Some cheerful news: Funding for Water Source Protection

 Last month, FEMA issued a policy update regarding environmental benefits, making it a lot easier for nature-based, or ‘green’ solutions to pass the benefit-cost requirement and be funded by FEMA hazard mitigation programs.

The new policy eliminates the need for complex modeling in many cases and opens FEMA's hazard mitigation funding programs to a much larger pool of “green” (nature-based) projects and applicants. 

FEMA is increasingly recognizing the role of nature-based solutions for building community resilience and mitigating the impacts of floods, wildfires, and drought. These advances are reflected in the recent policy updates that recognize the economic value of nature-based projects in benefit-cost analysis, including FEMA's 2013 and 2016 Environmental Benefits policies. FEMA requires benefit-cost analysis for virtually all-hazard mitigation funding, which totaled $1.2 billion in 2019 alone. 

FEMA Policy FP-108-024-02, titled "Ecosystem Service Benefits in Benefit-Cost Analysis for FEMA's Mitigation Programs Policy," recognizes that the natural environment is an essential component of a community's resilience strategy, and removes the 0.75 benefit-cost ratio threshold requirement. This means that the inclusion of environmental and social benefits is not limited in benefit-cost analysis, and nature-based hazard mitigation projects can now be considered cost-effective based on the value of these benefits alone. 

 Our colleagues at Earth Economics have been advocating for this inclusion into FEMA policy. With the concepts, framework, and economics behind the previous 2013 and 2016 policies. With the adoption of this new policy, they’ve been working with partners around the U.S. to build relationships with federal and state partners and craft project proposals to help partners access FEMA funding for nature-based projects. 

Questions? Ideas for ‘green’ projects?  Contact Johnny Mojica (jmojica@eartheconomics.org)