MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135397412 · doi:10.69739/jece.v2i2.1701

Leveraging FEMA Hazard Mitigation Funding to Preserve Affordable Housing in Climate-Vulnerable Communities: A Narrative Policy Review

2025· article· W7135397412 on OpenAlexaff
Miracle A. Hilliman, Linda Egbubine, Emmanuel Kwasi Xonu, Nnaemeka Phil Eke-okocha, Sylviastella Favour Peteranaba

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environment Climate and Ecology · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordable housingCorporate governanceHazardEquity (law)Resilience (materials science)Agency (philosophy)Emergency managementSubsidized housing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is increasingly destabilizing affordable housing systems by transforming occasional disaster-related damage into a persistent driver of housing loss and displacement. Low-income households and renters are disproportionately exposed to climate-related hazards because historically affordable housing has often been developed in areas vulnerable to flooding, extreme heat, and wildfires. In the United States, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers major climate adaptation initiatives through its Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs. Although these programs are primarily designed to reduce disaster risk and financial losses, their broader implications for housing affordability and community stability remain insufficiently examined. This narrative policy review synthesizes interdisciplinary research on disaster risk reduction, climate adaptation, housing affordability, and equity governance to examine how FEMA hazard mitigation funding influences affordable housing outcomes in climate-vulnerable communities. The review finds that widely used mitigation strategies, particularly property acquisition and demolition, can unintentionally reduce the supply of affordable housing and displace tenants without guaranteeing replacement housing. In contrast, in-situ mitigation and community-scale resilience measures that could preserve housing stability are less frequently implemented. Institutional barriers further complicate the integration of housing affordability goals within hazard mitigation policy. These barriers include benefit–cost analysis frameworks that undervalue social outcomes, fragmented governance between emergency management and housing institutions, and short planning horizons that overlook long-term housing impacts. By synthesizing these insights, the article reframes hazard mitigation as an investment in social infrastructure and proposes a housing-centered framework for climate adaptation policy. The findings highlight that preserving affordable housing and preventing displacement must become central objectives within hazard mitigation strategies to ensure equitable and effective climate resilience. Without housing stability, climate adaptation programs risk exacerbating the very vulnerabilities they are intended to address.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environment Climate and EcologySame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207