Conor here: In recent discussions surrounding America’s “Great Climate Migration,” a significant concern has emerged: individuals fleeing climate-affected areas are opting not to accept buyouts that would remove properties from circulation. Instead, they are selling their homes, effectively passing on the inherent risks to new homeowners.
By James R. Elliott and Debolina Banerjee. Elliott is a Professor of Sociology at Rice University, and Banerjee is a research analyst at Rice’s Kinder Institute for Urban Research. Originally published at The Conversation.
In 2025, dangerous floods wreaked havoc across nearly every state, devastating neighborhoods and leaving homes in disarray. In many affected regions, homeowners faced the grim task of tearing out waterlogged wallboards and disposing of soaked carpets, a situation they had unfortunately encountered multiple times.
The desire to rebuild following these catastrophic flooding events is entirely understandable. However, for some, the most effective way to remain connected to their community while adapting to the evolving climate and recovering from disasters is to embrace a solution humanity has turned to for millennia: relocation.
Researchers anticipate that millions of Americans will move away from properties increasingly susceptible to floods, fires, and various disasters in the coming years.
The choices homeowners make regarding these high-risk properties will significantly influence their community’s resilience and vulnerability to future calamities.
Our research focuses on flood resilience, and we have been mapping the outcomes of government buyout initiatives throughout the United States. These programs aim to buy up damaged homes after disasters and convert the areas into open spaces.
Recent national maps illustrating relocation patterns after floods show that most Americans who depart buyout zones tend to remain relatively local. However, a concerning trend has emerged: most individuals choose to sell their homes or vacate their rental properties rather than accept government buyout offers. This practice merely shifts the risk to incoming residents, leaving communities still exposed to future hazards.
FEMA’s Buyout Program at Risk
Government buyout programs play a crucial role in helping communities recover from disasters by purchasing high-risk homes and demolishing them. The land is then restored to a natural floodplain, transformed into parks, or repurposed for new infrastructure aimed at preventing future flood damage in nearby areas.
For decades, FEMA has funded these initiatives through its property buyout program, investing nearly $4 billion to buy and demolish around 45,000 flood-prone homes across the nation, most of which occurred since 2001.
Such investments yield significant returns: studies indicate the program saves an estimated $4 to $6 in future disaster recovery costs for every $1 spent. Homeowners receive pre-disaster market value for their properties, adjusted for any flood insurance payouts they might receive.
However, the future of this vital assistance is now in jeopardy. The Trump administration has cut FEMA’s staffing and funding, with discussions around dismantling the agency. Between March and September, governors submitted 42 applications for funding from FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, which includes buyouts, but as of mid-September, all were denied or left pending.
After studying this program, we advocate for its improvement rather than its termination. If structured correctly, buyouts can help sustain local communities and foster more sustainable futures together.
Buyouts vs. Selling Homes in Damaged Areas
Our research team at Rice University’s Center for Coastal Futures and Adaptive Resilience developed an interactive mapping tool that tracks relocations of participants in FEMA buyout programs and their neighbors living within a half-mile radius after a buyout is initiated.
These maps were constructed using individual data down to the address level from 2007 to 2017 across more than 550 counties where FEMA’s buyout program was implemented nationwide.
The maps convey the extensive reach of the program, showcasing its impact from coastal cities to inland towns. Additionally, they detail where more than 70,000 residents moved after FEMA-funded buyouts in their vicinity.
FEMA’s buyout programs have supported homeowners and communities throughout the U.S., across almost every state. James R. Elliott, CC BY
The maps distinguish between those who accepted federal buyouts and those who relocated independently. Alarmingly, the data reveals that most movers—about 14 out of 15—do not participate in the federal buyout program. Instead, they are neighbors opting for conventional real estate transactions.
This distinction is crucial, highlighting that the majority of Americans are retreating from climate-affected regions by shifting their property risks to new buyers rather than embracing buyouts that would effectively take the properties out of circulation.
While selling may benefit homeowners who can find buyers, it ultimately fails to strengthen community resilience.
A map depicting buyouts in Sayreville, N.J., illustrates that most residents remained nearby. James R. Elliott, CC BY
Lessons for Future Buyout Programs
Our interactive map offers encouraging insights and recommendations for future buyout programs.
Regardless of whether moves occur through buyouts or sales, our findings indicate that relocations from affected areas typically average just 5 to 10 miles from the original homes. This suggests that most individuals strive to retain local connections even as they adjust to the increasing climate risks.
Nearly all relocations also lead to safer homes, with minimal to slight risks of future flooding, as demonstrated by address-level flood factors provided by the First Street Foundation, a nonprofit source of flood risk assessments now integrated into various online real estate platforms.
Nonetheless, many homes in vulnerable regions continue to be resold or rented to newcomers, leaving communities engaging in a precarious game of climate roulette.
The sustainability of this situation will vary by neighborhood, with rising insurance costs, intensification of storms, and increasing awareness of flood risks already affecting home sales in certain areas—thereby limiting the opportunity for property owners to simply shift their risk onto others.
To foster safer communities, it is essential to expand federal, state, and local voluntary buyout programs. These initiatives not only aid in reducing future flood damage but also encourage cooperative planning for the improved use of cleared lands.
Additionally, extending the time allowed for residents to participate post-disaster could enhance the allure of these programs. This would offer property owners greater flexibility in deciding when to sell and demolish their homes, aiding in the removal of high-risk properties from the market rather than passing that risk onto new residents.
