Report on Extreme Heat as a Major Disaster and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

The Governance Gap in Climate-Related Disaster Response

In 2025, the United States has faced 27 major disaster declarations for events including wildfires, tornadoes, and floods. However, a significant and deadly extreme heat wave in June, which resulted in hundreds of individuals requiring medical assistance, was not declared a disaster. This highlights a critical gap in the federal response framework, specifically within the Stafford Act, which does not explicitly list “extreme heat” as a qualifying natural disaster. This omission directly impacts the nation’s ability to meet key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those related to health, resilient infrastructure, and climate action.

Legislative Efforts to Enhance Climate Action and Resilience (SDG 13 & SDG 11)

In response to this legislative gap, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has proposed a bill to classify extreme heat as a “major disaster.” This change is fundamental to advancing SDG 13 (Climate Action) by strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards.

Official recognition would unlock federal funding through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), enabling proactive and responsive measures that support SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities). The proposed uses for these funds include:

• Establishing and expanding public cooling centers.
• Providing air conditioning to vulnerable communities.
• Financing critical water infrastructure projects, aligning with SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation).
• Funding heat adaptation and mitigation projects such as urban tree planting and the construction of shade structures to reduce the urban heat island effect.

Debate on Institutional Frameworks and Public Health (SDG 16 & SDG 3)

The necessity of amending the Stafford Act is a subject of debate among policymakers and former officials. This discussion is central to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), as it concerns the effectiveness and evolution of governmental institutions in the face of new challenges.

1. Argument for Legislative Change: Proponents argue that with heat being the leading cause of weather-related fatalities, an explicit classification is necessary to ensure communities receive desperately needed support. This directly addresses SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) by providing resources to prevent heat-related illness and death. Historical requests for heat-related disaster declarations from states like Missouri (1980), Illinois (1995), and California (2022) were all denied.
2. Argument for Utilizing Existing Mechanisms: Opponents, including a former FEMA administrator, contend that the Stafford Act’s definition of “other catastrophe” is broad enough to include extreme heat and that governors can already request such declarations. The focus, from this perspective, should be on utilizing existing pre-disaster hazard mitigation grants, which are designed to fund resilience projects like those proposed in the new legislation. However, it was noted that funding for these mitigation programs has been subject to cuts.

Protecting Labor and Promoting Decent Work (SDG 8)

The issue of extreme heat extends into the workplace, creating a direct challenge to SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), which calls for safe and secure working environments for all workers. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is considering the first federal rule to protect indoor and outdoor workers from heat exposure by mandating water, shade, and paid breaks.

This proposed regulation faces significant opposition from business groups citing “unreasonable burdens,” highlighting the tension between economic interests and worker safety. In the absence of federal action, several states have implemented their own heat protection standards for workers. The ongoing debate underscores the difficulty in establishing comprehensive federal policies to address the multifaceted impacts of extreme heat, a critical step for achieving holistic and sustainable development.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • The article directly addresses health impacts from extreme heat, citing specific numbers of people requiring medical assistance and fatalities. It highlights that “more Americans are killed by extreme heat than any other form of extreme weather incident combined,” linking climate events to public health crises.
2. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
   • The article discusses the protection of workers from heat-related hazards. It mentions that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is considering a “federal rule to protect indoor and outdoor workers from heat, which would mandate employers provide paid breaks, water and shade.” This connects to ensuring safe working environments.
3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The core issue revolves around making communities resilient to disasters. The article discusses the need for federal funding for “cooling centers, air conditioning to communities that need it, money for water infrastructure projects,” and “heat adaptation projects, such as planting more trees, or building shade structures.” These measures are aimed at reducing the vulnerability of urban and local populations to extreme heat events.
4. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • The article focuses on a “climate-related hazard,” specifically an “extreme heat wave” and “heat dome.” The proposed legislation and mitigation efforts are direct responses to the need to strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to the impacts of climate change.
5. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article examines the effectiveness of governmental institutions and legal frameworks, specifically the Stafford Act and FEMA. The debate over whether to classify extreme heat as a disaster is a discussion about adapting institutions to be more effective and accountable in responding to modern challenges. The proposed legislation is an attempt to reform this institutional framework.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.d: Strengthen the capacity of all countries… for early warning, risk reduction and management of national and global health risks.
   • The article’s focus on the high number of heat-related illnesses and deaths (“472 people needed medical assistance,” “more than 500 people died”) and the push for a formal disaster declaration system for heat waves directly relates to improving the management of a national health risk.
2. Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers…
   • This is identified through the discussion of OSHA’s potential federal rule to protect workers from heat and the fact that “seven states… have adopted independent heat protection rules for workers.”
3. Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses… caused by disasters…
   • The article’s central theme is the impact of extreme heat as a disaster that causes fatalities, affects large numbers of people, and results in “billions of dollars in damage to property and businesses.” The proposed legislation aims to mitigate these exact outcomes.
4. Target 11.b: …substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards… mitigation and adaptation to climate change, disaster risk reduction…
   • This target is reflected in the proposed use of federal funds for “heat adaptation projects, such as planting more trees, or building shade structures to reduce urban heat,” which are integrated plans for climate adaptation and disaster risk reduction at the community level.
5. Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.
   • The entire effort by lawmakers to classify extreme heat as a major disaster is an attempt to strengthen the country’s adaptive capacity. The article states the goal is to allow communities to “receive the federal funding needed to respond and prepare for future extreme heat events.”
6. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • The debate around the Stafford Act’s limitations and the proposed legislation to amend it is a direct effort to make a key federal institution (FEMA) and its guiding law more effective and accountable for a recurring and deadly hazard. The denial of three previous requests for heat-related disaster declarations shows a gap in the current institutional framework.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Number of deaths and people affected by disasters:
   • The article provides specific figures that serve as indicators of the impact of extreme heat, such as “472 people needed medical assistance for heat-related illnesses,” “more than 500 people died in one single county in Nevada,” and a heat wave that “killed more than 700 people” in 1995. These numbers can be used to track progress in reducing the health impacts of disasters.
2. Adoption of disaster risk reduction strategies and legislation:
   • The primary indicator discussed is the status of the proposed legislation to amend the Stafford Act. Its passage would be a key measure of progress. The article also mentions that “seven states… have adopted independent heat protection rules for workers,” which is another indicator of policy adoption at the state level.
3. Availability of funding and resources for adaptation:
   • An implied indicator is the amount of federal funding that would flow to communities if the legislation passes. The article notes that a declaration would “unlock the funds and support our communities desperately need” for projects like cooling centers and tree planting. Tracking the allocation and use of such funds would measure progress.
4. Institutional responsiveness:
   • The number of disaster declarations requested for extreme heat versus the number granted is a clear indicator. The article notes that in “three previous times… the requests were denied.” A change in this pattern would indicate progress in institutional effectiveness.

4. Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: cbsnews.com