@article {bnh-7996, title = {Fire spread across different fuel types: research and utilisation {\textendash} final project report}, number = {668}, year = {2021}, month = {05/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

It is crucial for emergency and disaster management organisations to predict of the rate of spread and intensity of bushfires for operational planning, community warnings and the deployment of their resources. Currently, this is achieved by simulation using simplified operational models that have the useful attribute of providing results on time scales commensurate with those required by emergency managers. However, when Cruz \& Alexander [1] reviewed the performance of the operational fire models used by fire and emergency service analysts on seven vegetation types found in Australia, they found that on an average most of the fire models have an error of 20{\textendash}80\% in estimating the rate of fire spread. These differences in prediction are due to the assumptions and limitations of these models. Therefore, it is essential that these simplified operational tools be refined so that they can better predict fire behaviour. Additionally, a more physically based firebrand model needs to be included in operational models to predict firebrand distribution and subsequent spotting, which lead to an increased rate of fire spread (ROS). Currently, no such model exists. With an increased population in the rural{\textendash}urban interface (or wildland{\textendash}urban interface, WUI), it is also important to understand the vulnerability of houses from radiant heat and firebrand flux in order to minimise such vulnerability.

In this project, we tested two established reliable physics-based models: Fire Dynamics Simulator (FDS) and FIRESTAR3D to simulate bushfire scenarios in three broad areas:

(1)\  sub-canopy wind flow,

(2)\  firebrand transport, and

(3)\  propagation of grass and forest fires.

We have made significant inroads into providing usable outputs as well understanding various aspects of bushfire behaviour. The following are particular highlights:

This project was also established to create a capability and capacity in Australia to conduct research and understand physical-based wildfire modelling approaches. There are several international groups developing these models, and it is imperative that Australia can interact and work alongside these researchers to translate the findings to the Australian context.

Overall, we have achieved our goal of obtaining greater insight into bushfire physics and we are now utilising those insights to parameterise various phenomena for operational models.

This report explains these issues in more detail.

[1] Meaning WRF will vary for the geographical location and driving wind velocity and direction

}, keywords = {Fire, fuel, research, spread, types, utilisation}, issn = {668}, author = {Nazmul Khan and Amila Wickramasinghe and Mahmood Rashid and Khalid Moinuddin} } @article {bnh-7964, title = {NSW Mid North Coast flood impact research}, number = {659}, year = {2021}, month = {04/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {MELBOURNE}, abstract = {

On March 18, 2021, an extreme rainfall event kicked off, resulting in severe flooding in the Mid North Coast of New South Wales. 18,000 people were evacuated, including 1,000 flood rescues. Flooding also impacted the North Coast, Hunter, Western Sydney, South Coast, Central West, and North West Regions of NSW. Flooding was also experienced in Southeast Queensland. The focus of this briefing is on flood impacts experienced on the NSW Mid North Coast.

Overview

On March 24, Risk Frontiers, with assistance from the BNHCRC, deployed a survey team to the NSW Mid North Coast region to observe and report on significant flooding in the area. Areas surveyed included, Bulahdelah, Taree, Wingham, Port Macquarie, North Haven, Laurieton, and Dunbogan. In addition to measuring flood depths and recording noteworthy damages to belongings and infrastructure, the team spoke with residents, business owners, and rescue personnel (Rural Fire Service, NSW Fire and Rescue, and State Emergency Services). Discussions covered evacuation, emergency response and communication, community resilience, and the insurability of their homes.

A couple of key issues emerged during the investigation. The first was insurance affordability in areas that were clearly at risk of flooding. Some residents and business owners we spoke with cited quotes for policies covering flood ranging from $5k - $30k per year. Our survey indicates that the full extent of damage will not be evident in claims data due to the low rates of insurance as a lot of individuals had chosen to remain uninsured due to the prohibitive costs quoted for them. Disaster mitigation needs to be considered in these areas to assist with insurance affordability.

Another common concern expressed was the lack of warning and mitigative action. For example, some residents had not considered sandbagging. Residents claimed they were either misinformed or warned too late, and then felt aspects of the process to recover were unclear.

}, keywords = {Flood, Impact, Mid North Coast, New South Wales, quick response, research}, issn = {659}, author = {Steve George and Salom{\'e} Hussein and R Crompton and Thomas Mortlock} } @article {bnh-6883, title = {Models and frameworks for assessing the value of disaster research}, journal = {Progress in Disaster Science}, volume = {6}, year = {2020}, month = {04/2020}, abstract = {

Funders, governments, stakeholders and end-users expect to see tangible evidence that an investment in research is a worthy use of resources. Research has impact if it makes a demonstrable contribution to the economy, society, culture, public policy, health, the environment, or quality of life, beyond academia.

This paper reviews frameworks that assess the impact of research and considers their usefulness in the conceptualisation and measurement of research impact in the disaster domain. Frameworks demonstrate impact through attribution, measurement and quantification of academic, social, and economic impacts in the short, medium and long term. While there is no specific framework in the hazard domain, adaptation of the {\textquotedblleft}pathways to research impact{\textquotedblright} tool created by Cruz Rivera et al. (2017) provides a well-considered basis for assessing disaster research impact.

}, keywords = {disaster, framework, Impact, research, Value, Wildfire}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100094}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590061720300314?via\%3Dihub}, author = {Ken Strahan and Adriana Keating and John Handmer} } @article {bnh-7214, title = {The value of research from the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, number = {601}, year = {2020}, month = {08/2020}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre (BNHCRC {\textendash} the CRC) retained us to develop a transparent, reproducible estimate of the total value to Australia of its research: to answer the question, what is the return to Australia of its investment in the BNHCRC?

Cooperative Research Centres, like the BNHCRC, represent the main formal vehicle for explicitly enhancing research and industry collaboration in Australia.\  With government sponsorship, researchers and industry work closely to produce socially and commercially desirable outcomes.\ 

Funders of all research, including that of bushfire and emergency management, increasingly want to ensure that their investments generate value for the emergency management sector and contribute to risk reduction.\  Research value can take a number of forms, from a readily assessed improvement in performance due to a new widget or process, to increases in capacity and risk management across the emergency sector, and direct and indirect benefits to the whole of society and economy.\ \ 

The ARC (Australian Research Council) has a broad definition of research impact:

{\textquotedblleft}Research impact is the contribution that research makes to the economy, society, environment or culture, beyond the contribution to academic research.{\textquotedblright}\ 

The definition suggested by the European Commission is broader still and includes indirect impacts and effects, on for example, innovation culture, capacity building, and increasing the stock of useful knowledge.\  We use the ARC{\textquoteright}s definition broadened slightly to encompass the specifics set out in the European definition as they help to capture the CRC{\textquoteright}s contribution. This is achieved through four pathways to value, set out in the following section.

}, keywords = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC, research, Value}, isbn = {978-0-6482756-7-1}, issn = {601}, author = {John Handmer and Adriana Keating and Ken Strahan} } @article {bnh-6012, title = {State Emergency Service volunteer views on expectations, experiences and motivations}, number = {513}, year = {2019}, month = {09/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

In 2017, the University of Western Australia (UWA) began a research collaboration project with the Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES), funded by the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre (CRC), to investigate ways to improve the retention rates of their emergency service volunteers. The State Emergency Service (SES) volunteers are a vital community within Western Australia{\textquoteright}s emergency volunteering sector due to their profound work and assistance in times of natural disasters and other emergencies. As such, researchers from UWA (Patrick Dunlop, Maryl{\`e}ne Gagn{\'e}, and Djurre Holtrop have since relocated to Curtin University) have collaborated to develop and administer a Cultural Assessment Tool (CAT) in the form of an online survey. The purpose of this survey was to learn about the SES volunteering experience from the volunteers{\textquoteright} perspectives in order to obtain information on how to improve volunteer recruitment, retention, wellbeing, and diversity within the overall SES volunteering journey.

}, keywords = {Emergency management, research, state emergency service, survey, sustainable volunteering, volunteering}, issn = {513}, author = {Hawa Farid and Darja Kragt and Patrick Dunlop and Maryl{\`e}ne Gagn{\'e} and Aleksandra Luksyte and Djurre Holtrop} } @article {bnh-5565, title = {Ten years after the Black Saturday fires, what have we learnt from post-fire research?}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management}, volume = {32}, year = {2019}, month = {05/2019}, abstract = {

Ten years ago, 173 people lost their lives and more than 2000 homes were destroyed in the Black Saturday bushfires. The fires of 7 February 2009 led to a royal commission and significant changes to bushfire management throughout Australia. Research played an important role in the royal commission and subsequent changes. This paper reflects on what was learnt from research into human behaviour and community safety undertaken as part of the Bushfire CRC 2009 Victorian Bushfires Research Taskforce. The research involved interviews with over 600 householders and a mail survey of 1314 households affected by the fires. This paper reviews findings from subsequent post-fire research to consider the extent to which there have been changes in findings related to community planning, preparedness and responses to bushfire. The review suggests that many of the issues encountered on Black Saturday{\textemdash}limited awareness of and preparedness for bushfire risk, a tendency for leaving (or evacuating) at the last moment and a commitment to defending, even under the highest levels of fire danger{\textemdash}persist, despite major changes to policy and public messaging.

}, keywords = {Black Saturday, bushfires, Emergency management, research}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/ajem-april-2019-ten-years-after-the-black-saturday-fires-what-have-we-learnt-from-post-fire-research/}, author = {J Whittaker} }