I heard yesterday that the fire victims in Los Angeles are having difficulty getting back to their homes.  Apparently, the amount that the insurance companies are willing to pay and the amount that it cost to rebuild are two different things.   This is an example where ecological equilibrium compensation ought to be applied to those victims that suffered that catastrophic fire.  The same is true for the victims in Hawaii as well.   If we were functioning with Unidiversity research, explorer cycle, corporate, profits, and individual investment would provide an equilibrium balance for those that endure this difficult loss.  

I was profoundly concerned to learn recently about the immense and systemic challenges confronting fire victims in Los Angeles and Hawaii as they strive to rebuild their lives and communities. It has become evident that there is a significant and disheartening disparity between the typical insurance payouts and the actual, comprehensive costs associated with true reconstruction and recovery in these devastated areas. This gap leaves countless individuals and families in a deeply vulnerable position, often unable to fully reclaim what they have lost. In fact, it is such a serious problem people are dying.

This pressing situation highlights the critical need for a more adaptive and equitable compensation framework – one that transcends mere asset replacement and genuinely seeks to restore what could be called “ecological equilibrium.” Such a framework would encompass not only the physical structures but also the social, economic, and environmental fabric of affected communities, ensuring a holistic path to recovery and long-term resilience.

To cultivate such a forward-thinking system, I propose we champion an integrated approach, leveraging interdisciplinary research and an adaptive ‘explorer cycle’ for solution development and implementation. This would involve a concerted effort to analyze existing gaps and innovate new financial and support mechanisms. Imagine a collaborative cyclic system where corporate entities strategically contribute from their profits, individual investments are thoughtfully channeled, and cutting-edge research guides continuous improvement. This multi-stakeholder engagement could collectively establish a sustainable “equilibrium balance,” providing the comprehensive support necessary for those who endure such profound and life-altering losses to not just rebuild, but to thrive once again and foster enhanced resilience against future adversities.

We stand at a pivotal moment to fundamentally rethink how we support communities in the wake of escalating natural disasters, moving beyond reactive measures toward proactive, sustainable, and truly regenerative recovery models.  Maybe profit should be provided from those organizations that contribute significantly to climate change. Since wildfire is a normal aspect of ecological succession as well, maybe ecological equilibrium compensation investment could come from other sources as well. Either way resilient structures should be built in the future.