After the storm passes, inequities worsen

As  climate change  drives warmer atmospheric temperatures, rising sea levels, and hotter, drier conditions, extreme weather events are intensifying. Despite post-recovery intentions, these disasters end up affecting communities differently, primarily along racial and income lines. A  2020  analysis by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Advisory Council found that after natural disasters, wealthy residents accumulate more wealth while lower-income individuals fall deeper into poverty.

Natural disasters, such as floods, hurricanes, and windstorms, are  increasing  in frequency and intensity due to the effects of climate change. These natural disasters have great economic impacts, causing  billions  of dollars in damages. Unfortunately, the economic burdens are unequal, with poorer communities receiving less post-disaster assistance and recovery resources. As environmental disasters continue to worsen, they systematically widen gaps along lines of income, education, housing, and public health through lack of private investment, insurance access, and FEMA resource access.

Wealth disparity through the numbers: Race, income, and homeownership

Wealth outcomes

Researchers have found that wealth gaps widen after natural disasters and disrupt the flow of recovery resources. When analyzing the impacts of disasters on nearly 3,500 American families from 1999–2013, one longitudinal  study  by Rice University and University of Pittsburgh researchers showed that both the disasters themselves and the resulting recovery efforts exacerbate wealth disparities and that race, income, and homeownership are all key factors.

In particular, Latino,* Asian, and Black communities tend to fare worse than white communities after major disasters. The study found that when damages from an extreme weather event exceeded $10 billion, white residents gained  $126,000  on average, while Black and Latino residents lost  $27,000  and  $29,000 , respectively, on average.

Shockingly, FEMA aid seems to be making racial wealth disparities worse. According to the  study , whites living in counties that received substantial amounts of FEMA aid ($900 million or more) ended up better off—by $55,000 on average—than whites living in counties that received negligible amounts of FEMA aid. However, Blacks and Latinos in hard-hit counties that received substantial FEMA aid actually accumulated less wealth ( $82,000  and  $65,000  less, respectively) than their counterparts in counties without aid. In other words, FEMA aid appears to be making whites wealthier than they would otherwise be, but Blacks and Latinos poorer. There is a lack of research to understand why more aid exacerbates racial inequities, but the study's researchers  point  to patterns from previous disasters. After Hurricane Katrina, FEMA aid was not distributed equitably for public infrastructure redevelopment, leading to wealthier, white communities receiving more funding. This imbalance continued the cycle of depreciating property value and business profitability in lower-income neighborhoods.

Wealth gap disparities after disasters also follow homeownership lines, even after controlling for race and income. Disasters impact renters more severely—the wealth gap between homeowners and renters increased by  $133,000  on average following climate-related disasters according to the study. Renters need to move from damaged buildings, and rents tend to rise in the aftermath of a disaster due to higher demand and reduced housing supply. This disparity is compounded by differences in pre-disaster property values. White-owned homes are valued, on average,  $30,000  more than Latino-owned homes, and the gap widens to $80,000 when compared to Black-owned homes. This discrepancy in property values stems from decades of disinvestment from bankers, developers, and financial and government stakeholders in Black and Latino neighborhoods, particularly those that were redlined by the federal government beginning in the  1930s .

Rebuilding imbalance

The speed of rebuilding after a natural disaster also favors white, wealthier neighborhoods according to an artificial intelligence-aided  analysis  of Google Street View images. When examining neighborhoods struck by natural disasters in 16 states from 2011 to 2018, the results showed that homes in higher-income neighborhoods are more likely to be rebuilt after disasters—and rebuilt to higher standards that may help the structure weather the next storm—whereas homes in lower-income neighborhoods are more likely to remain empty lots.

While 37% of damaged structures in lower-income areas remained empty lots in the aftermath of a disaster, the number dropped to 7% when analyzing high-income areas. In addition, 82% of damaged structures were rebuilt to a higher standard in high-income areas (for example, they may have had their foundation raised); in lower-income areas, the number was only 33%. Higher-income homeowners who receive more FEMA assistance are more likely to have insurance as well. With more financial power in general (including relationships with developers, banks, etc.), they can more easily replace an entire home.

Case study: Impacts of the 2025 Los Angeles wildfires on the Latino community

Economic and health vulnerabilities

Wealth disparity patterns in disaster recovery can clearly be seen following the  2025 Los Angeles wildfires . In January 2025, approximately  74,000  Latino residents in Los Angeles were either directly displaced or at risk of displacement due to the wildfires, meaning one in four individuals affected by evacuation orders or warnings was Latino. When examining the specific systemic factors that intensified the impact of the Los Angeles fires on Latino communities, several critical areas emerge: employment vulnerability, limited access to recovery resources, and preexisting health disparities.

A data  brief  from the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Latino Policy and Politics Institute and the UCLA Center for Neighborhood Knowledge reveals that the Palisades, Hurst, and Eaton wildfires had far-reaching effects beyond the evacuation zones for Latinos. Latino residents are significantly more likely to work in outdoor occupations such as construction, delivery, transportation, and agriculture, and these sectors are directly impacted by deteriorating air quality during wildfire events. With  17%  of residents in Latino neighborhoods employed in these sectors compared to just 6% in white neighborhoods, the risk of respiratory illnesses and work disruption (resulting in income loss) is greatly magnified for Latino workers. This employment vulnerability leaves families less able to recover financially from the fires’ aftermath, deepening existing economic inequities.

Another factor addressed by the UCLA study is the high percentage of Latino workers employed in wealthy areas struck by the fire. When looking at the Palisades fire, which struck an affluent, predominantly white community,  34% of jobs  in the area were held by Latino workers, even though they were only 7% of the population. At least  35,000  jobs held by Latinos were temporarily or permanently lost after the fires. While individuals who work from home held onto their jobs, only  7% of Latino workers  are remote, compared to 22% of white workers.

In addition to economic vulnerability, Latino communities face heightened health risks, which are exacerbated by wildfire smoke. The UCLA  brief  highlights that Latino neighborhoods already experience double the exposure to diesel particulate matter pollution than white neighborhoods. The health consequences of this environmental inequity are stark: asthma-related emergency room visits in Latino neighborhoods average  67 per 10,000  residents, over 2.5 times the rate in white neighborhoods. Furthermore, access to health care remains a critical barrier. According to the brief,  14% of residents  in Latino neighborhoods lack health insurance, compared to just 3% in white neighborhoods. These insurance gaps not only hinder immediate access to critical medical care during disasters, but also compound the long-term health impacts on already vulnerable populations.

Barriers to recovery

Finally, disparities in disaster preparedness and recovery resources left Latino households and small businesses particularly vulnerable. The UCLA brief notes that  nearly 30%  of Latino-owned small businesses in California reported having no insurance coverage for fires or natural disasters, critically limiting their ability to rebuild. In an  EcoMadres discussion  on the impacts of the California wildfires on Latino communities, civil rights attorney Sonja Diaz noted that immigration fears prevented many undocumented individuals in the community from seeking assistance after the fires. Diaz stated that the fear of law enforcement actions, including immigration enforcement, leads to systemic barriers in Los Angeles in terms of relief and recovery.

Solutions

Addressing post-disaster wealth disparity requires restructuring at the federal, state, and local level. FEMA has historically relied on property values when determining relief funding, which favors higher-value property owners instead of the most vulnerable. When E&E News investigated FEMA’s flood-mitigation grant program database, it discovered that in  12 out of the 18 states  analyzed, more than half of FEMA’s funding for elevating homes above flood levels went to white, wealthy communities.

Legislation such as the FEMA Equity Act ( S.2961 ) has been proposed to make relief funding more equitable. The bill would require the designation of an equity advisor and the establishment of an equity enterprise steering group that together would assess equity practices throughout the agency and seek to improve data collection on relief programs to measure disparities in aid distribution.

Mutual aid groups, nonprofits, and labor unions are also vital for deploying post-disaster support. According to  Sonja Diaz , the federal government should look to these organizations as partners in developing more equitable relief strategies. Similarly, after researchers from the now-defunct  University of North Carolina Coastal Resilience Center  analyzed disaster relief inequities across four counties in North Carolina, they recommended that FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security take a  holistic approach  to mitigation planning, involving local government agencies and individuals. Engaging and learning from communities can include interviewing local faith-based organizations, business owners, emergency managers, and other stakeholders who are involved in disaster mitigation and recovery on the ground.