Circular Economy Gains in Post-Disaster Recovery: The Altadena Reciprocity Model

The Altadena Reciprocity Model, a pioneering initiative in Los Angeles, is redefining post-disaster recovery through circular economy principles. By repurposing fire-charred timber from the Eaton Fire into reusable lumber, this project not only reduces environmental waste but also creates a resilient, locally sourced material supply chain. Angel City Lumber, a Boyle Heights-based sawmill, leads this effort through its “community wood bank” program, which transforms burned trees into millwork-grade lumber for flooring, furniture, and construction materials. Residents can donate trees meeting size requirements (18-inch diameter, 9-foot lengths), which are then milled and returned to the community at or below market cost [1]. This model aligns with ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) goals by preserving local heritage, reducing landfill dependency, and fostering economic equity [2].

Federal policies are increasingly supporting such circular strategies. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling (SWIFR) grant program, funded by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, allocates $275 million over five years to enhance recycling infrastructure. This includes post-disaster debris management, directly aiding communities like Altadena in scaling circular practices [3]. Similarly, the Economic Development Administration (EDA)’s FY 2025 Disaster Supplemental Grant Program provides $1.45 billion for economic recovery, emphasizing long-term resilience through sustainable infrastructure and industry diversification [4]. These programs underscore a growing recognition of circular economy models as tools for climate adaptation and urban resilience.

Quantifying the return on investment (ROI) for circular projects reveals compelling economic and environmental benefits. A case study of the 2011 tornado in Sullivan, Indiana, demonstrated that nearly 46% of construction and demolition debris could be recycled or reused, reducing landfill dependency by 46% and cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 28% compared to conventional methods [5]. In disaster recovery, such strategies not only mitigate environmental harm but also conserve resources, lowering the need for new materials. The Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council further highlights that hazard mitigation yields a 4:1 to 11:1 benefit-to-cost ratio, emphasizing the cost-effectiveness of resilient infrastructure [6].

Despite these advantages, funding gaps persist. Circular economy investments globally surged from $10 billion in 2018 to $28 billion in 2023, yet high-impact innovations in design and production received only 4.7% of total investment [7]. In the U.S., circular projects account for just 2% of tracked capital, indicating untapped potential [7]. Angel City Lumber’s initiative, for instance, faces logistical challenges such as securing long-term storage and milling space, with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers temporarily hosting logs at an Altadena golf course [1]. Addressing these gaps requires targeted federal support and private-sector collaboration to scale circular models beyond pilot projects.

The Altadena Reciprocity Model exemplifies how circular economy principles can transform disaster recovery into an opportunity for sustainable urban renewal. By integrating federal funding, community engagement, and innovative material reuse, such projects align with global sustainability goals like the UN’s Sustainable Cities and Communities and Responsible Consumption and Production objectives [8]. As climate-related disasters intensify, investing in circular infrastructure is not merely an environmental imperative but a strategic economic decision. The ROI of these initiatives—measured in reduced emissions, preserved jobs, and long-term resilience—positions them as a cornerstone of future-ready urban planning.

Source:
[1] Altadena Reciprocity Project, [https://angelcitylumber.vercel.app/altadena-reciprocity-project]
[2] Circular Economy in Disaster Recovery: Life Cycle Approaches to Debris, [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/392871600_Circular_Economy_in_Disaster_Recovery_Life_Cycle_Approaches_to_Debris]
[3] Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling Grant Program, [https://www.epa.gov/infrastructure/solid-waste-infrastructure-recycling-grant-program]
[4] FY2025 Disaster Supplemental Grant Program, [https://www.eda.gov/strategic-initiatives/disaster-recovery/supplemental/2025]
[5] (PDF) Circular Economy in Disaster Recovery: Life Cycle Approaches to Debris, [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/392871600_Circular_Economy_in_Disaster_Recovery_Life_Cycle_Approaches_to_Debris]
[6] ROI: The economic case for resilient design, [https://www.aia.org/resource-center/roi-economic-case-resilient-design]
[7] The CGR Finance: circular economy investment has surged since 2018 but high-impact solutions remain underfunded, [https://circularity-gap.world/updates-collection/the-cgr-finance-circular-economy-investment-has-surged-since-2018-but-high-impact-solutions-remain-underfunded]
[8] Circular Economy Strategies for Post-Disaster ..., [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43615-024-00495-y]