@article {bnh-3799, title = {Strategies for non-traditional emergency volunteers: a risk-benefit framework for decision-making}, number = {253}, year = {2017}, month = {07/2017}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This report presents a Risk-Benefit framework that can assist decision-makers in emergency management organisations (EMOs) to identify potential benefits and risks of alternative strategies for {\textquoteleft}non-traditional{\textquoteright} emergency volunteers. The framework was developed primarily from stakeholder input in two workshops, combined with recent research.

Non-traditional emergency volunteering includes any type of volunteering {\textendash} formal and informal - that is: 1) Focused on contributing to disaster and emergency prevention, preparedness, response, or relief/recovery and 2) Involves volunteers who are not traditional emergency management volunteers affiliated with EMOs.

Different strategies for non-traditional volunteers bring different sets of potential benefits, challenges and risks for communities, volunteers, and EMOs. Not all of the potential consequences of different options will be immediately evident to a particular organisation at a particular point in time. Without decision support EMOs may perceive greater risks with non-traditional emergency volunteers and voluntary organisations and overlook or downgrade potential benefits due to unawareness, unfamiliarity, or risk aversion.

}, issn = {253}, author = {Tarn Kruger and John Handmer and J Whittaker} }