Changes to Hazard and Risk Mitigation Planning

An ongoing devolution of hazard mitigation responsibilities from the federal government to states is a major emerging trend for planners and practitioners in the field. Federal changes under the Trump administration have de-emphasized the federal role in state and local mitigation planning.

Misinformation and restrictions on the flow of information related to natural hazards pose a direct threat to lives, property, and community well-being. Funding cuts are halting data collection, reducing forecast accuracy, and ending overnight staffing of forecast offices. In April 2025, the National Weather Service suspended automated language translations of weather alerts, though this decision was later reversed. Federal policy changes and layoffs ended communications between FEMA staff and county emergency management officials in Washington state and held back disaster relief funding throughout the country. And social media misinformation continues to threaten efforts to reduce hazard risks and impacts. In Oregon, for example, misinformation about the connection between public policy and insurance rates fueled public backlash against an updated wildfire risk map, leading state lawmakers to repeal the map — along with state residential defensible-space and wildfire-protection requirements.

For planners in a post-disaster environment, the spread of misinformation is a dangerous threat that can be compounded further by the deliberate withholding of information before a disaster occurs. This directly imperils the development of plans based on sound information and data that are broadly accepted by the communities they are designed to protect. Rather than simply fulfilling federal mitigation requirements, planners should more deeply engage in community-specific planning that aligns with local needs.