texas Hill Country suffered devastating loss of life and property in severe flash flooding. The Guadalupe River flows through my hometown, and I am heartbroken to see so much loss in communities upriver of the places I most cherished growing up.

Given this rapid acceleration in both the frequency and severity of modern disasters, we can no longer assume that past ways of preparing for, responding to, and recovering from these events will be adequate, or in the words of Yogi Berra, “The future ain’t what it used to be.”

If we expect communities and habitats to withstand the shocks of disaster now and into the future, we need to reimagine the way we reduce risk, and we must improve how we recover and rebuild from disasters when they inevitably occur. Disaster is a fault line that eventually carves through many of us, bisecting our lives into a before and after. Whether any one disaster affects us directly or not, they shape and reshape the way we see the world and how we move through it, altering our view of our friends and family, our community, our government, and ourselves. Disasters are nonpartisan, and our approach to solving this growing problem requires bold, nonpartisan actions that match the scale, complexity, and urgency of the threats we face. 

In July, Congress introduced legislation aimed at modernizing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the agency tasked with disaster mitigation and recovery. Our national approach to disasters is in need of improvement, but to meet the scale of the challenge, we need to think more systematically, more strategically, and, yes, more naturally about disaster response and risk reduction.

Here are five ways to rethink how we prepare for and recover from disasters in the U.S.:

1. Nature protects communities and the economy

Natural infrastructure—like wetlands, oyster reefs, floodplains, and forests—not only benefits birds and local habitats, it also provides critical, cost-effective protections against disaster impacts. These natural systems absorb floodwaters, reduce storm surge, and stabilize coastlines. Yet, for too long, federal disaster response has prioritized writing checks after a disaster, rather than reducing the risk of harm before disasters strike. Ensuring that FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation programs remain intact, including the preservation of the Building Resilience in Communities (BRIC) program, is a critical priority. Additional funding to expand pre-disaster mitigation programming is also needed to address the growing risk of severe disasters across the country.

Though the FEMA Act of 2025 contemplates continuing the BRIC program, which was cancelled earlier this year, the legislation changes the program to allocate funds based on set formulas rather than the previously existing competitive grants program. Competition helps ensure that funds go towards the best and most sustainable projects. Additionally, prioritizing substantial funding for natural infrastructure projects is critical to providing pre-disaster protections for communities and habitats.

2. Vulnerable communities deserve more than buzzwords

Disasters don’t affect everyone equally. They can hit hardest in communities that are already under stress—low-income neighborhoods, coastal and rural populations, and those living without access to safe housing or basic services. There are communities all across the U.S. where people can’t afford to evacuate, don’t have the means to rebuild, and take decades to fully recover, if ever.

“Bouncing back” is often used as a shorthand to define resilience. But as we see more instances of repetitive loss, people find it harder to “bounce back” after losing everything, again and again. Resilience should be a design principle, not a personal demand. Rethinking disaster planning and recovery gives us a chance to embed equity and fairness into how we prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. Resilience is more than a buzzword—it is a principle that should be incorporated into how we build our homes, communities, natural systems, and public policies, not a mandate that we place on already burdened communities. 

3. Support rural and low-capacity communities

Disasters affect everyone, but some communities have less capacity to navigate the complexities of disaster recovery than others. Currently, FEMA’s definitions of “small impoverished communities” and “economically disadvantaged” are too narrow, and some communities are falling through the cracks.

Adjustments to these terms and definitions are a step in the right direction, though additional edits such as changing the terminology to “small, low-capacity community,” as well as increasing population and income limits are also needed. Again, resilience must work for everyone, or it’s not resilience at all.

4. Rethink cost-sharing to reward proactive states

The FEMA Act of 2025, as currently written, would allow the federal government to lower its share of public assistance funding for disasters to 65 percent, unless states take certain actions that could incentivize raising the federal share up to 85 percent. In other words, states would need to meet specific requirements, like maintaining state risk management and other disaster programs, to receive more federal support. Congress should consider adding additional incentives that encourage states to prepare ahead of time. These include adopting strong floodplain standards, integrating climate projections into risk assessments, and prioritizing investment in natural infrastructure.

5. Let communities and nonprofits support recovery

Community-based organizations and nonprofits are often known as the third responders in a disaster—after the storm passes and before government recovery fully kicks in, they are the ones helping people on the ground. For example, the Lower Ninth Ward Center for Sustainability, Engagement, and Development was created after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans as a community-based hub for recovery.

Allowing public and private nonprofit entities to participate in mitigation and recovery efforts, and updating rules to support combining of federal disaster grants with other public and private sector funding, would allow the organizations to provide more robust and sustainable services.

We know that healthy natural systems are essential to healthy communities, both for birds and people. Changing environmental conditions are changing how we prepare and react to weather disasters, so FEMA reform is not just a policy conversation—it’s a moral and fiscal imperative. We can’t afford to wait for the next disaster to act, we must invest now in resilience that works for people, birds, and the places we all call home.