Introduction
The Atlantic and Gulf coasts of the United States are frequently hit by hurricanes, which continue to have a significant negative economic and human impact. As per the National Centres for Environmental Information, USA, Hurricane Helene was the deadliest US mainland hurricane since Katrina (2005) and the most expensive occurrence, costing an estimated $78.7 billion.
In 2024 alone, the United States saw 27 distinct billion-dollar weather and climate disasters, totalling over $182.7 billion. It also mentions that the pattern comes after a record-breaking 28 billion-dollar catastrophes in 2023. Although they only make up about 17% of these events since 1980, tropical cyclones are responsible for over half of all losses. These figures highlight the importance of readiness and the repercussions when it is inadequate.
Where the US Has Improved
According to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) statistics and post-season reviews, the potential of scientific monitoring, forecasting, and warning has significantly improved. Track and intensity projections have been continuously improving. This results in earlier watches and warnings and improved evacuation decision-making. However, when implemented, state and federal mitigation programs can be quite economical.
According to the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS), adopting modern building rules saves about $11 for every $1 invested, and a variety of mitigation strategies financed by federal grants have benefit-cost ratios of about 6:1 on average. The US Government Accountability Office mentions that building codes and mitigation are also cited by FEMA as high-return investments.
Furthermore, construction codes in hurricane-prone areas have been tightened in a number of coastal states. According to independent studies conducted by the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS), states such as Florida and Virginia have adopted and enforced top-tier codes, reflecting lessons learnt from devastating landfalls.
The Paradox of Preparedness: Recurrent Deficits
Three structural flaws still restrict US readiness and result in significant losses and preventable suffering, notwithstanding advancements in science and policy.
1) Legacy Housing and Uneven Building Codes
Because they were constructed before current hurricane rules, many older homes in the United States—often referred to as “legacy” housing—lack the most basic storm safeguards. For instance, a severe hurricane had never tested the majority of homes constructed on the East and Gulf coasts in the 1970s and 1980s. According to the Natural Hazards Centre, hurricane risk was viewed as insignificant during that protracted quiet time, and damaged homes were only rebuilt rather than fortified against future storms.
It also mentions that the poor construction methods and chaotic development resulted from this carelessness, and building regulations were not strictly enforced. Because of this, a lot of heritage homes still do not have concrete ties, impact-resistant windows, or reinforced roof connectors, which increases their vulnerability to significant wind and flood damage during a storm.
Building codes have gradually improved, though frequently only after disasters revealed flaws. Prior to the 2000s, builders were free to choose from hundreds of local ordinances in Florida. AIA Florida’s report describes it as “disjointed and chaotic.” Hurricane Andrew, which struck in 1992 and caused $27 billion in damage and 65 fatalities, brought these flaws to light. Florida responded by enacting the Florida Building Code (FBC), a single statewide code.
Thornton Tomasetti states that in high-risk regions, the FBC mandates significantly stronger, wind-resistant construction, such as hurricane straps, reinforced roofs, and shutters or impact windows. The three main regional code groups united to form the International Code Council at about the same time, resulting in a standardized collection of model codes that are updated on a regular basis.
The IBHS’s 2024 “Rating the States” mentions that while protection levels frequently do, hurricane wind and water do not respect county limits. Significant differences exist in the Gulf and Atlantic seaboard’s adoption and implementation of contemporary hurricane-resistant rules. Because of this diversity, the likelihood of damage to two houses located a few miles apart can differ significantly.
A significant number of legacy homes that were constructed prior to modern codes exacerbate the problem, and despite evidence that retrofits and code-plus measures are beneficial, upgrades are still optional and under-incentivized in many localities.
2) Interdependent, Fragile Infrastructure
Infrastructure systems such as water and wastewater, transportation, communications, and electricity are all affected by hurricanes. Critical services and supply chains malfunction during days-long power outages, making response and recovery more difficult. Although upgrades and hardening are uneven and often delayed, federal evaluations confirm that mitigation investments in “lifelines” (power, water, transportation, and communications) yield excellent returns and can achieve benefit-cost ratios far over 6:1.
3) Funding, Governance, and Program Design Challenges
There is still hostility in the government disaster enterprise. In its 2025 High-Risk update, GAO noted capacity limitations, surge staffing shortages, and the magnitude and complexity of recent catastrophes as reasons for adding federal disaster aid to its government-wide “High-Risk List.”
Separately, under FEMA’s Risk Rating 2.0, GAO has highlighted difficulties in explaining and implementing new risk-based insurance pricing as well as in the timing of post-disaster recovery. These problems impact the fairness and effectiveness of recovery following storms as well as the incentives for preparation prior to them.
Why the US Houses Remain So Vulnerable to Disasters
The majority of homes in the United States are made of wood frames, which are rapid and inexpensive to construct yet naturally susceptible to hurricane damage. Compared to concrete or masonry, wood-frame walls and roofs are more easily torn apart by strong winds because they are comparatively light.
According to May Residential, wood homes “are highly vulnerable to wind damage” in reality. Additionally, wood absorbs water and may rot or deform during flooding. In comparison, walls made of reinforced concrete or cinderblock are far more resilient to wind loads (some are made to withstand 200 mph or more) and do not deteriorate in the presence of moisture.
Since many homes in the South are constructed on concrete slabs that are directly on the ground, foundation design is extremely important. According to GroundWorks, solid slabs may withstand wind-induced uplift, but they may split or sink if floodwaters remove the underlying soil.
Although homes with crawlspace or raised pier-and-beam foundations are less likely to flood, they sometimes have exposed vents and wooden beams underneath that can rot or collapse in the event of flooding.
Vulnerability is also influenced by the location of homes. Due to the rapid urbanization of coastal areas, more homes are currently situated directly in hurricane trajectories. A study by the National Hazards Centre mentions that following Andrew, the concentration of people and property on the coast “grew many-fold” in Florida and elsewhere, and insured coastal values increased significantly (for instance, Florida’s coastal property value soared from $565 billion to $872 billion in just a few years).
In these dangerous neighbourhoods, mobile or manufactured homes are sometimes the least expensive housing options. A local Florida news source, Wuft, mentions that there are over 822,000 of them in Florida alone, which makes up 10% of the state’s housing stock compared to 6% nationwide.
Importantly, older mobile homes—those constructed prior to 1976 and before wind standards were implemented for them in 1994—are particularly vulnerable during storms. It also mentions that the outdated units that “cannot hold up against hurricane-strength winds” are the issue, not the code-compliant modern manufactured homes. Older mobile homes can be completely destroyed by even a moderate hurricane because the majority are built on slabs or blocks that are at ground level. Many susceptible units are grouped together in crowded coastal parks or projects.
The US housing stock is particularly vulnerable to hurricane destruction due to a variety of variables, including a robust coastal population, a significant number of ageing mobile homes, and a huge number of frail wood-frame structures.
The NFIP and Risk Signals: Pricing, Repetitive Losses, and Equity
At the core of coastal risk management is the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), although it has long faced financial and policy challenges. Incentives to upgrade, retrofit, or move were weakened for decades by subsidised rates and repetitive-loss buildings. The goal of Risk Rating 2.0 is to better match premiums to property-level risk; the GAO has suggested increased openness on actuarial assumptions and the financial outlook, as well as improved policyholder communication.
As per the National Association of Counties, recognizing the program’s critical role in fostering resilience in households and communities, Congress is still debating NFIP’s reauthorization and modifications to address debt, affordability, and mitigation incentives.
Evacuation and the Protection of Vulnerable Populations
Being prepared involves more than just financial resources and infrastructure; it also involves people. According to historical public health evaluations of the disaster, older persons accounted for a disproportionate amount of deaths from Hurricane Katrina; Louisiana data show that about half of the Katrina victims were 75 years of age or older. Similar trends can be seen in more recent incidents.
For example, Florida medical examiners documented at least 149 storm-related deaths during Hurricane Ian (2022), with follow-up analysis showing a high percentage among elderly and medically frail individuals. These results highlight the necessity of continuity of care planning, accessible shelters (particularly for people with medical dependencies), and focused evacuation assistance.
Why Losses Stay High
Even with improved projections, there are other factors that contribute to the “why” of ongoing losses:
Exposure Continues to Increase
Even minor storms can result in significant losses since more people and valuable assets are at risk along the shore. According to NOAA’s billion-dollar disaster data, the number and expense of extreme events have increased significantly over the past five years in comparison to the long-term norm.
The Cost of Mitigation Gaps is High
As per the US Homeland Security Department, FEMA, high returns to mitigation are consistently found by NIBS and FEMA; projected damages remain high when codes are not implemented or enforced, and retrofits are delayed.
Overloading Recovery Systems
Given the increasing frequency of compounding disasters, GAO’s high-risk designation for federal disaster relief indicates strained capacity. This has an impact on the speed at which survivors receive assistance and the degree to which lessons learnt are incorporated into future readiness.
What Works: Evidence-based Steps to Close the Gap
The audit and study record suggest doable, uncontroversial actions that quantifiably lower losses and save lives:
1. Adopt and Implement the State’s and the Region’s Current Model Building Codes
Strong codes, rigorous inspection procedures, and frequent revisions have helped the states with the highest IBHS ratings. Localities should enact storm rules immediately and enforce them strictly in cases where statewide codes are weak or nonexistent.
2. Quicken the Retrofits of Important Facilities and Heritage Housing
Give low- and moderate-income households and inhabitants who are medically vulnerable priority when offering strong, well-publicized incentives for wind and flood retrofits (roof-deck attachments, secondary water barriers, shutters/impact glazing, elevation/vents). These investments are supported by benefit-cost analysis.
3. Harden Infrastructure “Lifelines”
As suggested by the National Institute of Building Sciences, under the direction of risk mapping and continuity-of-operations plans, target telecom hubs, water/wastewater facilities, hospital backup power, and grid components (substations, distribution lines in surge/wind corridors) for relocation, elevation, or flood proofing. There is evidence that lifeline initiatives have high benefit-cost ratios.
4. Strengthen Risk Signals and Affordability Side-by-Side
While combining reforms with means-tested aid and community mitigation, which can gradually reduce risk and premiums, keep enhancing NFIP pricing transparency so that rates more accurately reflect risk. According to the National Association of Counties NACO, a means of stabilizing the program and funding mitigation that lowers recurring losses is provided by Congressional reauthorization.
5. Invest in Evacuation Support for Vulnerable Populations
Create registrations and opt-in processes for residents who require assistance with evacuation; arrange accessible transportation in advance; set up medical-needs shelters; and work with home health organizations and healthcare providers. The mortality trends from Katrina and Ian demonstrate the life-saving nature of these actions.
6. Scale What We Already Know Works—and Measure It
Require post-project loss-avoidance reviews, keep mitigation funding sources steady, and incorporate GAO recommendations to increase staffing and surge capacity throughout the catastrophe business.
Conclusion
America is not starting from scratch because forecasting skills are more advanced than ever, some states have robust hurricane regulations, and the ROI of mitigation is well demonstrated. However, program-design frictions, infrastructural weaknesses, unequal policy acceptance, and exposure growth keep losses high and communities at risk.
More “lessons learnt” would be translated into fewer deaths and less losses with a unified national approach based on contemporary codes, fair retrofits, hardened lifelines, more intelligent insurance signals, focused evacuation assistance, and ongoing institutional capacity. Implementation at the risk level is the issue, but the data clearly shows that the payoff is real.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please visit the Submissions page.
To stay updated with the latest jobs, CSS news, internships, scholarships, and current affairs articles, join our Community Forum!
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
Ayesha Saeed is an international relations graduate with a strong interest in diplomacy, global politics, peace and conflict studies, and climate change. Her work focuses on research and understanding how international systems affect global peace and sustainability. She is especially interested in how countries cooperate to solve issues like conflict and climate change.