The Department of Homeland Security Climate Change Research Act would add a dedicated climate research and development function to the Homeland Security Act of 2002. It requires the Under Secretary for Science and Technology to evaluate existing federal research on mitigating climate-change effects that could impact homeland security, and, subject to appropriations, to conduct further research and development.
The bill also directs interagency and intergovernmental consultation and defines climate change for purposes of the act. Finally, it adds a reporting requirement to Congress on the research and development activities.
The core aim is to bolster DHS’s ability to anticipate, prepare for, and respond to climate-driven security challenges while ensuring funding and coordination structures support those efforts.
At a Glance
What It Does
Adds Section 324 to the Homeland Security Act to establish climate change research and development within DHS. It requires the Under Secretary for Science and Technology to evaluate existing federal research and, subject to appropriations, conduct targeted R&D to mitigate climate-change impacts on homeland security.
Who It Affects
DHS program offices and operations, other federal agencies, state/local/Tribal governments, and owners/operators of critical infrastructure who would rely on improved climate risk assessments and resilience measures.
Why It Matters
Sets a formal pathway for DHS to address climate-related risk as a security issue, linking research to emergency planning, disaster response, and critical infrastructure resilience.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
This bill creates a formal climate change research mandate within the Department of Homeland Security. The Under Secretary for Science and Technology must first review existing federal research to understand how climate-change impacts may affect homeland security, including preparedness, emergency planning, and disaster response, as well as whether current federal funding structures adequately address those impacts.
If funding is available, DHS may pursue research and development programs aimed at mitigating identified or potential climate-related threats to DHS operations. The scope prioritizes actions that directly affect DHS capabilities and coordination, and the Under Secretary must consult with other federal agencies, state and local governments, Tribal governments, and critical infrastructure owners to align efforts.
Climate change is defined as changes to climate system components attributable to human activity and alterations in the atmosphere. The act also requires a Congress-wide reporting obligation—annually for three years after enactment—on the research and development work undertaken.
The bill’s design emphasizes interagency coordination and practical DHS operational impact, rather than broad, untargeted research, and creates a clear cadence for reporting back to Congress to ensure accountability and alignment with homeland security priorities.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds a new Section 324 to the Homeland Security Act to formalize climate change research within DHS.
The Under Secretary for Science and Technology must evaluate existing federal research on climate-change impacts affecting homeland security.
Subject to appropriations, DHS may conduct targeted R&D to mitigate identified or potential climate-related effects on DHS operations.
The bill requires consultation with other federal agencies, state/local/Tribal governments, and critical infrastructure owners.
Annual reporting to Congress on these R&D activities is required for three years after enactment.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
General climate research and development mandate
The Under Secretary for Science and Technology must evaluate existing Federal research on mitigating climate-change effects that could impact DHS, including effects on preparedness, emergency planning, and disaster response, and assess whether current funding structures are adequate. If appropriations are available, the Under Secretary may conduct research and development aimed at addressing these effects. This provision ensures that DHS explicitly treats climate risk as a core operational concern and not as an ancillary issue.
Scope and prioritization
The scope of the research and development under subsection (a) prioritizes mitigation of climate-related effects that impair DHS operations. It may address the matters identified in subsection (a) and is meant to align with DHS’s mission-critical functions, ensuring that funded efforts translate into tangible improvements in readiness and response capabilities.
Consultation and coordination
The Under Secretary must consult with the heads of other relevant federal agencies and departments and coordinate with state, local, Tribal, and territorial governments, as well as owners and operators of critical infrastructure. This ensures cross-agency alignment and practical integration of research results into real-world security and resilience workflows.
Climate change defined
“Climate change” is defined as detectable changes in climate system components attributable to human activity and alterations in the global atmosphere. This provides a concrete, though broad, basis for the scope of research and avoids ambiguity about what constitutes climate-related threats under the Act.
Reporting to Congress
Not later than one year after enactment and annually for three years, the Under Secretary must submit a report on climate change research and development activities to the House Committee on Homeland Security and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. This creates a formal accountability mechanism and a feedback loop to Congress on progress and remaining gaps.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- DHS operational components (e.g., offices responsible for planning, response, and resilience) gain access to better climate risk knowledge and tools that improve readiness.
- Other federal agencies receive coordinated climate-risk research outputs, reducing duplication and fostering joint analyses across agencies.
- State, local, and Tribal governments benefit from tailored, interoperable information and coordination that informs local emergency planning and resilience activities.
- Owners and operators of critical infrastructure (energy, water, transport, communications) benefit from greater visibility into climate risks and potential mitigation options that protect essential services.
Who Bears the Cost
- DHS and participating agencies may incur upfront costs to conduct evaluations and fund targeted R&D activities.
- State, local, and Tribal governments may bear coordination and data-sharing costs to implement risk assessments and resilience improvements.
- Critical infrastructure owners could face compliance and integration costs to align with new risk assessments and resilience requirements.
- Federal agencies may experience staff time and administrative overhead associated with interagency coordination and reporting obligations.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between prioritizing immediate DHS operational resilience and pursuing long-term, broad-based climate research that may outlast current funding cycles or political focus. Balancing the need for rapid, operationally relevant outcomes with the scientific complexity and interagency coordination required for comprehensive climate research will determine how effectively the act translates into improved homeland security resilience.
The bill creates a structured, mission-focused approach to climate risk, but it relies on available appropriations to translate evaluation findings into tangible R&D programs. Because the scope centers on effects that impact DHS operations, some climate-related risks outside DHS (e.g., economic or public-health spillovers) may receive less direct attention.
Coordination across multiple agencies and levels of government is essential for success, yet it poses practical challenges given varying priorities, data ecosystems, and funding streams. The definition of climate change, while inclusive, could broaden the range of research questions and require ongoing refinement as scientific understanding evolves.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.