Table 1.

Renters’ climate inequities

Renters’ climate inequities	Description
Less preparedness before a disaster event (MDC n.d.).	Renters often have little or no incentive, or authority, to invest in improvements to a rental home that will reduce the potential impacts of an event such as a flood. Additionally, the 2017 American Housing Survey found renters to be less prepared for emergencies (including evacuations) with only 58% of renters having access to $2000 for an emergency compared to 85% of homeowners having that cash access (FEMA n.d.-c).
Co-vulnerabilities	Renting households are more likely to be facing other financial, family, or professional challenges that use up limited resources. In fact, at least 46% of renters spend 30% or more of their income on rent and this percentage is even higher in high-risk areas like California and Florida (Insurance Information Institute 2020). In the 2018 US Department of Housing and Urban Development American Housing Survey, it was estimated that “renters are three times more likely [than homeowners] to need financial assistance to evacuate during a major disaster” (US Census Bureau 2018). Rental housing may also be old or of low quality in certain areas, making the structure itself more vulnerable to an extreme weather event. And, in some areas, rental housing is more likely to be in closer proximity to industrial or manufacturing facilities, putting them at greater risk if an extreme weather event causes an accident at such a facility (MDC n.d.). Additionally, for immigrant and other vulnerable populations in rental housing, concerns about legal status or language barriers may prevent individuals from obtaining appropriate insurance or assistance.
Lack of knowledge of area risk	FEMA floodmaps are used by mortgage lenders, insurance companies, and builders, so homeowners are often well aware if their property is located in a high-risk area, but tenants are often not aware of flood risks, or of potential support available if their home is destroyed or damaged in an extreme weather event. An example of this can be seen with the Willow River apartment complex in Salem, VA, where an apartment complex with 300 units has suffered repeated flood damage dating to 1977 but continued to rebuild with federal insurance proceeds, with buildings repaired and then new renters move in, presumably unaware of the risks (Hammack 2019). Additionally, outreach and educational materials that may be mailed out to those in high flood-risk areas by local authorities typically go to the homeowner’s address using parcel or tax data as opposed to going to the residents through a door-to-door effort, so the tenant may never receive such information. There is also a significant lack of requirements or enforcement by local authorities ensuring the right to information and disclosure of flood risks be passed from the owner to the tenants. Some localities do have flood disclosure rules, and these vary significantly across jurisdictions. As an example, in Texas, landlords are not required to disclose to their tenants that the residence has flooded in the past (Rice 2019). Where disclosure rules do exist, those rules often do not guarantee that renters are fully informed due to confounding factors such as language barriers or complex relationships (that can involve power disparities) between the owner and tenants. Additionally, repetitive loss data is very difficult to obtain from FEMA (considered confidential information) should someone try to understand a property’s history of flooding independently (FEMA 2019).
1	Most homeowners will have homeowners insurance, or a mortgage which requires such insurance. Depending on the location and proximity to floodways and floodplains of the property, homeowners may also be required to have insurance through the NFIP. In the 2017 American Housing Survey, not a single renter responded as having flood insurance (US Census Bureau 2018). Many renters are not aware of what types of flood of disaster insurance may be available to them, or if available, it may not be affordable. Additionally, renters may not be able to afford the premiums associated with renters’ insurance or flood insurance even if they are aware of the risks. Renters insurance also will often only cover the contents of the dwelling and neither that nor flood insurance will reimburse tenants for temporary housing, relocation costs, and other expenses incurred immediately following an event (FEMA 2020b).
Rental turnover may be high, resulting in reduced support from immediate neighbor networks	Renters in more transient neighborhoods may not have the established relationships with neighbors that can serve as a lifeline in a disaster. Even seemingly simple acts such as knowing a home are occupied and checking on a neighbor during or immediately following a disaster may be less likely without knowledge or personal connection to nearby tenants (MDC n.d.).
Lack of funding or intervention programs directly (and primarily) targeting the tenant population	Community development organizations and federal and state investments, even when focused on affordable housing, tend to preferentially favor homeowners (Ahmed 2019). Even if these programs are successful in moving some renters into homeownership, the remaining tenants are overlooked. As just one example, in November 2018, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development allocated more than $5 billion in initial assistance to Texas after Hurricane Harvey. $1.1 billion of that was allocated to a homeowner assistance program, $275 million for home-buyouts, $100 million for reimbursements to homeowners for certain direct post-disaster expenses, and $250 million—only 5% of the total award—focused on affordable rental properties (US HUD 2018). As another example, Washington et al. (2006) documented huge disparities between the funding provided by the federal government that supports homeownership and community development programs, and those that support low income rental housing—of an $11.5 billion grant in Louisiana, only $920 million was allocated to the latter.
Post-disaster impacts are compounded by the above factors	Post-disaster risks that are disproportionally borne by renters include the following: the loss of the home entirely if landlords use the “opportunity” to sell or upgrade the property; no or little immediate financial relief aid; loss of rental housing stock causing rental prices to increase; or lack of replacement rental housing in the immediate vicinity which could result in renters having to relocate farther away from work/school or out of the area completely (MDC n.d.); additional stress that can compound health issues which can result in medical bills or loss of income from missed work (Ahmed 2019). These types of post-disaster impacts can lead to the renter population falling even further behind their homeowner counterparts, and because of the existing disparity in homeownership rates between white and non-white people, racial wealth gaps may correspondingly increase in a particular area after a disaster. Additionally, local or state laws may put renters in even worse situations during or following a flood event. For example, in Texas, the law forbids renters from withholding rent even if the dwelling is not habitable (Miller 2017; Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. § 92.058); thus, renters may still be required to pay rent while being displaced and having to pay for other housing accommodations while the property is flooded or under repairs.