Most strategies for addressing environmental and climate injustices in the United States are predicated on strong local governance tools, oftentimes tied to land use and zoning. There is, however, no right to local governance in the United States—a serious issue considering an estimated one-third of residents live in unincorporated areas. As a result, many unincorporated communities struggle to receive adequate stormwater management, particularly in the face of climate change. In this article, the effects of unincorporated status are examined in relation to (in)equitable access to stormwater management in the Lower Río Grande Valley of South Texas.

From this case, two key implications for planners emerge. First, planners mustacknowledge the historic concerns facing low-income communities of color that lead to inequitable out-comes in FEMA funding. Unincorporated communities of color are less likely to be able to access strongenvironmental planning, placing them at higher risk of disaster. Second, local stigma surrounding com-munities can greatly influence the efficacy of post-disaster reconstruction and recovery by predeterminingwho is or is not“deserving”of assistance. Engaging local histories of racism and prejudice is key toaddressing and redressing these inequities

A community report examining the causes of flooding in the Lower Río Grande Valley of Texas. We argue that colonia flooding is as much political as it is environmental.

In the United States (US), post-disaster reconstruction often leverages a stigma of “informality as illegality” to withhold post-disaster funding. This chapter illustrates how this occurs through the example of Texas/Mexico colonias and their efforts to rebuild after Hurricane Dolly in 2008. In the context of the Texas/Mexico border, “colonias” are low-income communities experiencing a dearth of adequate housing and basic physical infrastructures (such as affordable potable water, reliable electricity, and floodwater management, among others). This chapter studies the stigma of informality which constitutes a driving factor influencing inequitable access to post-disaster reconstruction and recovery in Texas/Mexico colonias by examining FEMA’s response to colonias after Hurricane Dolly.

As disasters overlap and compound one another the call for communities to “bounce back” becomes increasingly untenable: there is minimal to no “post-disaster” period. From this, compounding disasters form slow moving and continuous neglect with detrimental impacts for oppressed communities. The question becomes: what does resilience and “bouncing back” truly mean when it becomes a near-constant imposition?

This essay uses theories of colonialism and coloniality from Puerto Rico to examine how colonialism operates through repeated disaster, in this case hurricanes. Building off of research on environmental colonialism in Puerto Rico, the concept of disaster colonialism is proposed to explain how procedural vulnerability is deepened through disasters and subsequently leveraged to deepen coloniality.

This case study examines the legal case LUPE, et al. v. FEMA, B:08-cv-487 [2008], which discusses the issue of informal housing repairs in post-disaster situations. On July 23, 2008, Hurricane Dolly made landfall in the Rio Grande Valley of southern Texas, one of the poorest regions of the United States. In the following months, community members noticed a high rejection rate in post-disaster funding, specifically from the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Individuals and Households Program (IHP). This high rejection rate was particularly striking in the valley’s poorest communities—the colonias—which suffer from inadequate housing, utilities, and infrastructure.