Resilient Futures Initiative

Case studies

Solution Provide a free guidebook plus facilitated cohort and “Quick Start” support to help under-resourced local leaders identify climate vulnerabilities and emissions sources, prioritize strategies, and produce actionable climate resilience plans aligned to local needs. Key challenge Small and mid-sized communities often lack the budget and bandwidth to take climate action, even when relevant strategies exist across local planning documents. Context Geos Institute created Climate Ready Communities in response to the needs of small and mid-sized communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis. Building on more than 15 years of community work through its ClimateWise initiative, the program is structured around a free “Practical Guide to Building Climate Resilience” and a step-by-step roadmap to help local leaders understand vulnerabilities and emissions, develop strategies, and translate them into an actionable plan reflecting local needs, values, and realities. Since 2019, the guide has been downloaded over 2,000 times, and partnerships formed in 2023 and 2025 expanded delivery models and the inclusion of both adaptation and mitigation. Solution in practice Climate Ready Communities is delivered through a guidebook-centered planning process and (in its current form) a cohort model led by an expert facilitator, where multiple communities work through the planning steps together and learn from peers. For communities that are under-resourced but positioned to move quickly, the “Quick Start Process” provides facilitated support (including a Navigator) to identify and prioritize resilience actions already approved in existing plans, surface strategies embedded in local documents, clarify remaining gaps, and define actionable next steps to build momentum toward resilience goals. Impact / outcome Guide downloaded 2,000+ times since 2019; cohort and Quick Start support for under-resourced communities. Next steps Adapt and translate the guidebook-and-cohort model for insurability outcomes by aligning planning outputs to insurance-relevant risk information (e.g., standardized hazard exposure and mitigation action tracking), and recruit additional delivery partners (e.g., regional collaboratives, universities, and facilitator networks) to scale cohorts and Quick Start support for under-resourced communities while maintaining a consistent, step-by-step process that leads to implementable actions. Organizations involved Authoring: Geos Institute Implementation partners Civil Society Organizations; Data Providers
USA
Step-by-step climate resilience planning roadmap and cohort facilitation — Geos Institute Climate Ready Communities
Solution Model wildfire loss under multiple forest fuel-treatment scenarios using a catastrophe risk model modified for fuel landscape changes to quantify avoided average annual loss and net present value of mitigation. Key challenge Fuel reduction needs are vast and costly, and communities lack replicable, decision-grade quantification of avoided losses needed to prioritize and finance mitigation at scale. Context Recent wildfire seasons in the United States have produced severe impacts, including 10.2 million acres burned and an estimated $17.1 billion in losses in 2020. A century of fire suppression has increased fuel loads, while hotter and drier conditions linked to climate change exacerbate fire risk. With about 50 million homes in the wildland-urban interface and growth continuing, the scale of mitigation required is large and current public investment levels are far below estimated needs across the western U.S. Solution in practice AFF and Moody’s (formerly RMS) applied the RMS US Wildfire HD Model to Grass Valley, California (population at risk stated as 76,000) and modified the modeling to reflect changes to the fuel landscape from hazardous fuels reduction. The analysis tested eight treatment scenarios varying the share of landscape treated (3.7% to 18.4%), fuel types, and treatment directionality, then estimated impacts on average annual loss to infrastructure and the net present value of fuel modification over a 15-year period. The modeled scenarios indicated 21–59% avoided average annual loss to infrastructure and an estimated $13–$17 million net present value under certain treatment and maintenance assumptions. Impact / outcome 21-59% avoided average annual loss to infrastructure; USD 13-17m net present value over 15 years (modelled). Next steps Extend the modeling to additional asset classes (such as carbon, water quality, and human health) and incorporate changing climate conditions, while also developing a community-level financial mechanism that can fund fuel treatments at scale based on the quantified avoided-loss benefits. Organizations involved Authoring: Moody's RMS; American Forest Foundation (AFF) Implementation partners Data Providers
USA
Quantifying avoided infrastructure loss from hazardous fuels reduction — Grass Valley, California (American Forest Foundation & Moody’s/RMS)
Solution Create a special district parcel tax on properties inside a defined wildfire hazard boundary, generating stable multi-year revenue for place-level vegetation management, evacuation route protection and fire patrols that no individual property owner can deliver alone. Key challenge Wildfire mitigation in the Oakland Hills competed for general fund dollars against every other city priority amid a USD 177 million budget shortfall, leaving the risk-reduction work that determines whether homes in the area remain insurable both chronically underfunded and repeatedly interrupted. Context The 1991 East Bay Hills fire burned 1,500 acres, killed 25 people, destroyed more than 3,500 homes and caused about USD 2.99 billion in losses in 2023 dollars. Since then Oakland has funded fire prevention through a succession of assessment districts that lapsed repeatedly: a Wildfire Prevention Assessment District from 1992 to 1997, only basic services from 1997 to 2003, a ten-year reinstatement from 2003, and a failed ballot measure in 2013. The affected area is the peri-urban wildland-urban interface of the Oakland Hills, where the median household income is greater than USD 120,000. Insurers have issued non-renewal notices and raised premiums across the area, and non-renewals continue to grow and expand into locations previously considered insurable by carriers. In May 2024 the city adopted its first Vegetation Management Plan, a ten-year plan covering approximately 1,924 acres of city-owned land and 308 miles of roadway - but with no dedicated funding to deliver it, leaving mitigation competing against other priorities within a general fund facing a nearly USD 177 million shortfall. Solution in practice In November 2024 voters inside Oakland's Wildfire Prevention Zone - Cal Fire's Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone plus adjacent properties, around 25,000 parcels - approved Measure MM with roughly 70% support, clearing the required two-thirds threshold. The tax took effect on 1 July 2025 and runs for 20 years, levying USD 99 per single-family home and USD 65 per apartment or condominium, with non-residential parcels charged by frontage and square footage and annual CPI-linked increases capped at 5%. It raises an estimated USD 2.67 million in its first year, dedicated to implementing the Vegetation Management Plan: expanded roadside clearing to protect emergency evacuation routes, enhanced fire patrols on high-danger days, expanded goat grazing for fuel reduction, and public education for residents, businesses and property owners. Annual parcel inspections deliberately remain on the general fund so that new revenue goes to mitigation rather than administration. An oversight committee receives an independent audit of expenses and an annual report, and makes recommendations directly to City Council. Exemptions apply for very low-income homeowners (at or below 60% of area median income) and seniors below 80% AMI; the tax is halved for nonprofit-owned senior, disabled and low-income rental housing; and the city's Rent Adjustment Program prevents the cost being passed to most tenants. In parallel, the 2024 cohort of the Howden / Resilient Cities Network / Sustainable Markets Initiative Global Risk and Resilience Fellowship worked with the City of Oakland resilience team from March to October 2024, giving city leaders an understanding of underwriter and carrier perspectives, a toolkit for engaging carriers on withdrawal decisions, and a realistic view of what can be done locally to reduce the protection gap. Impact / outcome Measure MM passed with about 70% support; about USD 2.67m in year one for vegetation management across ~25,000 parcels. Next steps The Howden Fellowship’s key recommendation to the City of Oakland and its counterparts was to continue mitigation and education efforts, with a view to ensuring homeowners can reduce their risk exposure as much as possible; a focus on risk reduction matters because a solution to the lack of access to affordable insurance relies heavily on changes to State regulation in California, which the city has no direct control over. Educating the public about mitigation and insurance matters will support more informed and timely decision-making and can help communities avoid underinsurance or lapses in coverage, and in addition to preventing the start and spread of wildfires, mitigation efforts will encourage carriers to begin or continue to write policies in Oakland. The Fellowship gave City stakeholders a better understanding of underwriter and carrier perspectives on homeowners insurance, a toolkit to engage with carriers around the factors resulting in withdrawal of cover, and a clear understanding of what can realistically be done to reduce the insurance protection gap. On the regulatory side, the playbook cites Colorado’s HB 1182, passed in 2025, which requires insurers to account for property, community and landscape-scale mitigation in both pricing and coverage decisions, and offers a model other jurisdictions could adopt to incentivize this behavior. Under Measure MM, an oversight committee receives an independent audit of expenses and an annual report on funded activities and makes recommendations directly to Oakland City Council. Organizations involved Authoring: Resilient Cities Network; SPUR Actors: City of Oakland; Howden; Sustainable Markets Initiative Implementation partners Local Governments; Regulators & Policymakers; Civil Society Organizations; Insurers
USA
A voter-approved wildfire parcel tax funding place-level fuel reduction - Oakland Measure MM, California
Solution Secure permanent agricultural conservation easements on privately held floodplain farmland and implement farm-level Agricultural Conservation Plans to improve soil health and reduce runoff and flood impacts. Key challenge Runoff-driven water quality degradation and flood risk in an interconnected watershed spanning urban and rural areas, requiring durable protection of productive floodplain farmland and adoption of conservation practices. Context The Milwaukee River and connected streams face excessive phosphorus, sediment and bacteria from runoff across both urban and rural landscapes, threatening watershed health. Protecting productive farmland along waterways is positioned as vital for preserving the watershed and strengthening resilience to severe weather. The Working Soils® Program focuses on permanently protecting privately held working lands within the watershed floodplain while keeping them in agricultural production. Solution in practice The Conservation Fund works with landowners to secure agricultural easements on priority floodplain parcels, allowing owners to retain title and continue farming while permanently restricting uses inconsistent with conservation goals. Participating landowners and operators then collaborate with Natural Resources Conservation Service staff to implement an Agricultural Conservation Plan intended to enhance soil health and proactively mitigate future flooding. The Milwaukee River Watershed Conservation Partnership was created to coordinate collaboration and investment in conservation practices, and from 2016–2021 NRCS Regional Conservation Partnership Program (Farm Bill) funding supported targeted activities and results. Impact / outcome Permanent easements on priority floodplain farmland with farm conservation plans (NRCS funding 2016-2021). Next steps The Making Allies partnership initiative is now actively continuing to safeguarding floodplains, mitigating flood risk, preserving agricultural lands, improving water quality and delivering nutritious food — all while offering valuable support to local farmers. Organizations involved Authoring: The Conservation Fund Actors: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS); Milwaukee River Watershed Conservation Partnership Implementation partners Civil Society Organizations; Regulators & Policymakers; Infrastructure Owners & Operators
USA
Permanent agricultural easements to protect floodplains — Milwaukee River Watershed (Working Soils Program)
Solution Apply neighborhood-scale wildfire mitigation standards to new housing developments so that home design, spacing, defensible space, and perimeter treatment work together to reduce ignition and structure-to-structure fire spread Key challenge Wildfire losses are driven not only by individual home vulnerability but also by neighborhood layout, perimeter exposure, ember intrusion, and fire spread between structures Context IBHS expanded its Wildfire Prepared program to include a Neighborhood designation aimed at reducing conflagration risk at community scale. KB Home’s Dixon Trail in Escondido became the first new-home community to achieve the designation, while Mercury partnered with IBHS to support insurance discounts for certified wildfire-prepared homes. Solution in practice The designation requires mitigation at both home and neighborhood scale. At Dixon Trail, homes were built to the IBHS Wildfire Prepared Home Plus standard and the neighborhood design incorporated features such as Class A fire-rated roofs, ember- and flame-resistant vents, non-combustible zones, defensible space, and separation between structures. Mercury Insurance introduced premium incentives tied to IBHS wildfire-prepared designations for eligible homes. Impact / outcome Dixon Trail (Escondido) was the first new-home community to earn the Wildfire Prepared Neighborhood designation; Mercury offers premium incentives for designated homes. Next steps Expand neighborhood-scale wildfire standards beyond pilot developments, strengthen insurer recognition of verified mitigation measures, and build stronger links between subdivision design, resilience certification, and long-term insurability. Organizations involved Authoring: Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS) Actors: KB Home; Mercury Insurance Implementation partners Civil Society Organizations; Property value chain stakeholders; Insurers; Local Governments
USA
IBHS Wildfire Prepared Neighborhood designation — KB Home and Mercury Insurance
Solution Use high-resolution, insurance industry catastrophe flood-and-loss modeling to quantify how mangrove extent changes storm-surge flood depths and resulting property losses by comparing “With Mangroves” vs “No Mangroves” scenarios. Key challenge Mangrove impacts on storm-surge losses are spatially variable and storm-severity dependent, with mixed effects for properties inside or seaward of mangrove forests and limited fine-scale evidence for decision-making. Context The study analyzes Florida, a coastline with high hurricane storm-surge exposure, valuable coastal properties, and extensive mangrove forests. Using kilometer-scale flood and loss modeling (∼100 m in the coastal floodplain), it estimates how mangroves modify storm surge and resulting damages, both as average annual loss (AAL) in Collier County using representative synthetic storms drawn from a 100,000-year catalog, and for historical events Hurricane Irma (2017) and Hurricane Ian (2022) across southern Florida. Reported results include annual avoided losses of US$67 million in Collier County and event-scale reductions of US$725 million (14%) for Irma and about US$4.1 billion (≈30%) for Ian from storm surge damages. Solution in practice The authors apply an insurance industry-standard catastrophe risk modeling workflow that couples a physics-based storm surge/overland flooding model with an economic loss model to estimate property-level storm-surge losses under two land-cover scenarios: present-day mangroves (“With Mangroves”) and a counterfactual where mangroves are absent (“No Mangroves,” represented by lower-friction land cover such as developed open space/open water). The approach quantifies avoided losses by comparing damages between scenarios, and maps spatial patterns showing that mangroves always reduce losses for landward properties, with significant benefits extending roughly 11–14 km inland depending on the event, while effects for properties inside and seaward of mangroves are net positive but mixed and can sometimes increase damages. Impact / outcome USD 67m a year in avoided losses in Collier County; USD 725m (14%) for Irma and about USD 4.1bn (~30%) for Ian. Next steps Use the quantified, high-resolution evidence on avoided losses and spatial variability to inform targeted conservation/restoration and adaptive management of mangroves as “natural infrastructure,” prioritize investments where landward property protection benefits are highest, and incorporate up-to-date mangrove extent (and ideally health/density) data into storm-surge risk assessments to support incentives such as premium reductions or resilience investments; further studies are also indicated to better capture waves, dynamic vegetation drag, and more realistic counterfactual land-use scenarios. Organizations involved Authoring: Cell Reports Sustainability - peer-reviewed study Implementation partners Data Providers; Insurers; Civil Society Organizations; Regulators & Policymakers
USA
Quantifying mangrove storm-surge loss reduction using insurance catastrophe models — Florida (Collier County; Hurricanes Irma & Ian)
Solution Insurer-led flood risk assessment, site visits, and policy-supported resilience planning for port-adjacent assets Key challenge Port resilience is difficult because risks are systemic and interdependent across neighboring assets Context Japan’s ports are highly exposed to sea-level rise, storm surge, coastal flooding, and typhoon-related impacts, while interdependence across assets complicates incentives for individual investment Solution in practice After heavy losses at a major vehicle storage yard, Tokio Marine assessed the site’s flood risk and recommended raising ground levels. The company implemented the investment, and later experiences showed no comparable severe losses. The case also informed wider MLIT-led guidance for coordinated port resilience planning Impact / outcome Raising ground levels at the storage yard - no comparable severe losses since; informed MLIT-led port resilience guidance. Next steps Standardize port and coastal risk assessment methods, strengthen coordination across neighboring port assets and operators, and connect insurer-led analytics more directly to investment planning and public policy frameworks. Organizations involved Authoring: Tokio Marine; Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) Actors: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), Japan Implementation partners Insurers; Regulators & Policymakers; Infrastructure Owners & Operators; Local Governments
Japan
Applying insurance analytics and policy frameworks to enable port resilience investments — Japan
Solution Physical risk assessment and resilience upgrades linked to improved insurance terms Key challenge Adaptation investments require upfront spending while benefits are often uncertain and not always reflected in insurance pricing Context Following severe extreme weather including the Haikui Typhoon and Black Rain of 2023, Link assessed its Hong Kong portfolio and identified flooding and typhoons as dominant acute risks Solution in practice Link invested HKD 8 million in targeted flood and typhoon resilience measures, including detachable flood barriers, flood sensors, drainage improvements, relocating electrical switchboards, flood-response protocols, monitoring systems, and emergency drills. AXA modelled the financial benefits, and Link secured improved insurance terms including an 11.7% premium reduction for 2025 Impact / outcome HKD 8m of flood and typhoon measures secured improved insurance terms, including an 11.7% premium reduction for 2025. Next steps Expand resilience-linked insurance approaches across larger real estate portfolios, strengthen the evidence base linking asset-level resilience measures to improved underwriting outcomes, and encourage broader insurer recognition of verified risk reduction measures. Organizations involved Authoring: Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) Actors: Link REIT; AXA Implementation partners Insurers; Asset Owners & Managers; Property value chain stakeholders
Hong Kong SAR, China
Securing property insurance premium reductions through building resilience — Hong Kong
Solution Start with a place rather than a peril: bring farmers, water utilities, local authorities and the environmental agency around a single catchment, aligning environmental stewardship payments, flood-risk reduction and water-quality improvement into one Program that no individual participant could have funded or justified alone. Key challenge The Severn Valley suffers average annual losses of around GBP 150 million ($205 million) from flooding, the catchment spans two nations (Wales and England) with different regulators and funding regimes, and the scheme envisages up to GBP 1 billion ($1.3 billion) of investment - far beyond public grant funding alone. Context The River Severn has recorded some of its highest levels in decades in the past seven years alone. Modelling shows that up to 100 million cubic metres of water will need to be stored during large flood events - equivalent to 11 days of the United Kingdom's water supply - to better protect more than 3,000 homes and businesses at risk. The catchment covers rural areas and all property types across the Severn Valley and Shropshire, crossing the England-Wales border. Solution in practice Jointly led by the national Environment Agency, Shropshire and Powys Councils and Oliver Wyman, the scheme is the flagship project of a wider cross-border partnership treating catchment-scale resilience as a driver of regional growth. The emerging design combines more than 25,000 nature-based interventions with engineered water storage, aimed at managing a one-in-100-year flood with an allowance for impacts of future climate change. Early delivery is already under way: more than 140 natural flood management measures - leaky dams, ponds and wetlands - have been installed upstream. The coalition is now working with beneficiaries of the risk reduction, from insurers and developers to farmers and government, to identify channels for funding the scheme. Once completed, it is expected to support up to GBP 5 billion ($6.8 billion) in wider economic impact. The coalition is exploring several routes to close the funding gap: green finance as an established starting point, through carbon credit sales and Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) units; working with large infrastructure operators across rail, water, energy and highways to jointly shape the scheme around their own resilience needs, capturing the value that catchment-scale risk reduction offers assets that would otherwise be exposed to flooding; and wider mechanisms targeted at businesses and communities in the local economy, explored through the Marches Forward Partnership, a cross-border alliance of four councils seeking trailblazer green growth status, including regulatory freedoms and investment zone status. Together these sit alongside blended public and private finance, with the mix still to be confirmed. Impact / outcome More than 140 natural flood management measures installed; designed to protect 3,000+ homes and businesses and support up to GBP 5bn of wider economic impact. Next steps The priority now is turning these routes into firm commitments: resolving free-rider risk among beneficiaries, securing insurer participation and confirming which mechanisms and investors will anchor the model. Lessons from this process are intended to inform how similar catchments could be financed elsewhere. The playbook identifies two connected areas where innovation is required. Making the national security and productivity case: the economic arguments most often cited are insured loss avoidance and property value protection, while others - supply chain protection, fiscal revenue stabilization and maintaining labor productivity - are less quantified in ways that reach central governments and treasury departments, and developing that evidence base would unlock a scale of co-investment currently absent from most coalitions, requiring greater ownership and advocacy from local government actors. Governance frameworks for transboundary coalitions: the hardest design question is how costs, benefits and decision rights are shared across jurisdictions, and the river basin and coastal coalition examples have each had to solve this from scratch - there is an opportunity to develop replicable collaboration templates, drawing on water law, watershed management and municipal finance precedents, to make the structure more straightforward for capital markets and insurers who might want to participate. Organizations involved Authoring: Marsh Actors: Environment Agency; Shropshire Council; Powys County Council; Oliver Wyman; Marches Forward Partnership Implementation partners Regulators & Policymakers; Local Governments; Investors & Banks; Insurers; Civil Society Organizations; Property value chain stakeholders
United Kingdom
A whole-catchment coalition — the Shropshire Valley Water Management Scheme
Solution Maintain and restore forests around production plants (thinning, pruning, planting) and implement certified water stewardship to increase groundwater recharge and replenish more water than operations withdraw. Key challenge High dependence on reliable water supplies creates financial and operational risk from water stress, requiring sustained watershed recharge and stewardship beyond the plant boundary. Context Suntory launched the Natural Water Sanctuary Initiative in 2003 to cultivate water resources and preserve biodiversity in forests surrounding its plants, explicitly treating water dependency as a significant financial risk. The initiative uses forest maintenance to improve water source recharge and is paired with broader integrated water resource management (reducing operational water use and managing wastewater). Suntory also positions its approach within the broader global water sustainability movement via the Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS), a standard created by NGOs including WWF and The Nature Conservancy together with companies. Solution in practice Suntory has expanded the Natural Water Sanctuary Initiative to more than 12,000 hectares across 26 locations in 16 prefectures in Japan, and reports that these sanctuaries recharge more than double the amount of groundwater used by its Japanese plants. The work includes thinning, pruning, and planting to enhance recharge capabilities, and it is implemented with local governments, NGOs, educational institutions, and communities, including monitoring of groundwater levels. Suntory has also pioneered AWS Certification in Japan and extended sanctuary-style efforts internationally to sites including the Maker’s Mark distillery grounds in the US as well as locations in France, Scotland, and Mexico. Impact / outcome 12,000+ ha across 26 sites recharge more than double the groundwater used by Suntory's Japanese plants. Next steps Expand and replicate the forest-and-stewardship model with partners in additional water-stressed basins, using AWS (and related monitoring) to standardize practices and demonstrate outcomes. Support Suntory’s stated targets to replenish more water than it uses in at least 50% of its owned plants globally by 2030 (including all in highly water-stressed areas), with a long-term pathway to 100% by 2050 by strengthening local collaborations, ongoing groundwater monitoring, and operational water-use reduction and wastewater management. Organizations involved Authoring: Suntory Actors: WWF; Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS); The Nature Conservancy Implementation partners Civil Society Organizations; Local Governments; Regulators & Policymakers
Japan
Forest-based groundwater recharge and water stewardship — Suntory Natural Water Sanctuary (with WWF/AWS)
Solution Develop a credit that recognizes both the carbon and the flood-reduction benefits of protecting and restoring coastal wetlands, so that the resilience value of a natural system carries a recognized financial value across the finance ecosystem rather than being captured only as carbon. Key challenge Mangroves, seagrasses and salt marshes provide a protective barrier against incoming coastal storms, but that resilience value is not captured across financial actors - there is no recognized financial value for the flood-reduction benefit that insurers, lenders and investors can act on. Context Coastal wetlands deliver multiple benefits simultaneously, including carbon sequestration and storm surge attenuation. Carbon markets already price the first; nothing prices the second. The result is that conservation and restoration are financed, if at all, on the carbon case alone, while the flood risk reduction that most directly affects property losses and insurability goes unrecognized. The challenge is creating a recognized financial value for the resilience benefits of coastal wetlands that actors across the finance ecosystem will accept. Solution in practice The Ocean Risk and Resilience Action Alliance (ORRAA) is partnering with The Nature Conservancy and AXA XL, an insurance company, to create Blue Carbon Resilience Credits for mangrove ecosystems in the Caribbean. The aim is to allow corporations to offset their carbon footprint while also supporting resilience by reducing flooding in highly vulnerable coastal areas through wetland conservation and restoration. Based on a pre-feasibility study across two sites covering 10,000 hectares of mangroves, ORRAA estimates that restoring these sites could avoid more than USD 140 million a year in property damages and reduce flood risk for more than 750 people. The Nature Conservancy is now working with local partners to establish a recognized baseline for the project, including updated mangrove site maps, and is examining blended finance mechanisms that bring actors together to scale additional projects. Impact / outcome Restoring 10,000 ha of mangroves could avoid USD 140m+ a year in property damage and reduce flood risk for 750+ people (pre-feasibility). Next steps Blue Carbon Resilience Credits now need to be adopted by additional actors to scale the initiative across additional sites. The Nature Conservancy is working with local partners to establish a recognized baseline for the project, including updated mangrove site maps, and is examining blended finance mechanisms that bring actors together to scale additional projects. The playbook identifies application to other perils as the area where further innovation is required: the resilience credits offer an approach that could be extended to other perils, and excessive rain may be particularly well suited to this, since municipalities typically hold information on drainage capacity which could support the development of comparable metrics for surface water resilience, thereby incentivizing further investments. Under action area 4c the playbook also notes that AXA and SCOR have explored insurance products designed around nature restoration, where the insured asset is the ecosystem itself and the policy incentivizes the ongoing management that keeps it functioning as a risk buffer - a principle replicable wherever a natural system performs a protective function that can be measured, verified and credited. Organizations involved Authoring: World Economic Forum; Marsh Actors: Ocean Risk and Resilience Action Alliance (ORRAA); The Nature Conservancy; AXA XL Implementation partners Insurers; Civil Society Organizations; Investors & Banks; Data Providers; Regulators & Policymakers
Latin America
Capturing the value of coastal wetlands through Blue Carbon Resilience Credits - Caribbean
Solution Use high-resolution flood and loss models with detailed property exposure data to quantify how coastal wetlands reduce storm-surge flood damages and annual flood losses, enabling these risk-reduction benefits to be reflected in insurance-standard risk modelling. Key challenge Wetlands’ risk-reduction benefits are often not measured in ways that meet insurance-sector modelling standards, making it harder to align conservation with risk reduction and insurability goals. Context With increasing exposure to coastal hazards in the northeastern USA, interest is growing in nature-based solutions for risk reduction. Hurricane Sandy (2012) caused devastating storm-surge flooding and was the second costliest hurricane in US history; damages in the northern Atlantic are largely driven by storm surge and are aggravated by population growth, urban development, and sea-level rise. In New Jersey’s Barnegat Bay, more than 25% of salt marshes have been lost over the past century due to infilling and development, though losses have been limited since the 1970s by the New Jersey Coastal Wetlands law, and structural defenses like shoreline armoring can be costly and harm ecosystems. Solution in practice The study applies high-resolution flood and loss models and an extensive property exposure database (tools widely used by the insurance sector) to estimate the protective value of temperate coastal wetlands. Regionally, it finds wetlands avoided about $625 million in direct flood damages during Hurricane Sandy. Locally in Barnegat Bay (Ocean County, NJ), it pairs the modelling with a database of synthetic storms to estimate an average 16% reduction in annual flood losses from salt marshes, with higher reductions at lower elevations, thereby quantifying wetlands’ ecosystem service as measurable flood-risk reduction. Impact / outcome Wetlands avoided about USD 625m in flood damage during Hurricane Sandy; salt marshes cut annual flood losses by 16% on average in Barnegat Bay. Next steps Advance collaboration between ecological modelling and the risk modelling industry so wetland risk-reduction benefits are consistently modelled to industry standards, improving the accuracy of risk assessment and supporting decisions that align conservation with flood-risk reduction where appropriate. Organizations involved Authoring: Scientific Reports (Nature Portfolio) - peer-reviewed study Implementation partners Data Providers; Regulators & Policymakers; Civil Society Organizations
USA
Coastal wetlands flood damage reduction valuation — Northeastern USA
Solution Have a community foundation purchase parametric cover on behalf of a place, so that a pre-agreed hazard trigger releases funds within days to frontline nonprofits and pre-identified priority neighbourhoods that hold little or no conventional coverage of their own. Key challenge In Greater Miami's most vulnerable neighbourhoods households hold little or no conventional cover, and the nonprofits acting as first responders have no pre-arranged liquidity, while indemnity claims and federal assistance take months or years to arrive - precisely the period in which recovery outcomes are determined. Context Miami-Dade is among the most hazard-exposed counties in the United States, with dense urban and coastal urban neighbourhoods exposed to hurricanes and extreme rainfall. The Miami Foundation runs the Miami Disaster Resilience Fund, a permanent, revolving collaborative fund supporting disaster preparedness and equitable long-term recovery, and convenes the Miami Strong Disaster Resilience Network, a collective of grassroots organizations across the county. The constraint on that fund was timing rather than intent: traditional insurance policies generally involve lengthy claims processes requiring proof of damages, and it can take months or even years after a catastrophic event before policyholders receive payment. Solution in practice For the 2024 disaster season the Foundation purchased a parametric insurance policy, becoming one of the first US philanthropic institutions to do so. The policy pays out on a measurable, pre-defined trigger - the windspeed and proximity of an arriving storm - with payment issued immediately on trigger and in as few as ten days, against months or years for indemnity claims. Payouts flow into the Miami Disaster Resilience Fund and are moved rapidly to the nonprofits acting as first responders in their own communities, amplifying the Fund’s capacity and giving pre-crisis certainty about how much will be available. Resilient Cities Network documents a closely related South Florida application in which a parametric policy provides immediate post-flooding resources for communities with the greatest vulnerabilities and limited traditional coverage, developed with three municipalities so that priority neighbourhoods are identified in advance and funding flows quickly after extreme rainfall. The Foundation frames the policy explicitly as a proof of concept for how foundations respond to climate disasters. Impact / outcome Parametric policy pays out on trigger in as few as 10 days, funding frontline nonprofits. Next steps The Miami Foundation frames the policy as a proof of concept, demonstrating the potential of parametric insurance in amplifying disaster response funds, and invites contributions to the Miami Disaster Resilience Fund and participation in the Miami Strong Disaster Resilience Network by nonprofits engaged in disaster preparedness, relief, recovery or resiliency across Miami-Dade County. Resilient Cities Network notes that other cities are testing parametric triggers based on rainfall intensity, wind speed or water levels, which pay out automatically when thresholds are reached and allow agencies to accelerate recovery without waiting for conventional damage assessments; delivery involves finance and budget offices, emergency management agencies, insurance providers and risk-modelling specialists, community foundations and local partners, and public works and environment teams. The playbook action area 2c sets out the corresponding opportunity: the community-based model is relevant wherever individual insurance take-up is low, civil society organizations play a key role as trusted intermediaries between insurers and the communities they serve, and communities, insurers and local governments could explore adaptations suited to their own institutions and regulatory settings - with initiatives such as the Insurance for Good Solutions Catalyst offering a starting point for identifying partners and existing solutions. Organizations involved Authoring: Resilient Cities Network Actors: The Miami Foundation; Miami Strong Disaster Resilience Network Implementation partners Civil Society Organizations; Insurers; Local Governments; Data Providers
USA
Philanthropic parametric cover for rapid post-disaster community payouts - The Miami Foundation, South Florida
Solution Rebuild wildfire-damaged communities to the IBHS Wildfire Prepared Home (WPH) standards (Base/Plus) and pair with community-wide mitigation (e.g., Zone 0), using modeled Average Annual Loss reductions to support insurer underwriting and discounts. Key challenge Wildfire-driven insurability constraints—high modeled losses (AAL) can limit private-market availability and push communities into the FAIR Plan unless risk is reduced and credibly evidenced. Context After the January 2025 Palisades and Eaton fires, which killed 31 people and destroyed more than 16,000 structures, the region faces a time-limited opportunity to rebuild nearly 30,000 homes within the burn perimeters in ways that materially reduce future wildfire losses. The California Department of Insurance and NAIC highlight that Average Annual Loss (AAL) is heavily used in insurer decisions and rate filings, so measurable AAL reductions could shift communities from reliance on the FAIR Plan to access to competitive private coverage. Solution in practice CDI and NAIC modeled the effect of rebuilding with science-based building and landscaping standards—IBHS Wildfire Prepared Home (WPH)—across the Altadena and Palisades area, using the Moody’s wildfire catastrophe model via NAIC’s Catastrophe Risk Management Center of Excellence. The study found rebuilding to WPH Base could reduce AAL by 31% and WPH Plus by 35%, and it recommends adopting WPH Plus for Los Angeles fire rebuilds at an estimated marginal cost of ~3% per home, paired with community-wide mitigation such as Zone 0 requirements; it also recommends funding WPH evaluations for low-income homeowners and connecting rebuilt homes to insurance discounts through CDI’s Safer from Wildfires program. The approach is reinforced by evidence from Paradise (post-2018 Camp Fire) where newer and hardened homes with defensible space survived at higher rates, and Paradise’s municipal adoption of WPH as a rebuilding benchmark coincided with insurers returning and some residents seeing materially lower insurance bills compared to the FAIR Plan. Impact / outcome Rebuilding to Wildfire Prepared Home Base/Plus could cut AAL by 31%/35% at about 3% extra cost per home. Next steps Align state and local rebuilding requirements around WPH Plus and complementary community-wide mitigation (including Zone 0), and ensure evaluation/certification capacity so homeowners can earn WPH designations at scale, with targeted funding for low-income households. Translate modeled AAL reductions into clear insurer underwriting pathways and consumer-facing insurance discounts (e.g., via Safer from Wildfires) so resilience actions are directly linked to availability and affordability of private coverage, reducing reliance on the FAIR Plan. Organizations involved Authoring: California Department of Insurance (CDI); National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) Actors: Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS); Moody's Implementation partners Regulators & Policymakers; Data Providers; Local Governments; Insurers
USA
Rebuilding to IBHS Wildfire Prepared Home standards could cut Average Annual Loss — Los Angeles, California (Altadena & Palisades)
Solution Use a community development financial institution, seeded with bank and philanthropic capital and backed by a state loan-loss guarantee, to offer rebuild mortgages with lower liquidity requirements and flexible cashflow underwriting for homeowners who cannot access conventional construction loans after a disaster. Key challenge After the 2025 Palisades and Eaton fires, most displaced households remained unable to rebuild because conventional construction lending requires liquidity and cashflow profiles that underinsured, displaced homeowners cannot meet - leaving them at risk of losing homeownership entirely. Context The January 2025 Pacific Palisades and Eaton fires displaced thousands of Los Angeles households across established urban and suburban residential communities. A survey of more than 2,300 fire-impacted residents found that most families remained displaced as the costs of temporary housing and rebuilding continued to rise. Insurance settlements alone were insufficient, and the conventional construction loan market did not serve borrowers whose income and liquidity had been disrupted by the event. The specific financing gap was identified through FORGE LA, a collaborative initiative to identify financial gaps in disaster recovery, led by The Center by Lendistry, Lendistry's strategic nonprofit partner. Solution in practice In August 2026 Lendistry Home Loans launched the Disaster Recovery Mortgage Pilot, seeded with a USD 15 million commitment from Bank of America and USD 5 million from the California Community Foundation through its Los Angeles Wildfire Rebuilding and Renewal Fund. The pilot lowers liquidity requirements and applies more flexible cashflow underwriting standards while still meeting statutory ability-to-repay requirements, targeting community members at risk of losing homeownership who cannot access construction loan products. It launched shortly after California’s 2026-27 state budget established a USD 100 million Disaster Rebuilding Assistance Program providing loan-loss guarantees and reduced interest rates for impacted homeowners - public risk-sharing that allows the lender to price and underwrite the product. Bank of America positioned the CDFI route as complementary to its own Rebuild Solution for existing mortgage clients (extended forbearance, a line of credit and preservation of the original lower interest rate), recognizing that non-clients needed a separate channel. The Program was announced ahead of applications opening, in early autumn 2026, to give homeowners equitable opportunity to prepare to apply. Impact / outcome USD 20m seed capital for rebuild mortgages backed by a USD 100m state loan-loss guarantee Program; applications open early fall 2026. Next steps Loan applications for the Disaster Recovery Mortgage Pilot will be available in early fall of 2026. Lendistry Home Loans announced the Program in advance of applications opening to allow equitable opportunity for homeowners to prepare to apply, directing homeowners to www.disasterrecoverymortgage.com to learn more and sign up for updates. The pilot is designed to work alongside California's Disaster Rebuilding Assistance Program, a USD 100 million Program established in the 2026-27 state budget providing loan-loss guarantees and reduced interest rates for impacted homeowners, which helps lenders mitigate risk while providing responsible financing to affected communities. This maps directly onto the playbook action area 2a: mortgage lenders and retail banks have the longest financial relationship with any property, often 25 years or more, yet play a limited role in funding resilience today, and examples like this remain exceptions rather than standard practice. Organizations involved Authoring: Lendistry Home Loans Actors: Bank of America; California Community Foundation; The Center by Lendistry; State of California Implementation partners Investors & Banks; Civil Society Organizations; Regulators & Policymakers; Local Governments
USA
A CDFI disaster recovery mortgage for wildfire-displaced homeowners - Lendistry Home Loans, Los Angeles
Solution Structure long-term Resilience Purchase Agreements (RPAs) between nature restoration projects and corporate buyers to generate stable contracted cashflows from ecosystem services, making catchment-scale nature restoration investable for institutional asset owners such as pension funds. Key challenge Degraded natural landscapes (rivers, wetlands, peatlands) increase flood and drought risk for businesses and communities, but nature restoration has lacked the contracted revenue streams and institutional-grade structures needed to attract private capital at scale. Context UK flooding, drought, and degraded water quality compound into a significant annual economic cost for businesses and communities. Rebalance Earth was established to make nature an investable asset class by structuring nature restoration projects as productive natural capital assets generating long-term contracted income. The fund targets UK urban and rural catchments where degraded landscapes compound water risk for infrastructure operators, utilities, food and beverage companies, and local authorities. West Yorkshire Pension Fund (LGPS) provided £25m in cornerstone seed capital for the RE(DARWIN) fund, recognizing nature-based resilience as a long-term institutional investment aligned with the UK Mansion House agenda. Solution in practice Rebalance Earth structures Resilience Purchase Agreements (RPAs) — long-term Nature-as-a-Service contracts — under which corporates pay for catchment-scale nature restoration (rivers, wetlands, peatlands) to reduce their operational exposure to flooding and water stress. The RPAs generate stable cashflows that service institutional investor returns. The platform uses AI, remote sensing, and geospatial mapping to identify and underwrite restoration projects, and applies independent measurement frameworks to translate ecological performance (e.g. flood peak attenuation, water retention) into contracted payment triggers. Rebalance Earth targets mobilizing over £10 billion in nature restoration capital across the UK over the next decade, with a live pipeline of catchment, coastal, and upland projects structured for institutional investment. Impact / outcome GBP 25m cornerstone from West Yorkshire Pension Fund; targets GBP 10bn+ of nature restoration capital over a decade. Next steps A coalition could work with Rebalance Earth and institutional asset owners to standardize RPA contract terms and ecological performance metrics across catchments, enabling replication in additional geographies and asset classes. Organizations involved Authoring: Rebalance Earth Actors: West Yorkshire Pension Fund Implementation partners Investors & Banks; Civil Society Organizations; Local Governments; Data Providers
United Kingdom
Rebalance Earth
Solution Establish a cross-jurisdictional public entity to plan, coordinate, and advance resilience projects for flooding, sea level rise, and other water-related climate risks across an entire county Key challenge Climate risks do not align with city boundaries, but planning, funding, and delivery are often fragmented across jurisdictions Context One Shoreline was established in 2020 as an independent public agency to address the water-related impacts of climate change across San Mateo County. It provides a regional platform for planning, project development, funding, and coordination where no single city can address the full risk alone. Solution in practice One Shoreline advances shoreline resilience plans, creek and flood resilience projects, planning policy guidance, early warning systems, and multi-jurisdictional project development across the county. Its work includes Brisbane, the southern Bayside cities, San Bruno Creek, and other shoreline and flood-prone areas. Impact / outcome County-wide agency (since 2020) advancing shoreline, creek and flood resilience projects across San Mateo County. Next steps Advance multi-jurisdictional shoreline resilience plans, develop future-conditions guidance for public infrastructure, build funding-ready project pipelines, and test links between property-level risk reduction and improved insurability. Organizations involved Authoring: One Shoreline (San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District) Implementation partners Local Governments; Investors & Banks; Regulators & Policymakers; Civil Society Organizations
USA
One Shoreline — San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District
Solution Provide step-by-step instructions for supplementing historic climate data with specific, regional, forward-looking climate change projections in the design of city facilities, applied consistently across nearly all municipal capital projects. Key challenge Codes and standards that regulate the design of facilities already incorporate historic weather data to determine how to design for today’s conditions, but historic data does not accurately represent the projected severity and frequency of future storms, sea level rise, heat waves and precipitation - threatening to undermine capital investments and impede critical services over the full useful life of facilities designed today. Context New York City faces challenges resulting from a rapidly changing climate. Many capital projects, including infrastructure, landscapes and buildings ("facilities"), will experience extreme flooding, precipitation and heat events, and the intensity and severity of these events will increase over the 21st century. With 520 miles of coastline across its five boroughs, several low-lying locations across the dense urban area will experience monthly tidal inundation resulting from higher seas. The New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) prepares and regularly refines projections for the metropolitan region, covering temperature and extreme heat events, precipitation and sea level rise by the 2050s and 2080s. Solution in practice The Climate Resiliency Design Guidelines, developed by the Mayor’s Office of Climate & Environmental Justice (previously the Mayor’s Office of Resiliency and, before that, the Mayor’s Office of Recovery and Resiliency) in collaboration with city agencies that oversee capital project development, provide a consistent methodology for engineers, architects, landscape architects and planners to design facilities that are resilient to changing climate conditions. They complement the use of historic data in existing codes and standards, and are built on NPCC projections with the intent that they are updated as those projections are refined. An initial version was released in April 2017; Version 2.0 followed in April 2018 after a year-long expert testing and review phase; Version 4.0 was published in September 2020 and Version 4.1 in May 2022. The Guidelines are used throughout the design process - from capital planning initiation, as a reference in requests for proposals, through a conceptual or study phase to final design - for all new construction and substantial improvements, and apply to all City capital projects except coastal protection projects such as sea walls, bulkheads and levees, for which the City is developing separate guidance. All new projects and substantial improvements assess risks to climate hazards in the context of the project’s purpose. More than 20 City agencies contributed, including Environmental Protection, Transportation, City Planning, Buildings and Design & Construction. Impact / outcome Consistent forward-looking design methodology applied across City capital projects, developed with 20+ City agencies (v4.1, May 2022). Next steps Future versions of the Guidelines will explore additional climate stressors as the science evolves, in coordination with the New York City Panel on Climate Change. NYC is undertaking a study to assess projected changes to extreme wind hazards and identify risks to the city’s built environment, as firm projections on future wind conditions have not yet been developed. The City is separately developing guidance for coastal protection projects, which currently sit outside the scope of the Guidelines. Organizations involved Authoring: NYC Mayor's Office of Climate & Environmental Justice Actors: New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC) Implementation partners Local Governments; Regulators & Policymakers; Data Providers; Property value chain stakeholders
USA
Climate Resiliency Design Guidelines - NYC Mayor’s Office of Climate & Environmental Justice
Solution Use a statutory resilience district to draw a boundary around the beneficiaries of a resilience investment and pool multiple funding levers - tax increment financing, benefit assessments, resilience bonds and grants - into a single vehicle, supported by technical assistance that moves communities from concept to investment-ready. Key challenge Resilience investment benefits many parties - homeowners, businesses, insurers, lenders and government - over decades, while the costs are concentrated and immediate, so no single actor has sufficient incentive to act and communities remain dependent on one-off grants rather than stable long-term financing. Context California's Senate Bill 852 (2022) authorized the creation of resilience districts, giving communities a legal mechanism to pool funding across beneficiaries and invest collectively in long-term risk reduction. Legal authority alone, however, does not make a district financeable: communities still need to define a boundary, select the right combination of funding levers for their fiscal context and institutional relationships, and reach a standard of project design that insurers, lenders and investors will accept. The pilot communities span California and Connecticut, two states at different stages of resilience district legislation. Solution in practice To translate the statute into practice, California Forward and Resilient Cities Catalyst launched the Resilience District Incubator in 2025, selecting five pilot communities in California and Connecticut, including the City of San Rafael, the County of Los Angeles and the City of Bridgeport. The incubator provides each community with technical assistance, peer learning and expert input from advisers spanning finance, insurance and risk modelling. The funding mechanisms available to districts include tax increment financing, benefit assessments, resilience bonds and grants, with the right combination determined by local fiscal context and institutional relationships. Four design features make the model work: a defined geographical boundary that captures the beneficiaries of resilience investment; multiple funding levers pooled into a single vehicle, reducing reliance on one-off grants; technical and governance support to move communities from concept to being investment-ready; and an advisory group spanning insurers, lenders and risk specialists to validate project design. Impact / outcome Five pilot communities in California and Connecticut receiving technical assistance (pilot stage). Next steps The model is still in its pilot stage, but it provides a replicable template for how communities can move beyond one-time funding towards stable, long-term financing for place-based resilience. The next step is demonstrating that private asset owners within district boundaries can be active contributors, not just beneficiaries. The playbook sets out the corresponding action under action area 2a: the resilience district concept offers a route for private actors, and asset owners and managers could engage with business improvement districts and similar structures to explore how resilience measures might be funded collectively at district level, allowing the owners who benefit from a safer place to contribute to creating it. The playbook also identifies, under action area 2b, the need for more replicable blended vehicles combining government grants, low-cost loans from public or development banks and private investment in standardized structures that, once developed in one municipality, can be adopted elsewhere rather than rebuilt deal by deal. Organizations involved Authoring: World Economic Forum; Marsh Actors: California Forward; Resilient Cities Catalyst; City of San Rafael; County of Los Angeles; City of Bridgeport Implementation partners Local Governments; Regulators & Policymakers; Insurers; Investors & Banks; Civil Society Organizations
USA
Building the template for resilience districts - California Forward Resilience District Incubator
Solution Translate forward-looking climate projections into standardized, mandatory design criteria so that all municipal capital projects are built to withstand future — not historical — climate conditions. Key challenge Municipal infrastructure projects in New York City were being designed using historical climate data that no longer reflects future conditions, leaving new and substantially renovated public assets exposed to sea level rise, extreme heat, and intensifying storms over their full useful lives. Context New York City faces compounding urban climate risks: sea levels are projected to rise significantly by mid-century, extreme heat events are intensifying, and major precipitation events are becoming more frequent and severe. Prior to Local Law 41 of 2021, no binding requirement existed to apply climate projections consistently across New York City's more than 20 capital agencies. Solution in practice The NYC Climate Resiliency Design Guidelines (CRDG), developed by the Mayor's Office of Climate Resiliency, translate future climate projections into actionable technical design criteria for city capital projects. Version 4.1 (May 2022) provides hazard-specific guidance across extreme heat, increased precipitation, sea level rise and tidal inundation, and coastal storms, differentiated by facility type. Local Law 41 of 2021 mandated a pilot Program under which more than 20 city capital agencies are designing approximately 40 projects to the CRDG standard. A full resilient design mandate is scheduled to begin on 31 December 2026. Impact / outcome About 40 projects across 20+ agencies designed to the guidelines under Local Law 41; full mandate from 31 December 2026. Next steps The NYC CRDG model — a statutory mandate, a shared technical standard, and a phased implementation Program — demonstrates how cities can systematically de-risk public capital investment through shared climate data. A coalition could work with other major cities to develop analogous mandatory design standards, particularly in fast-growing urban centers where capital investment decisions being made now will define climate exposure for 30–50 years. Organizations involved Authoring: NYC Mayor's Office of Climate & Environmental Justice Implementation partners Local Governments; Regulators & Policymakers; Data Providers; Property value chain stakeholders
USA
Mandating forward-looking climate design standards for municipal infrastructure — New York City

Resilient Futures Initiative

A World Economic Forum Initiative
© 2026 All rights reserved
Privacy Policy & Terms of Service