Disaster preparedness has historically been little more than an afterthought for elected officials. Between 1985 and 2008, the national government spent nearly 11-times more on disaster relief programs than disaster preparedness, despite the fact that every $1 spent on preparedness translates to roughly $15 in savings from the future damage it mitigates.
The lack of policymaker interest in preparedness is largely rooted in our electoral system. A 2009 study revealed that increases in disaster preparedness spending have virtually no effect on incumbent vote share in the next election cycle. Conversely, increases in relief spending from $1 to $10 per person can increase the incumbent vote share by as much 0.77 percentage points. Simply put, if voters don’t reward preparedness, then elected officials have little incentive to invest in preparedness.
But in the face of historic wildfires, increasing coastal flood events, record droughts and a myriad of other climate-related hazards, emergency management is slowly becoming a much more salient issue. Last week presidential hopeful Pete Buttigieg went so far as to release a seven-page plan dedicated entirely to disaster preparedness. Nor is Buttigieg the only Democratic candidate to underscore the importance of disaster resilience. The three frontrunners—Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren—also articulate climate adaptation strategies, although their plans pale in comparison to the Buttigieg’s multi-pronged approach.
Yet what makes the Buttigieg plan so striking is not only its scope, but the fact that it was released at such a critical juncture in his campaign. Buttigieg’s polling numbers have remained stagnant since July while the frontrunners have consolidated their lead. Indeed, Buttigieg’s campaign manager went so far as to tell reporters that it was time for Mayor Pete’s campaign to “flip the switch.” Is a preparedness plan enough to close the gap? Probably not. However, that Buttigieg would even consider launching a preparedness plan at such an important time suggests the politics of preparedness are changing.
The sudden uptick in policymaker concern with preparedness appears to be part of larger trend. Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker recently told Boston 25 News that climate change adaptation “Is like a lot of things that aren’t going to sort of happen today…You can just put it off until tomorrow or the day after or the day after. This one feels to me like one of those issues where we just need to get started.” Not only is climate resilience a priority for Governor Baker, who sponsored legislation that would raise the real estate transfer tax in order to fund municipal hazard vulnerability programs, but the Massachusetts House of Representatives passed a bill in July that would authorize the state to borrow $1.3 billion to fund, among other things, municipal adaptation programs.
Finally, in addition to flurry of presidential plans and state policies, my research suggests the politics of preparedness are changing. Working in collaboration with colleagues Sarah Anderson of the University of California, Santa Barbara and Kristin Taylor of Wayne State University, I helped launch a nationwide survey of state legislators that aimed to measure policymaker interest in disaster preparedness policy. When asked to indicate their preferred spending levels for disaster relief and preparedness, the state legislators we survey indicated that, on average, they would increase state disaster relief spending by 256% and disaster preparedness by 249%. The razor thin margin stands in stark contrast to the funding gap reported above, further evidences that disaster preparedness is becoming a much more salient political issue.
One would be hard pressed to find another election cycle where every frontrunner has presented some sort of disaster preparedness and resilience strategy. And while disaster preparedness is unlikely to garner the same level of interest as the economy, health care, or even climate change mitigation, it’s safe to say the types of hazard mitigation plans proposed by Buttigieg and the other Democratic candidates will become a staple of future campaigns. The politics of preparedness appear to be changing, at least for the time being.