Building resilient communities : creating effective multi-channel communication during disaster response and recovery

Aim: To examine evidence-based strategies that motivate appropriate action and increase informed decision-making during the response and recovery phases of disasters.

Discovering future disaster management capability needs using scenario planning

In recent years disaster risk reduction efforts have focused on disturbances ranging from climate variability, seismic hazards, geo-political instability and public and animal health crises. These factors combined with uncertainty derived from inter-dependencies within and across systems of critical infrastructure create significant problems of governance for the private and public sector alike. The potential for rapid spread of impacts, geographically and virtually, can render a comprehensive understanding of disaster response and recovery needs and risk mitigation issues beyond the grasp of competent authority. Because of such cascading effects communities and governments at local and state-levels are unlikely to face single incidents but rather series of systemic impacts: often appearing concurrently. A further point to note is that both natural and technological hazards can act directly on socio-technical systems as well as being propagated by them: as network events. Such events have been categorised as ‘outside of the box,’ ‘too fast,’ and ‘too strange’ (Lagadec, 2004). Emergent complexities in linked systems can make disaster effects difficult to anticipate and recovery efforts difficult to plan for. Beyond the uncertainties of real world disasters, that might be called familiar or even regular, can we safely assume that the generic capability we use now will suit future disaster contexts? This paper presents initial scoping of research funded by the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre seeking to define future capability needs of disaster management organisations. It explores challenges to anticipating the needs of representative agencies and groups active in before, during and after phases of emergency and disaster situations using capability deficit assessments and scenario assessment.

Working as one: A road map to disaster resilience for Australia

Natural disasters cause widespread disruption, costing the Australian economy $6.3 billion per year, and those costs are projected to rise incrementally to $23 billion by 2050. With more frequent natural disasters with greater consequences, Australian communities need the ability to prepare and plan for them, absorb and recover from them, and adapt more successfully to their effects. Enhancing Australian resilience will allow us to better anticipate disasters and assist in planning to reduce losses, rather than just waiting for the next king hit and paying for it afterwards. Given the scale of devastation, governments have been quick to pick up the pieces when major natural disasters hit. But this approach (‘The government will give you taxpayers’ money regardless of what you did to help yourself, and we’ll help you rebuild in the same risky area.’) has created a culture of dependence. This is unsustainable and costly. In 2008, ASPI published Taking a punch: building a more resilient Australia. That report emphasised the importance of strong leadership and coordination in disaster resilience policymaking, as well as the value of volunteers and family and individual preparation, in managing the effects of major disasters. This report offers a roadmap for enhancing Australia’s disaster resilience, building on the 2011 National Strategy for Disaster Resilience. It includes a snapshot of relevant issues and current resilience efforts in Australia, outlining key challenges and opportunities. The report sets out 11 recommendations to help guide Australia towards increasing national resilience, from individuals and local communities through to state and federal agencies.

Natural hazards and land use planning: How resilient must a landowner be?

The past decade has seen an increase in the occurrence of natural hazards and the experience in Australia has led to a reconsideration of the planning for natural hazards by government and to the adoption of a whole-of-nation resilience-based approach to disaster management. A key component of creating community resilience is the integration of disaster management with government and community strategic planning in relation to the social, built, economic and natural environments. Joint responsibility of government and the community for ‘land use planning systems and building control arrangements [which] reduce, as far as is practicable, community exposure to unreasonable risks from known hazards’, is a critical element of a resilient community. As the responsibility for the implementation of land use planning policies in Australia is generally with local governments, this paper will examine whether, in light of improved predictive technology, the failure of a local government to adequately foresee and make provision for a known hazard will give rise to liability for damage or loss of property caused by that hazard.

Framework for assessing the influence of critical infrastructure interdependencies in post-disaster reconstruction management

Due to ever increasing climate instability, the number of natural disasters affecting society and communities is expected to increase globally in the future, which will result in a growing number of casualties and damage to property and infrastructure. Such damage poses crucial challenges for recovery of interdependent critical infrastructures. Post-disaster reconstruction is a complex undertaking as it is not only closely linked to the well-being and essential functioning of society, but also requires a large financial commitment. Management of critical infrastructure during post-disaster recovery needs to be underpinned by a holistic recognition that the recovery of each individual infrastructure system (e.g. energy, water, transport and information and communication technology) can be affected by the interdependencies that exist between these different systems. A fundamental characteristic of these interdependencies is that failure of one critical infrastructure system can result in the failure of other interdependent infrastructures, leading to a cascade of failures, which can impede post-disaster recovery and delay the subsequent reconstruction process. Consequently, there is a critical need for developing a holistic strategy to assess the influence of infrastructure interdependencies, and for incorporating these interdependencies into a post-disaster recovery strategy. This paper discusses four key dimensions of interdependencies that need to be considered in a post-disaster reconstruction planning. Using key concepts and sub-concepts derived from the notion of interdependency, the paper examines how critical infrastructure interdependencies affect the recovery processes of damaged infrastructures.

The influence of critical infrastructure interdependencies on post-disaster reconstruction: Elements of infrastructure interdependency that impede the post-disaster recovery effort

The importance of developing effective disaster management strategies has significantly grown as the world continues to be confronted with unprecedented disastrous events. Factors such as climate instability, recent urbanization along with rapid population growth in many cities around the world have unwittingly exacerbated the risks of potential disasters, leaving a large number of people and infrastructure exposed to new forms of threats from natural disasters such as flooding, cyclones, and earthquakes. With disasters on the rise, effective recovery planning of the built environment is becoming imperative as it is not only closely related to the well-being and essential functioning of society, but it also requires significant financial commitment. In the built environment context, post-disaster reconstruction focuses essentially on the repair and reconstruction of physical infrastructures. The reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts are generally performed in the form of collaborative partnerships that involve multiple organisations, enabling the restoration of interdependencies that exist between infrastructure systems such as energy, water (including wastewater), transport, and telecommunication systems. These interdependencies are major determinants of vulnerabilities and risks encountered by critical infrastructures and therefore have significant implications for post-disaster recovery. When disrupted by natural disasters, such interdependencies have the potential to promote the propagation of failures between critical infrastructures at various levels, and thus can have dire consequences on reconstruction activities. This paper outlines the results of a pilot study on how elements of infrastructure interdependencies have the potential to impede the post-disaster recovery effort. Using a set of unstructured interview questionnaires, plausible arguments provided by seven respondents revealed that during post-disaster recovery, critical infrastructures are mutually dependent on each other’s uninterrupted availability, both physically and through a host of information and communication technologies. Major disruption to their physical and cyber interdependencies could lead to cascading failures, which could delay the recovery effort. Thus, the existing interrelationship between critical infrastructures requires that the entire interconnected network be considered when managing reconstruction activities during the post-disaster recovery period.

Disaster management in Nepal: Media engagement in the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction

Nepal, as a consequence of its geographical location and changing climate, faces frequent threats of natural disasters. According to the World Bank’s 2005 Natural Disasters Hotspots Report, Nepal is ranked the 11th most vulnerable country to earthquake and 30th to flood risk. Geo-Hazards International (2011) has classified Kathmandu as one of the world’s most vulnerable cities to earthquakes. In the last four decades more than 32,000 people in Nepal have lost their lives and annual monetary loss is estimated at more than 15 million (US) dollars. This review identifies gaps in knowledge, and progress towards implementation of the Post Hyogo Framework of Action. Nepal has identified priority areas: community resilience, sustainable development and climate change induced disaster risk reduction. However, one gap between policy and action lies in the ability of Nepal to act effectively in accordance with an appropriate framework for media activities. Supporting media agencies include the Press Council, Federation of Nepalese Journalists, Nepal Television, Radio Nepal and Telecommunications Authority and community based organizations. The challenge lies in further strengthening traditional and new media to undertake systematic work supported by government bodies and the National Risk Reduction Consortium (NRRC). Within this context, the ideal role for media is one that is proactive where journalists pay attention to a range of appropriate angles or frames when preparing and disseminating information. It is important to develop policy for effective information collection, sharing and dissemination in collaboration with Telecommunication, Media and Journalists. The aim of this paper is to describe the developments in disaster management in Nepal and their implications for media management. This study provides lessons for government, community and the media to help improve the framing of disaster messages. Significantly, the research highlights the prominence that should be given to flood, landslides, lightning and earthquakes.

A framing analysis on Nepalese media portrayal of disaster events using news frames and PPRR cycle

This study seeks to understand the prevailing status of Nepalese media portrayal of natural disasters and develop a disaster management framework to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of news production through the continuum of prevention, preparedness, response and recovery (PPRR) phases of disaster management. The study is currently under progress. It is being undertaken in three phases. In phase-1, a qualitative content analysis is conducted. The news contents are categorized in frames as proposed in the 'Framing theory' and pre-defined frames. However, researcher has looked at the theories of the Press, linking to social responsibility theory as it is regarded as the major obligation of the media towards the society. Thereafter, the contents are categorized as per PPRR cycle. In Phase-2, based on the findings of content analysis, 12 in-depth interviews with journalists, disaster managers and community leaders are conducted. In phase-3, based on the findings of content analysis and in-depth interviews, a framework for effective media management of disaster are developed using thematic analysis. As the study is currently under progress hence, findings from the pilot study are elucidated. The response phase of disasters is most commonly reported in Nepal. There is relatively low coverage of preparedness and prevention. Furthermore, the responsibility frame in the news is most prevalent following human interest. Economic consequences and conflict frames are also used while reporting and vulnerability assessment has been used as an additional frame. The outcomes of this study are multifaceted: At the micro-level people will be benefited as it will enable a reduction in the loss of human lives and property through effective dissemination of information in news and other mode of media. They will be ‘well prepared for', 'able to prevent', 'respond to' and 'recover from' any natural disasters. At the meso level the media industry will be benefited and have their own 'disaster management model of news production' as an effective disaster reporting tool which will improve in media's editorial judgment and priority. At the macro-level it will assist government and other agencies to develop appropriate policies and strategies for better management of natural disasters.

What does built environment research have to do with risk mitigation, resilience and disaster recovery?

One could argue that the nature of our housing stock is a key determining factor in the ability of our citizens to manage risk, be resilient to various natural and human events, and to recover from these events. Recent research has been examining current challenges posed by our housing stock and exploring potential solutions from a range of perspectives. The aim of this paper is to discuss key findings from recent built environment research in Australia to initiate cross-sectorial discussion and debate about the implications and opportunities for other sectors such as emergency management and insurance. Three recent building research projects are discussed: - Heat waves The impact of heat waves on houses and occupants, and proposed changes to building regulations, air conditioning standards and building design, to reduce risks associated with heat waves. - Net zero energy homes Exploration of the potential benefits of a strategic optimization of building quality, energy and water efficiency, and household or community level distributed energy and water services for disaster management and recovery. - Building information Mapping of the flow of information about residential buildings, and the potential for national or regional building files (in a similar manner to personal medical records) to assist all parties to make more informed decisions that impact on housing sustainability and community resilience. The paper discusses how sustainability, environmental performance and resilience are inter-related, and can be supported by building files. It concludes with a call for increased cross-sectorial collaboration to explore opportunities for a whole-of-systems approach to our built environment that addresses a range of economic and environmental challenges as well as disaster and emergency management.

Natural disasters have unexpected impacts on mental health

Radical circumstances (bushfires and natural disasters) flush out the mental illness in society. Whenever there’s a disaster, there’s a rush on hospital admissions for psychiatric problems. But on the whole, the illness is already there. Emergencies naturally make fodder for delusions and the emergency efforts, for mania. Obviously, there are direct mental health consequences – a small rise in post-traumatic stress disorder inevitably follows disaster. This correlates with the severity of the consequences of the disaster (loss of family, friends, animals and property). And there’s usually a big rethink, with about a third of those affected leaving the area permanently. But, for the most part, this isn’t driven by mental health issues, it results from the very real fears about whether living in a fire (or other disaster) zone is worth it.

Predictive technology and natural hazards: Risk for Australian planning authorities?

Purpose The object of this paper is to examine whether the improvements in technology that enhance community understanding of the frequency and severity of natural hazards also increased the risk of potential liability of planning authorities in negligence. In Australia, the National Strategy imposes a resilience based approach to disaster management and stresses that responsible land use planning can reduce or prevent the impact of natural hazards upon communities. Design/methodology/approach This paper analyses how the principles of negligence allocate responsibility for loss suffered by a landowner in a hazard prone area between the landowner and local government. Findings The analysis in this paper concludes that despite being able to establish a causal link between the loss suffered by a landowner and the approval of a local authority to build in a hazard prone area, it would be in the rarest of circumstances a negligence action may be proven. Research limitations/implications The focus of this paper is on planning policies and land development, not on the negligent provision of advice or information by the local authority. Practical implications This paper identifies the issues a landowner may face when seeking compensation from a local authority for loss suffered due to the occurrence of a natural hazard known or predicted to be possible in the area. Originality/value The paper establishes that as risk managers, local authorities must place reliance upon scientific modelling and predictive technology when determining planning processes in order to fulfil their responsibilities under the National Strategy and to limit any possible liability in negligence.

Reengaging, reenacting and reenvisaging discourses of disaster through public space performance: Austerity, art, and the art of protest

This paper offers a mediation on disaster, recovery, resilience, and restoration of balance, in both a material and a metaphorical sense, when ‘disaster’ befalls not the body politic of the nation but the body personal. In the past few decades, of course, artists, activists and scholars have deliberately tried to avoid describing personal, physical and phenomenological experiences of the disabled body in terms of difficulty and disaster. This has been part of a political move, from a medical model, in which disability, disease and illness are positioned as personal catastrophes, to a social model, in which disability is positioned as a social construct that comes from systems, institutions and infrastructure designed to exclude different bodies. It is a move that is responsible for a certain discomfort people with disabilities, and artists with disabilities, today feel towards performances that deploy disability as a metaphor for disaster, from Hijikata, to Theatre Hora. In the past five years, though, this particular discourse has begun rising again, particularly as people with disabilities fact their own anything but natural disasters as a result of the austerity measures now widespread across the US, UK, Europe and elsewhere. Measures that threaten people’s ability to live, and take part in social and institutional life, in any meaningful way. Measures that, as artist Katherine Araniello notes, also bring additional difficulty, danger, and potential for disaster as they ripple outwards across the tides of familial ties, threatening family, friends, and careers who become bound up in the struggle to do more with less. In this paper, I consider how people with disabilities use performance, particularly public space interventionalist performance, to reengage, renact and reenvisage the discourse of national, economic, environmental or other forms of disaster, the need for austerity, the need to avoid providing people with support for desires and interests as well as basic daily needs, particularly when fraud and corruption is so right, and other such ideas that have become an all too unpleasant reality for many people. Performances, for instance, like Liz Crow’s Bedding Out, where she invited people into her bed – for people with disabilities a symbolic space, which necessarily becomes more a public living room restaurant, office and so forth than a private space when poor mobility means they spend much time it in – to talk about their lives, their difficulties, and dealing with austerity. Or, for instance, like the Bolshy Divas, who mimic public and political policy, reports and advertising paranoia to undermine their discourses about austerity. I examine the effects, politics and ethics of such interventions, including examination of the comparative effect of highly bodied interventions (like Crow’s) and highly disembodied interventions (like the Bolshy Diva’s) in discourses of difficulty, disaster and austerity on a range of target spectator communities.