Surprise: We Need To Change The Governance Of Property Due To Global Boiling

I wonder what that change could be

Rethinking the governance of property can help communities adapt to climate change

Climate change is bringing threats such as flooding, wildfires, extreme heat, and drought to communities across the United States and the world, endangering people, infrastructure, ecosystems, and properties. Unfortunately, our current systems of property and land governance—including land use, taxes, insurance, and zoning—often limit how well we can respond to those threats. These systems tend to treat land as a fixed set of parcels mainly meant to build wealth, which can lead to inequality and an inability to collectively adapt at scale.

While property and land governance systems in the U.S. have historically supported democracy and opportunity for some, they have also contributed to divisions and disadvantages for others. This way of managing land is fueling growing inequality, housing crises, and racial wealth gaps. And in the process, it’s also leaving many groups more vulnerable to climate risks. A 2021 Environmental Protection Agency report found that socially vulnerable populations—including racial minorities, low-income individuals, and people with less education—are far more vulnerable to climate change hazards such as flooding and extreme temperatures. And as research by Brookings and others has shown, rental housing, public housing, and manufactured housing—which are forms of housing and land tenure disproportionately used by low-income households—all face elevated vulnerability to climate impacts.

Planning for climate adaptation often ignores the fact that property is a social institution that can change; people assume current systems are fixed and unchangeable. But they’re not, and we can do better. Addressing climate challenges is not just about engineering or funding (though both are important topics). It also requires that we rethink and improve our property institutions and practices so they serve everyone better.

This is a very long piece. I wonder where they are going with it?

The combined effect is that it is difficult for communities to adapt to climate change in ways that advance affordable, resilient housing and ecological restoration at a meaningful scale. In the absence of collective adaptation, reliance on individual property-by-property adaptation can widen inequalities, both in “sending communities” from which people flee and in communities that receive displaced people. These practices may also contribute to climate gentrification, in which resilience investments reduce housing affordability and contribute to the displacement of current residents. Research suggests that climate gentrification is already underway in some cities, including Miami, Tampa, and other South Florida communities.

Really, what they are saying is that government should be in charge of all property, essentially being a national HOA, telling you what you can and cannot do. “Collective adaptation.” Modern Socialism. Property will really be in the hands of government. Surprise?