Climate disasters are no longer isolated shocks. As bushfires, floods, and storms strike with growing frequency, many communities are hit not once, but multiple times—often in quick succession. A new study from The Lancet Public Health shows what that means for mental health: each disaster takes a deeper toll, especially when recovery time is cut short.
Using data from the nationally representative HILDA survey, researchers tracked over 1,500 Australians whose homes were damaged by climate disasters between 2009 and 2019. They compared their mental health trajectories to people unexposed to disasters, using well-established tools like the Mental Health Inventory (MHI-5) and the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) to track psychological distress over time. The findings are clear: a second or third exposure leads to sharper declines and delayed or incomplete recovery.
Those declines were worse when disasters occurred close together—within one or two years—suggesting that people need time to mentally rebound. Without it, the stress accumulates. The study also found that certain groups are hit harder: people with chronic health conditions, limited social support, or living in rural or low-income areas showed more severe and lasting distress. Women, younger adults, and people living in rented homes — rather than homes they own — were also more vulnerable to repeat trauma.
These insights matter because most disaster recovery systems still operate as if disasters are one-off events. But the evidence says otherwise. Recovery from one crisis is often interrupted by the next—and this study offers crucial guidance for improving how support systems respond in a world shaped by recurring climate events.
What this research highlights is the urgent need for long-term, adaptive responses. Mental health services must extend beyond the immediate aftermath and consider the cumulative impact of multiple disasters. Programs that stay in place for years—not just weeks—can help rebuild psychological resilience.
Housing policy plays a role too. Repeated displacement and unstable housing conditions compound the mental health toll. Ensuring secure, affordable housing is as much a mental health intervention as a logistical one.
Also, the study underscores the power of social support—not just from institutions, but from neighbors, communities, and personal networks. People who felt connected and supported by others were consistently more resilient. This suggests that collective, community-based responses—like peer support, outreach programs, and inclusive recovery planning—can be as vital as formal interventions. For example, after the DANA floods in Spain, a community-led educational initiative brought together children, families, and educators to co-design recovery strategies that addressed both safety and emotional wellbeing. This approach highlights how local collaboration can foster resilience and protect vulnerable groups like children during climate-related crises.
As climate change continues to reshape our world, we’ll need more than emergency response. We’ll need systems designed for sustained recovery, built around the realities of compounding trauma. This study offers key guidelines: support must be deeper, longer, and smarter—because the next disaster is rarely the last.
Coordinator at la Verneda-Sant Martí Learning Community and adjunct professor at the University of Barcelona