Exploring the Moderation of Climate-Adaptive Welfare and Ecowelfare on U.S. Welfare Enrollment after Natural Hazards

• In Event: Poverty and Environmental Inequity: Land, Heat, and Energy

Abstract

Background and Purpose

Climate risks, exacerbated by capitalist accumulation and hydrocarbon consumption, are leading to increasingly frequent and intense natural hazards that disproportionately affect less affluent and racially marginalized regions and deepen socioeconomic inequities. Welfare states have traditionally provided support during economic crises, yet their role in mitigating climate-induced risks remains unclear. This study examines the extent to which enrollment in traditional welfare (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families [TANF], Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program [SNAP], Unemployment Insurance [UI], and Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program [LIHEAP]), climate-adapted welfare (Disaster-SNAP [D-SNAP], Disaster-Unemployment Insurance [D-UI]), and ecowelfare programs (National Flood Insurance Program [NFIP], Individual Assistance Program [IAP]) relate to natural hazards in the United States. The findings from this study are especially salient given recent efforts to further retrench and federate both welfare and ecowelfare in the United States.

Methods

A longitudinal moderation analysis was conducted using state-level panel data on enrollment in TANF, SNAP, UI, and LIHEAP. Enrollment in each program was modeled as a function of lagged, time-varying measures of disaster intensity and key social, economic, and political controls. Longitudinal moderation analysis was utilized to examine how climate-adapted welfare (D-UI and D-SNAP) and ecowelfare programs (IAP and NFIP) moderate the relationship between disaster intensity and welfare enrollment.

Results

Preliminary analyses of the non-interacted base models indicate a positive association between enrollment in TANF, SNAP, and UI programs and lower-intensity hazards, whereas LIHEAP enrollment showed an unexpected negative association. Additionally, program-specific enrollment responses varied during high-intensity disasters, with TANF enrollment decreasing and SNAP enrollment increasing. It is hypothesized that climate-adapted and ecowelfare programs moderate these relationships for higher disaster intensities because those hazards are more likely to receive Presidential authorization for disaster assistance.

The average marginal effects from the preliminary moderation analysis results point to statistically significant interaction effects. D-UI and IHP seem to moderate TANF at higher disaster intensities with a negative association. NFIP has an unexpected positive association with SNAP at higher intensities, but IHP has a negative relationship. D-SNAP and IHP are approaching a positive relationship with UI, and IHP has an unexpected positive relationship with LIHEAP. These results both tentatively confirm the hypothesis of moderating relationships and highly texturize the relationships between programs.

Conclusions and Implications

The findings highlight a complex interplay between traditional welfare, climate-adapted welfare, and ecowelfare programs in response to climate-driven disasters. The divergence in enrollment patterns across programs underscores the need for nuanced policy approaches that consider the unique reactions of different welfare programs to varying disaster intensities. Policymakers should consider these differential impacts when designing ecowelfare policies to effectively mitigate climate risk and promote resilience, especially given the projected increase in disaster frequency and intensity. The associations between traditional welfare, climate-adapted welfare, ecowelfare programs, and natural hazards affirm the need for a robust ecowelfare state consciously designed to ameliorate evolving and differential climate risk and adapt to rapid changes from climate change.

Author

• Christopher Taylor Brown, University of California, Berkeley
  Presenting Author