For example, we reported  that community goals such as building housing and promoting economic  development may be higher priorities than formulating mitigation  regulations that may include restrictive development regulations and more  stringent building codes. Information Required to Support Risk Decision Making is Imprecise, Incomplete, and Complex

In January 1998, we described three sets of issues that complicate  assessing the cost-effectiveness of actions to build resilience. Similarly, in our  February 2014 testimony on limiting fiscal exposure from and increasing  resilience to climate change, we noted that local decision makers need  expert assistance translating climate change information into something  that is locally relevant. These issues are  longstanding and difficult policy issues. We are encouraged that  DHS finalized the National Mitigation Framework in 2013 to coordinate  interagency and intergovernmental efforts and that the framework  established a Mitigation Framework Leadership Group to coordinate  mitigation efforts of relevant local, state, tribal, and federal organizations. Federal Response to Hurricane Sandy Demonstrated Increased Focus on Mitigation and Resilience-Building

In ongoing work on federal resilience efforts in the aftermath of Hurricane  Sandy, we identified three high-level actions that demonstrated an  intensified federal focus on incorporating resilience-building into the  recovery. Among other  things, the executive order charged the task force to work with partners in  the affected region to understand existing and future risks and  vulnerabilities from extreme weather events; identify resources and  authorities that strengthen community and regional resilience during  recovery; and plan for the rebuilding of critical infrastructure in a manner  that increases community and regional resilience. In August 2013, the Sandy Rebuilding Task Force issued the Hurricane  Sandy Rebuilding Strategy, which contained 69 recommendations to  various federal agencies and their nonfederal partners aimed at improving  recovery from both Hurricane Sandy and future disasters. We plan to issue a report on  these issues later this year. Congress Appropriated Funds to Key Federal Programs that Can Help Support Resilient Rebuilding

In January 2013, Congress passed and the President signed the Disaster  Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 (Sandy Supplemental), which  appropriated about $50 billion in funding to support recovery. These four  agencies administer five programs that play a key role in helping to  promote resilience-building as part of recovery: (1) FEMA’s Hazard  Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), (2) FEMA’s Public Assistance  Program (PA), (3) HUD’s Community Development Block Grant-Disaster  Recovery (CDBG-DR) Program, (4) DOT’s Federal Transit Administration  (FTA) Public Transportation Emergency Relief Program, and (5)  USACE’s Flood Risk Management Program. Changes to HMGP. SRIA  required FEMA to make recommendations for the development of a  national strategy to reduce costs on future disasters. Nonfederal Groups Have a Variety of Initiatives to Help Incentivize Resilience Building

As we have previously reported, most responsibility and authority for  resilience activities rests largely outside the federal government;  therefore, nonfederal incentives are also a critical piece of the overall  strategy to reduce future losses. Several examples of mitigation efforts at the state and local  levels help illustrate the variety of ways that incentives help drive  communities to be more resilient—with a range of activities from shoring  up building codes to facilitating buyouts of repetitive loss properties. As part of our ongoing work, we are reviewing studies about efforts to  build resilience to extreme weather events and climate change. For the  purposes of this statement, we selected illustrative examples from those  studies to describe a range of nonfederal efforts to incentivize mitigation. The U.S. Resiliency Council, a nonprofit organization based in  California, is working on creating building “report cards” to provide  technically defensible metrics to evaluate and communicate the  resilience of individual buildings. The initial focus is on seismic risk,  and officials plan to extend their efforts to creating metrics for  resilience to catastrophic wind and flood risk. GAO Related Products

Extreme Weather Events: Limiting Federal Fiscal Exposure and  Increasing the Nation’s Resilience. High Risk Series: GAO’s High-Risk Program.
Why GAO Did This Study

Multiple factors including increased disaster declarations, climate change effects, and insufficient premiums under the National Flood Insurance Program increase federal fiscal exposure to severe weather events. Managing fiscal exposure from climate change and the National Flood Insurance Program are both on GAO's High Risk list. GAO has previously reported that building resilience to protect against future damage is one strategy to help limit fiscal exposure. However, in prior reports GAO also identified multiple challenges to doing so. Responsibility for actions that enhance resilience rests largely outside the federal government, so nonfederal entities also play a key role.
This testimony discusses (1) resilience-building challenges GAO has previously identified; (2) federal efforts to facilitate resilience-building as part of Hurricane Sandy recovery; and (3) examples of nonfederal efforts to incentivize resilience building. This testimony is based on previous GAO reports issued from 1998 through 2014 related to hazard mitigation, climate change, flood insurance, and preliminary observations from GAO's ongoing work for this committee on federal resilience efforts related to the Sandy recovery. For the ongoing work, GAO reviewed documents such as the Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Strategy and a 2012 National Academies Study on building resilience. GAO also interviewed officials from FEMA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

What GAO Found

GAO has identified various challenges to resilience building—actions to help prepare and plan for, absorb, recover from, and more successfully adapt to adapt to adverse events including those caused by extreme weather. These include challenges for communities in balancing hazard mitigation investments with economic development goals, challenges for individuals in understanding and acting to limit their personal risk, and broad challenges with the clarity of information to inform risk decision making. GAO's work over more than 30 years demonstrates that these are longstanding policy issues, without easy solutions. The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) May 2013 release of a National Mitigation Framework and establishment of a group to help coordinate interagency and intergovernmental mitigation efforts offers one avenue for leadership on these issues.
In ongoing work on federal resilience efforts in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, GAO identified three high-level actions that demonstrated an intensified federal focus on incorporating resilience-building into the recovery.
The President issued an executive order to coordinate the recovery effort and created a task force that issued 69 recommendations aimed at improving recovery from Sandy and future disasters—including recommendations designed to facilitate resilient rebuilding.
Congress appropriated about $50 billion in supplemental funds for multiple recovery efforts, including at least five federal programs that help support resilience-building efforts. One of these, FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), is the only federal program designed specifically to promote mitigation against future losses in the wake of a disaster; while, another, the Public Transportation Emergency Relief Program made more than $4 billion available for transit resilience projects.
The Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 provided additional responsibilities and authorities related to FEMA's mitigation and recovery efforts. In response, FEMA has undertaken efforts to make HMGP easier for states to use—for example by streamlining application procedures. The act also provided additional authorities for FEMA to fund hazard mitigation with other disaster relief funds and required FEMA to provide recommendations for a national strategy on reducing the cost of future disasters to Congress, which FEMA finalized in September 2013.
For the purposes of this statement GAO reviewed studies that discuss resilience building and climate change adaptation and identified examples efforts at the state and local levels that illustrate a variety of nonfederal initiatives that may drive communities to build resilience. For example, a nonprofit group is creating report cards to assess the resilience of a building to earthquakes and plans to extend these efforts to wind and flood risk. In some localities public-private partnerships have helped promote efforts to buy properties that were at risk from repeat losses.