@article {bnh-8341, title = {Recovery Capitals: a collaborative approach to post-disaster guidance}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management}, volume = {37}, year = {2022}, month = {04/2022}, abstract = {

Knowledge from past disasters can inform and support recovery, yet these insights are not always readily accessible to recovery practitioners. To bridge this gap, effective collaboration is needed to produce practical, evidence-based resources. This was the focus of the Recovery Capitals (ReCap) project, a collaboration between researchers and practitioners across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. This paper presents a critical case study of the participatory processes involved in developing a recovery capitals framework and associated resources. The framework is based on an existing Community Capitals Framework that emphasises the social, natural, political, built, human, financial and cultural strengths and resources within communities. The Recovery Capitals Framework arose through applying the Community Capitals Framework to disaster recovery, with conceptual adaptations to reflect shared values, diverse perspectives and collective knowledge of recovery. The lessons learnt from this international and researcher-practitioner collaboration are analysed, and the application of principles of equity, inclusion and community-led recovery is evaluated. Shortcomings and innovations are examined in how resources were tailored to the cultural contexts of each country, and reflections are presented from the perspectives Indigenous and non-Indigenous contributors. These lessons can inform future collaborations that support inclusive, holistic and evidence-informed recovery efforts.

}, keywords = {capital, community, evidence-informed, framework, human capital, recovery}, doi = {10.47389/37.2.52}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/ajem-april-2022-recovery-capitals-a-collaborative-approach-to-post-disaster-guidance/}, author = {Phoebe Quinn and Lisa Gibbs and Denise Blake and Emily Campbell and David Johnston and John Richardson and Andrew Coghlan} } @article {bnh-8293, title = {Guidance framework for the selection of different fuel management strategies}, number = {716}, year = {2021}, month = {12/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Planned burning is one of the most utilised fuel management activities, but the safe application of this method is hindered by climate change (e.g. shrinking and shifting windows of opportunity) and adverse societal and environmental outcomes (e.g. smoke impact, risk of fire escape). For this reason, fire managers need access to detailed information to help them make informed decisions and select a fuel management strategy that is compatible with a range of factors.

This report focuses on the development and illustration of a general guidance framework that provides users with the information and knowledge they need to select suitable fuel management strategies for their particular circumstances, and hence assists them with preparing an effective fuel management plan. The framework is developed based on a review of literature and data collected from survey responses from local governments and their fire managers in Western Australia who conduct fuel management activities.

The framework provides information on a set of functions bushfire mitigation officers need to consider when developing fuel management plans for a range of fuel management techniques. The functions are divided into:

The fuel management techniques include:

The utility of the framework is illustrated on two hypothetical scenarios, representing situations where a user would like to ascertain relevant attributes of a set of candidate fuel management techniques and where a user would like to identify the best fuel management technique for a given situation.

}, keywords = {framework, Fuel management, guidance, strategies}, issn = {716}, author = {Amelie Jeanneau and Aaron Zecchin and Hedwig van Delden and Tim McNaught and Holger Maier} } @article {bnh-7227, title = {Diversity and inclusion framework for emergency management policy and practice}, number = {602}, year = {2020}, month = {08/2020}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The Emergency Management Sector (EMS) is made up of diverse organisations, and its scope of activity spans the prevention, preparedness, response and recovery (PPRR) spectrum for a wide variety of hazards. This requires an array of activities that contribute to the safety and wellbeing of communities and those within their organisations. The EMS is also undergoing dynamic change, of which human diversity is one key element. The sector has recognised that it needs to better reflect the communities it works with, and that it has {\textquoteleft}unacceptably low levels of diversity{\textquoteright} (National Strategy for Disaster Resilience, COAG, 2011). Inclusion is seen as an essential part of this process, but policy, management and practice need further development if the sector is to achieve functioning inclusive organisations who reflect the diverse communities they serve.

Diversity and inclusion (D\&I) are different but deeply entwined. Diversity can be seen as a variety of people who have different and unique characteristics. This difference can be determined by aspects such as their cultural or social background, their age, the way they think, their physical attributes or their gender or a combination of these. Increasing diversity creates a different dynamic, and inclusion is the action that is undertaken to manage this change. It is also the tool that ensures that the increased diversity is effective in serving the organisational or community needs, and does not create a risk for the community or the organisation.\ 

Although the nature and measurement of diversity is being better recognised and understood, the management and measurement of inclusion is still evolving. This is an area of innovation where not everything will work. New approaches need to be developed and adapted to suit the myriad of different contexts throughout the sector. This has resulted in numerous D\&I programs at sectoral and organisational levels. However, the effectiveness of past and present programs, and what constitutes good management and measurement, is still emerging (Young et al., 2018).\ \ 

There is often tension between the core work of EMS organisations, as the development of D\&I is often seen as a secondary activity that is a cost to the workforce rather than an investment in the future workforce. This tension has been exacerbated by deeply entrenched cultural and institutional factors. This framework aims to provide a basis for practitioners to address these issues through a strength-based approach, which builds upon current practice and expertise in the sector.\ 

The framework has been developed in response to needs that were identified in collaboration with practitioners across the sector, which included:

The framework has been developed, tested and refined in collaboration with emergency management experts, and draws on the following reports from the project:

Diversity and inclusion is not a simple problem with easy solutions. It is a dynamic situation that requires ongoing management. This means that standard notions of success and failure can be problematic, which is why this framework focuses on what has been found to be effective.\ 

As the EMS is diverse in terms of organisational composition, capability and context, what is possible and {\textquoteleft}doable{\textquoteright} will be different for each organisation. To account for this, this framework is deliberately not prescriptive. Its aim is to support and guide practitioners to develop and integrate D\&I practice, so that it becomes accepted as part of the day-to-day activities and {\textquoteleft}how things are done{\textquoteright}.\ 

This framework will be supported by two further documents that will focus on management and measurement practices.

}, keywords = {diversity and inclusion, Emergency management, framework, Policy, practice}, issn = {602}, author = {Celeste Young and Roger Jones} } @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} } @book {bnh-6848, title = {Natural Hazards and Disaster Justice: Challenges for Australia and Its Neighbours}, year = {2020}, pages = {368}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, organization = {Palgrave Macmillan}, edition = {1}, address = {London}, abstract = {

This book explores policy, legal, and practice implications regarding the emerging field of disaster justice, using case studies of floods, bushfires, heatwaves, and earthquakes in Australia and Southern and South-east Asia. It reveals geographic locational and social disadvantage and structural inequities that lead to increased risk and vulnerability to disaster, and which impact ability to recover post-disaster.\  Written by multidisciplinary disaster researchers, the book addresses all stages of the disaster management cycle, demonstrating or recommending just approaches to preparation, response and recovery. It notably reveals how procedural, distributional and interactional aspects of justice enhance resilience, and offers a cutting edge analysis of disaster justice for managers, policy makers, researchers in justice, climate change or emergency management.

}, keywords = {disaster justice, Emergency management, environmental sociology, framework, Natural hazards, policies}, isbn = {978-981-15-0466-2}, issn = {978-981-15-0465-5}, doi = {10.1007/978-981-15-0466-2}, url = {https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9789811504655$\#$aboutBook}, author = {Anna Lukasiewicz and Claudia Baldwin} } @article {bnh-7197, title = {Recovery Capitals (ReCap): applying a community capitals framework to disaster recovery - annual report 2019/20}, number = {599}, year = {2020}, month = {08/2020}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {MELBOURNE}, abstract = {

The Recovery Capitals (ReCap) project applies a Community Capitals lens to disaster recovery to increase understanding about the interacting influences of social, built, financial, political, human, cultural and natural capital on wellbeing outcomes. It aims to support wellbeing after disasters by providing evidence-based guidance through a range of resources in different formats to accommodate different learning styles and ways of working.

ReCap has shown marked progress in the past year by engaging a large team of end-user and stakeholder organisations who are actively involved in progressive decision making. Detailed evidence mapping against the community capitals framework was undertaken using previous research conducted by the academic teams and collaborators. The first ReCap resource, a booklet containing key messages in an accessible format will be released as a pilot in July 2020 to meet the demand for support in current recovery efforts. \ The remaining ReCap resources will be produced and released later in 2020.

}, keywords = {community capitals, disaster recovery, framework, ReCap}, issn = {599}, author = {Lisa Gibbs and Phoebe Quinn and David Johnston and Denise Blake and Emily Campbell and John Richardson} } @mastersthesis {bnh-6164, title = {Investigation of spotting and intrinsic fire dynamics using a coupled atmosphere-fire modelling framework}, volume = {Doctor of Philosophy}, year = {2019}, month = {10/2019}, school = {University of New South Wales}, type = {Doctorate}, address = {Sydney}, abstract = {

Large plume-driven wild res are among the most destructive and unpredictable of all natural hazards. A prerequisite for the development of the deep convection characteristic of these res is the existence of a large area of active aming, also known as deep aming. There are a number of processes associated with the development of deep aming; many involve some form of dynamic re behaviour, in which dramatic changes in re behaviour can occur with little or no change in ambient conditions. Another important driver of deep aming is intense spotting and spot- re coalescence, which itself involves dynamic re behaviour. It is difficult to model dynamic re behaviour in a computationally efficient way; it cannot be modelled with existing operational re-spread models. This thesis is concerned with the modelling of dynamic re behaviour, and the modelling of ember transport in turbulent plumes. A coupled atmosphere framework is used to model junction res (the merging of two separate relines at an acute angle), and the fundamental processes causing the asociated dynamic behaviour are identi ed. The idea that reline curvature can act as a proxy for some of the processes underlying dynamic re behaviour is critically examined, and rejected. A recently-developed simple coupled model, the pyrogenic-potential model, is discussed. It is found to produce results comparable with that of a coupled atmosphere\ model in simple test cases involving the ignition of res along circular arcs. The\ pyrogenic-potential model can capture some forms of dynamic behaviour, and is\ efficient enough to be used operationally.\ To study ember transport in turbulent plumes, a large eddy model is used to simulate\ the plume from a static heat source, and the resulting wind eld is used to\ model the transport of embers under various assumptions. It is shown that the\ terminal-velocity assumption, in which embers are assumed to always move at their\ terminal velocity with respect to the wind eld, leads to an overestimate of emberlanding\ densities at medium to long ranges. This has important implications for\ the stochastic modelling of spot- re development.

}, keywords = {bushfire dynamics, bushfires, Fire, fire modelling, framework, spotting}, author = {Thomas, C. M.} } @article {bnh-5686, title = {UNHaRMED framework report: a co-creation approach for the development and use of decision support systems for disaster risk reduction.}, number = {484}, year = {2019}, month = {07/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This report proposes a generic approach for the development and use of decision support systems (DSSs) for disaster risk reduction (DRR). At the core of the DSS is an integrated model, consisting of a land use model and risk models for four hazards, including flooding, coastal inundation, bushfire and earthquake. The inputs to these models are affected by a number of external drivers that change over time, including demographics, climate change and economics, as well as a number of mitigation options, including spatial planning, land management, structural measures and community-based resilience efforts. The outputs from the integrated model include risk maps for the individual hazards that change over time, as well as cost-benefit, social and environmental indicators used for assessing the impact of risk reduction portfolios.

}, keywords = {DDR, decision support system, Disaster management, framework, UNHaRMED}, issn = {484}, author = {Hedwig van Delden and Graeme Riddell and Roel Vanhout and Holger Maier and Jeffrey Newman and Aaron Zecchin and Graeme Dandy} } @article {bnh-6643, title = {Floodway inspection and maintenance framework}, number = {540}, year = {2018}, month = {04/2018}, institution = {Bushfire \& Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Bridges, culverts, and floodways are vital road infrastructures for the operation of a road network. Their application may vary based on geographic and demographic features of the territory. Floodways are common in rural road networks as they provide economic and environmental friendly solutions over bridges and culverts. Floodways play a significant role in the economy of a country by connecting regional communities, farmlands and agricultural areas to city centers. For example, 48\% of total agricultural production in Australia in 2006 had been produced from regional council areas, those covering only about 6.9\% of Australia{\textquoteright}s population, 11\% of total Australian land mass and 24\% of roads in length [1]. Floodways are common in most of these rural road networks and, hence, play a vital role to distribute agricultural and farming products to highly populated city centers. Therefore, healthy operational levels of floodways are of paramount importance to maintain the continuous supply of essential commodities and the economic balance of Australia.

Floodways are different from bridges and culverts in the design and operational aspects. By definition, floodways are sections of roads which have been designed to be overtopped by floodwater during relatively low average recurrence interval (ARI) floods and are expected to return to fully serviceable level after the flood water recedes [2]. Although, floodways are designed to withstand at low flood levels, extreme natural disasters can damage these vital road infrastructures as evident from the 2011 and 2013 Queensland flood events. 58\% of floodway structures in the Lockyer Valley Regional Council (LVRC) area in Queensland, Australia, were damaged during the 2013 Queensland flood event leading to operational failures in rural road networks. Floodway damage leads to isolating regional communities and hindering the supply of agricultural products to other regions. In a post-disaster period, the long-term impacts on the community and the economy of the country depend on the speed of reestablishing the fully operational level of those floodways.

}, keywords = {Flood, Floodway, framework, maintenance}, issn = {540}, author = {Sujeeva Setunge and Chun Qing Li and Darryn McEvoy and Kevin Zhang and Priyan Mendis and Tuan Ngo and Nilupa Herath and Karu Karunasena and Weena Lokuge and Dilanthi Amaratunga} } @article {bnh-7234, title = {A novel framework for owner driven reconstruction projects to enhance disaster resilience in the long term}, journal = {Disaster Prevention and Management}, volume = {27}, year = {2018}, month = {08/2018}, pages = {421-446}, abstract = {

Purpose

Post-disaster reconstruction poses a double-edged sword to its implementers as it demands addressing survivors{\textquoteright} need for speed as well as meeting the growing expectation to trigger resilience. While an owner-driven housing reconstruction (ODHR), inter-disciplinary and long-term approach has been promoted internationally; however, there is limited research focussed on the long-term impacts (\>10 years after a disaster) of ODHR. Furthermore, there is no one accepted framework for practitioners to guide through the process of ODHR projects to carve pathways for disaster resilience. The purpose of this paper is to assimilate findings{\textemdash}contingent and generalisable{\textemdash}into a novel framework for future change in practice.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper deployed a mixed methods methodology with a comparative case study research method. Two case study projects were from the Indian state of Gujarat, 13 years after the 2001 earthquake and the other two from Bihar, 6 years since the 2008 Kosi river floods. Due to multi-disciplinary nature of research, empirical data collection relied on a mix of social sciences methods including 80 semi-structured interviews, and architectural research methods including the visual analysis of photographs and sketches. Three sample groups of agency members, beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries were purposively selected. Thematic content analysis was used for the data analysis.

Findings

The paper provides empirical insights on how ODHR projects in Indian states of Gujarat and Bihar succeeded at enhancing disaster resilience of communities. It suggests that the civil society organisations acted as {\textquotedblleft}enablers{\textquotedblright} at four stages: envisioning strategically based on systemic understanding, building soft assets including community trust and dignity for social mobilisation prior to, proposing minor modifications to construction technology for its multi-hazard safety as well as cultural relevance, and sustaining capacity building efforts beyond reconstruction completion or beyond one project life-cycle.

Research limitations/implications

The author of this paper cautions that the spiral framework needs further development to make it flexibility and customisable to suit the specifics of a particular context.

Originality/value

The implications of the findings discussed in this paper are primarily for practitioners involved in disaster recovery and development sector. Since prevailing models or frameworks neither incorporate multi-disciplinary approach (demanded by socio-ecological systems resilience concept), nor represent project scale, a novel, four-pronged framework for ODHR has been proposed in this paper for strategic success. The framework has been illustrated in spiral and tabular forms, and has been kept abstract to provide practitioners the much-needed flexibility for adapting it to suit the specifics of a particular context.

}, keywords = {Capacity building; post-disaster reconstruction, disaster resilience, framework, owner-driven reconstruction, project management}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-11-2017-0285}, url = {https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DPM-11-2017-0285/full/html}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati} } @article {bnh-6663, title = {Business exposure information framework}, number = {542}, year = {2017}, month = {12/2017}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Bushfire and Natural Hazards are features of the Australian climate and landscape and the threats will continue (COAG, 2011). These hazards can have profound personal, social, economic and environmental impacts. The impacts of these disasters demand the need to advance the efforts of planning, preparation, response and recovery to improve community resilience. Disaster management is a collective responsibility of all levels of government, society, businesses and individuals. For disaster resilience, emergency management planning should consider risk and risk treatments across the built, economic, social and environmental assets (COAG, 2011). Exposure {\textquotedblleft}what is at risk{\textquotedblright} information is fundamental for assessing risk from natural hazards and therefore nationally consistent information is required for evidence based prioritising and targeting interventions. To address this, consistent methodologies and frameworks are required to enable information sharing and accurate interpretation.

In natural hazards and disasters decision making Exposure is a key component and constitutes people, buildings, infrastructure (transport, energy, communications and water), businesses, hazardous substances, primary and major industries. This report is an outcome of research funded by Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC to develop an {\textquotedblleft}Australian Natural Hazards Business Exposure Information Framework{\textquotedblright}. The framework is aimed at supporting the development of nationally consistent and centralised business and economic exposure information to enable the decision making in disaster management to the evidence based. This research has reviewed the current literature and information providers; engaged end users and researchers for future requirements, and conducted a gap analysis.

The literature review has helped to understand the relevant practices and future trends at international, national, regional and local levels. In particular, the review highlighted the business and economic exposure data requirements to enable researchers to develop models for better impact analysis.

The project has conducted an on-line survey of existing exposure information capabilities in Australia to ascertain existing data and information capabilities for disaster response and recovery. Overall a lack of national consistency in existing data and information capabilities is a limiting factor in evidence based decision making.

The project also conducted a Stakeholder Engagement Workshop with an aim to identify the exposure information needs of researchers and other end users in Australia. The workshop provided an opportunity for thirty six participants representing decision makers, emergency managers, planners, researchers, asset managers and the insurance sector to outline their future requirements. The collective views of data managers, researchers and end users have informed the basis for exposure information\  requirements to develop a consistent, standardised exposure information framework that will support vulnerability assessments for disaster risk reduction and socio-economic impact analysis.

Information on some exposure elements is critical for some end users and may not be of interest for others. To reduce the complexity, the framework categorises the information provision into three levels depending on user requirements such as policy and planning; response and recovery; and research and analysis. Australian Natural Hazards Exposure Framework (ANHEF) levels and their aims, description and boundaries are outlined in Built Environment Exposure Information Framework Report. There is some fundamental information and common elements that underpins the entire exposure framework such as spatial enablement; land use categorisation; insurance status and metadata outlined in Built Environment Exposure Information Framework Report.

The business exposure information framework presents the exposure elements required to develop information systems to support the impact analysis of both micro-economic (business sectors) and macro-economic (regional) for disaster risk reduction from a variety of natural hazards. The micro-economic variables considered in the framework include business entity, type, size, operations, space usage, workforce and input requirements. Whereas the macro-economic variables include the size and performance of the economy, industry sectors and labour force characteristics to assess the local economy.

The document outlines a generic framework to underpin the utilisation and is focused on end user requirements. The report identifies a list of exposure elements across different components of the business and economic activity that are presented in the summary tables.

}, keywords = {business exposure, disaster, framework, modelling, risk reduction}, issn = {542}, author = {Krishna Nadimpalli and Itismita Mohanty and Mohsen Kalantari and Abbas Rajabifard} }