Creating regional resilience in Australia

This paper explores the impact that extreme weather events can have on communities. Using the Brisbane floods of 2011 to examine the recovery operations, the paper highlights the effectiveness of recovery and rebuilding in already strong and resilient communities. Our research has shown that communities which have a strong sense of identity, as well as organized places to meet, develop resilient networks that come into play in times of crisis. The increasing trend of the fly-in/fly-out (FIFO) or drive-in/drive-out (DIDO) workforce to service regional areas has undermined the resilience of existing communities. The first hint of this occurs with community groups not knowing who their neighbours are. The paper is based on research examining the needs of groups in regional communities with the goal to better equip regional communities with the capacity to respond positively to change (and crisis) through in-novative, evidence-based policies, resilience strategies and tools. Part of this process was to build an evidence-base to address a range of challenges associated with the place-based environments and the sharing of information systems within communities and decision makers. The first part of the paper explores the context in which communities have been required to mobilize in response to crises; the issues that have galvanized a common purpose; and the methods by which these communities shared their knowledge. The second part of the paper examines how communities could plan for and mitigate natural disasters in the future by developing better decision making tools. The paper defines the requirements for information systems that will link data models of built infrastruc-ture with data from the disaster and response plans. These will then form the basis for the use of social media to coordinate activities between official crews and the public to improve response coordination and provide the technology that could reduce the time required to allow communities to resume some semblance of normality.

Regional resilience: Pre-service teacher preparation to teach in the bush

This paper reports on the outcomes of a two year ALTC Competitive Research and Development Project that aimed to "Develop Strategies at the Pre-Service Level to Address Critical Teacher Attraction and Retention Issues in Australian Rural, Regional and Remote Schools". As well as developing a ‘training framework’ and teaching guides to increase the capacity and credibility of four universities to prepare educators who might venture out of the metropolitan area to teach, data were gathered from pre-service and graduate teachers to analyse regional resilience. It was found that there was a strong likelihood to participate in a regional practicum and stay in a non-metropolitan community once they graduated from university if they had a positive attitude to regional Western Australia either through a family connection or previous experience. Recommendations from this study emphasise the importance of having pre-service students participate in positive regional experiences early in their university study.

Regional responses to recession:the role of the West Midlands regional taskforce

Bailey D. and Berkeley N. Regional responses to recession: the role of the West Midlands Regional Taskforce, Regional Studies. Regional taskforces were set up across the English regions in late 2008 in response to the most severe recession since the Second World War. This paper examines the role of one such body, the West Midlands Regional Taskforce, as an example of regional response to recession, and offers potential lessons for the future in dealing with such situations. In so doing it reflects on the contested concept of regional 'resilience' and its relevance for policy actions at the regional level. Understanding how the region responded in this way could help in maintaining a 'permanent capacity' to deal with shocks, especially in the context of the abolition of regional development agencies (RDAs) in England from 2012 and their replacement with local enterprise partnerships (LEPs). © 2014 © 2014 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis.

Conceptualising, evaluating and reporting social resilience in vulnerable regional and remote communities facing climate change in tropical Queensland : marine and tropical sciences research facility transition project final report

Regional and remote communities in tropical Queensland are among Australia’s most vulnerable in the face of climate change. At the same time, these socially and economically vulnerable regions house some of Australia’s most significant biodiversity values. Past approaches to terrestrial biodiversity management have focused on tackling biophysical interventions through the use of biophysical knowledge. An equally important focus should be placed on building regional-scale community resilience if some of the worst biodiversity impacts of climate change are to be avoided or mitigated. Despite its critical need, more systemic or holistic approaches to natural resource management have been rarely trialed and tested in a structured way. Currently, most strategic interventions in improving regional community resilience are ad hoc, not theory-based and short term. Past planning approaches have not been durable, nor have they been well informed by clear indicators. Research into indicators for community resilience has been poorly integrated within adaptive planning and management cycles. This project has aimed to resolve this problem by: * Reviewing the community and social resilience and adaptive planning literature to reconceptualise an improved framework for applying community resilience concepts; * Harvesting and extending work undertaken in MTSRF Phase 1 to identifying the learnings emerging from past MTSRF research; * Distilling these findings to identify new theoretical and practical approaches to the application of community resilience in natural resource use and management; * Reconsidering the potential interplay between a region’s biophysical and social planning processes, with a focus on exploring spatial tools to communicate climate change risk and its consequent environmental, economic and social impacts, and; * Trialling new approaches to indicator development and adaptive planning to improve community resilience, using a sub-regional pilot in the Wet Tropics. In doing so, we also looked at ways to improve the use and application of relevant spatial information. Our theoretical review drew upon the community development, psychology and emergency management literature to better frame the concept of community resilience relative to aligned concepts of social resilience, vulnerability and adaptive capacity. Firstly, we consider community resilience as a concept that can be considered at a range of scales (e.g. regional, locality, communities of interest, etc.). We also consider that overall resilience at higher scales will be influenced by resilience levels at lesser scales (inclusive of the resilience of constituent institutions, families and individuals). We illustrate that, at any scale, resilience and vulnerability are not necessarily polar opposites, and that some understanding of vulnerability is important in determining resilience. We position social resilience (a concept focused on the social characteristics of communities and individuals) as an important attribute of community resilience, but one that needs to be considered alongside economic, natural resource, capacity-based and governance attributes. The findings from the review of theory and MTSRF Phase 1 projects were synthesized and refined by the wider project team. Five predominant themes were distilled from this literature, research review and an expert analysis. They include the findings that: 1. Indicators have most value within an integrated and adaptive planning context, requiring an active co-research relationship between community resilience planners, managers and researchers if real change is to be secured; 2. Indicators of community resilience form the basis for planning for social assets and the resilience of social assets is directly related the longer term resilience of natural assets. This encourages and indeed requires the explicit development and integration of social planning within a broader natural resource planning and management framework; 3. Past indicator research and application has not provided a broad picture of the key attributes of community resilience and there have been many attempts to elicit lists of “perfect” indicators that may never be useful within the time and resource limitations of real world regional planning and management. We consider that modeling resilience for proactive planning and prediction purposes requires the consideration of simple but integrated clusters of attributes; 4. Depending on time and resources available for planning and management, the combined use of well suited indicators and/or other lesser “lines of evidence” is more flexible than the pursuit of perfect indicators, and that; 5. Index-based, collaborative and participatory approaches need to be applied to the development, refinement and reporting of indicators over longer time frames. We trialed the practical application of these concepts via the establishment of a collaborative regional alliance of planners and managers involved in the development of climate change adaptation strategies across tropical Queensland (the Gulf, Wet Tropics, Cape York and Torres Strait sub-regions). A focus on the Wet Tropics as a pilot sub-region enabled other Far North Queensland sub-region’s to participate and explore the potential extension of this approach. The pilot activities included: * Further exploring ways to innovatively communicate the region’s likely climate change scenarios and possible environmental, economic and social impacts. We particularly looked at using spatial tools to overlay climate change risks to geographic communities and social vulnerabilities within those communities; * Developing a cohesive first pass of a State of the Region-style approach to reporting community resilience, inclusive of regional economic viability, community vitality, capacitybased and governance attributes. This framework integrated a literature review, expert (academic and community) and alliance-based contributions; and * Early consideration of critical strategies that need to be included in unfolding regional planning activities with Far North Queensland. The pilot assessment finds that rural, indigenous and some urban populations in the Wet Tropics are highly vulnerable and sensitive to climate change and may require substantial support to adapt and become more resilient. This assessment finds that under current conditions (i.e. if significant adaptation actions are not taken) the Wet Tropics as a whole may be seriously impacted by the most significant features of climate change and extreme climatic events. Without early and substantive action, this could result in declining social and economic wellbeing and natural resource health. Of the four attributes we consider important to understanding community resilience, the Wet Tropics region is particularly vulnerable in two areas; specifically its economic vitality and knowledge, aspirations and capacity. The third and fourth attributes, community vitality and institutional governance are relatively resilient but are vulnerable in some key respects. In regard to all four of these attributes, however, there is some emerging capacity to manage the possible shocks that may be associated with the impacts of climate change and extreme climatic events. This capacity needs to be carefully fostered and further developed to achieve broader community resilience outcomes. There is an immediate need to build individual, household, community and sectoral resilience across all four attribute groups to enable populations and communities in the Wet Tropics region to adapt in the face of climate change. Preliminary strategies of importance to improve regional community resilience have been identified. These emerging strategies also have been integrated into the emerging Regional Development Australia Roadmap, and this will ensure that effective implementation will be progressed and coordinated. They will also inform emerging strategy development to secure implementation of the FNQ 2031 Regional Plan. Of most significance in our view, this project has taken a co-research approach from the outset with explicit and direct importance and influence within the region’s formal planning and management arrangements. As such, the research: * Now forms the foundations of the first attempt at “Social Asset” planning within the Wet Tropics Regional NRM Plan review; * Is assisting Local government at regional scale to consider aspects of climate change adaptation in emerging planning scheme/community planning processes; * Has partnered the State government (via the Department of Infrastructure and Planning and Regional Managers Coordination Network Chair) in progressing the Climate Change adaptation agenda set down within the FNQ 2031 Regional Plan; * Is informing new approaches to report on community resilience within the GBRMPA Outlook reporting framework; and * Now forms the foundation for the region’s wider climate change adaptation priorities in the Regional Roadmap developed by Regional Development Australia. Through the auspices of Regional Development Australia, the outcomes of the research will now inform emerging negotiations concerning a wider package of climate change adaptation priorities with State and Federal governments. Next stage research priorities are also being developed to enable an ongoing alliance between researchers and the region’s climate change response.

Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?

Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?

Building community resilience – learning from the 2011 floods in Southeast Queensland, Australia

The year 2010 was the wettest year on record for Queensland, Australia and the wettest year since 1974 for Southeast Queensland. The extremely heavy rain in early January 2011 fell on the catchments of heavily saturated Brisbane and Stanley Rivers systems resulting in significant runoff which rapidly produced a widespread and devastating flood event. The area of inundation was equivalent to the total land area of France and Germany combined. Over 200,000 people were affected leaving 35 people dead and 9 missing. The damage bill was estimated at over $1B and cost to the economy at over $10B with over 30,000 homes and 6,000 business flooded and 86 towns and regional centres affected. The need to disburse disaster funding in a prompt manner to the affected population was paramount to facilitate individuals getting their lives back to some normality. However, the payout of insurance claims has proved to be a major area of community anger. The ongoing impasse in payment of insurance compensation is attributed to the nature and number of claims, confusing definition of flooding and the lack or accuracy of information needed to determine individually the properties affected and legitimacy of claims. Information was not readily available at the micro-level including, extent and type of inundation, flood heights at property level and cause of damage. Events during the aftermath highlighted widespread community misconceptions concerning the technical factors associated with the flood event and the impact of such on access to legitimate compensation and assistance. Individual and community wide concerns and frustration, anger and depression, have arisen resulting from delays in the timely settlement of insurance claims. Lessons learnt during the aftermath are presented in the context of their importance as a basis for inculcating communities impacted by the flood event with resilience for the future.

Importance of a resilient air services network to Australian remote, rural, and regional communities

Rural, regional, and remote settlements in Australia require resilient infrastructure to remain sustainable in a context characterized by frequent large-scale natural disasters, long distances between urban centers, and the pressures of economic change. A critical aspect of this infrastructure is the air services network, a system of airports, aircraft operators, and related industries that enables the high-speed movement of people, goods, and services to remote locations. A process of deregulation during the 1970s and 1980s resulted in many of these airports passing into local government and private ownership, and the rationalization of the industry saw the closure of a number of airlines and airports. This paper examines the impacts of deregulation on the resilience of air services and the contribution that they make to regional and rural communities. In particular, the robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, and rapidity of the system are examined. The conclusion is that while the air services network has remained resilient in a situation of considerable change, the pressures of commercialization and the tendency to manage aspects of the system in isolation have contributed to a potential decrease in overall resilience.

Disaster resilience and local adaptation capacity in coastal Queensland

The 2011 floods illustrated once again Queensland’s vulnerability to flooding and similar disasters. Climate change will increase the frequency and magnitude of such events and will have a variety of other impacts. To deal with these impacts governments at all levels need to be prepared and work together. Like the rest of the nation most of the population of the state is located in the coastal areas and these areas are more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. This paper examines climate change adaptation efforts in coastal Queensland. The aim is increasing local disaster resilience of people and property through fostering coordination between local and state government planning activities in coastal high hazard areas. By increasing the ability of local governments and state agencies to coordinate planning activities, we can help adapt to impacts of climate change. Towards that end, we will look at the ways that these groups currently interact, especially with regard to issues involving uncertainty related to climate change impacts. Through an examination of climate change related activities by Queensland’s coastal local governments and state level planning agencies and how they coordinate their planning activities at different levels we aim to identify the weaknesses of the current planning system in responding to the challenges of climate change adaptation and opportunities for improving the ways we plan and coordinate planning, and make recommendations to improve resilience in advance of disasters so as to help speed up recovery when they occur.

Carbon, biodiversity and regional natural resource planning : towards high impact next generation plans

Given the increased importance of adaptation debates in global climate negotiations, pressure to achieve biodiversity, food and water security through managed landscape-scale adaptation will likely increase across the globe over the coming decade. In parallel, emerging market-based, terrestrial greenhouse gas abatement programs present a real opportunity to secure such adaptation to climate change through enhanced landscape resilience. Australia has an opportunity to take advantage of such programs through regional planning aspects of its governance arrangements for NRM. This paper explores necessary reforms to Australia's regional NRM planning systems to ensure that they will be better able to direct the nation's emerging GGA programs to secure enhanced landscape adaptation. © 2013 Planning Institute Australia.

Review: "Planning Asian cities : risks and resilience" edited by Stephen Hamnett and Dean Forbes, Planning, History and Environment Series, London, Routledge, 2011

Since the beginning of the agricultural revolution, cities have always been the cradle of civilisation, innovation and productivity, particularly as a result of the recent change factors affecting their (trans)formation, such as globalisation, the knowledge economy, technological advancements, climate change and so on. While in some parts of the world, cities are rapidly growing, in other parts, cities are shrinking, and their populations are aging. Even under the current pressure of constantly changing global conditions, the role of cities in influencing and partially shaping local, regional, national, supranational and even global level economy, society, environment and governance is undeniable. Global changes, while providing opportunities for cities and their administrations to reform and revisit existing planning and development processes and mechanisms, at the same time, challenge them by dealing with everincreasing risks and establishing resilience. At present, more than half of the world’s population...

Resilience and opportunity : regions and the roll-out of Australia's greenhouse gas abatement programs. A manual for Queensland's NRM regions

Voluntary and compliance markets for forest carbon and other (emission avoidance and biosequestration) activities are growing internationally and across Australia. Queensland and its Natural Resource Management (NRM) regions have an opportunity to take a variety of actions to help guide these markets to secure multiple landscape benefits and to build landscape resilience in the face of climate change. As the national arrangements for offsets within Australia’s Clean Energy Package (CEP) and emissions trading environment emerge, Queensland’s regions can prepare themselves and their landholding communities to take advantage of these opportunities to deliver improved climate resilience in their regional landscapes.

Analysis of the needs of the East Coast cluster regional natural resource management bodies in relation to planning for climate change adaptation

The Climate Change Adaptation for Natural Resource Management (NRM) in East Coast Australia Project aims to foster and support an effective “community of practice” for climate change adaptation within the East Coast Cluster NRM regions that will increase the capacity for adaptation to climate change through enhancements in knowledge and skills and through the establishment of long‐term collaborations. It is being delivered by six consortium research partners: * The University of Queensland (project lead) * Griffith University * University of the Sunshine Coast * CSIRO * New South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage * Queensland Department of Science, IT, Innovation and the Arts (Queensland Herbarium). The project relates to the East Coast Cluster, comprising the six coastal NRM regions and regional bodies between Rockhampton and Sydney: * Fitzroy Basin Association (FBA) * Burnett‐Mary Regional Group (BMRG) * SEQ Catchments (SEQC) * Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority (CMA) (NRCMA) * Hunter‐Central Rivers CMA (HCRCMA) * Hawkesbury Nepean CMA (HNCMA). The aims of this report are to summarise the needs of the regional bodies in relation to NRM planning for climate change adaptation, and provide a basis for developing the detailed work plan for the research consortium. Two primary methods were used to identify the needs of the regional bodies: (1) document analysis of the existing NRM/ Catchment Action Plans (CAPs) and applications by the regional bodies for funding under Stream 1 of the Regional NRM Planning for Climate Change Fund, and; (2) a needs analysis workshop, held in May 2013 involving representatives from the research consortium partners and the regional bodies. The East Coast Cluster includes five of the ten largest significant urban areas in Australia, world heritage listed natural environments, significant agriculture, mining and extensive grazing. The three NSW CMAs have recently completed strategic level CAPs, with implementation plans to be finalised in 2014/2015. SEQC and FBA are beginning a review of their existing NRM Plans, to be completed in 2014 and 2015 respectively; while BMRG is aiming to produce a NRM and Climate Variability Action Strategy. The regional bodies will receive funding from the Australian Government through the Regional NRM Planning for Climate Change Fund (NRM Fund) to improve regional planning for climate change and help guide the location of carbon and biodiversity activities, including wildlife corridors. The bulk of the funding will be available for activities in 2013/2014, with smaller amounts available in subsequent years. Most regional bodies aim to have a large proportion of the planning work complete by the end of 2014. In addition, NSW CMAs are undergoing major structural change and will be incorporated into semi‐autonomous statutory Local Land Services bodies from 2014. Boundaries will align with local government boundaries and there will be significant change in staff and structures. The regional bodies in the cluster have a varying degree of climate knowledge. All plans recognise climate change as a key driver of change, but there are few specific actions or targets addressing climate change. Regional bodies also have varying capacity to analyse large volumes of spatial or modelling data. Due to the complex nature of natural resource management, all regional bodies work with key stakeholders (e.g. local government, industry groups, and community groups) to deliver NRM outcomes. Regional bodies therefore require project outputs that can be used directly in stakeholder engagement activities, and are likely to require some form of capacity building associated with each of the outputs to maximise uptake. Some of the immediate needs of the regional bodies are a summary of information or tools that are able to be used immediately; and a summary of the key outputs and milestone dates for the project, to facilitate alignment of planning activities with research outputs. A project framework is useful to show the linkages between research elements and the relevance of the research to the adaptive management cycle for NRM planning in which the regional bodies are engaged. A draft framework is proposed to stimulate and promote discussion on research elements and linkages; this will be refined during and following the development of the detailed project work plan. The regional bodies strongly emphasised the need to incorporate a shift to a systems based resilience approach to NRM planning, and that approach is included in the framework. The regional bodies identified that information on climate projections would be most useful at regional and subregional scale, to feed into scenario planning and impact analysis. Outputs should be ‘engagement ready’ and there is a need for capacity building to enable regional bodies to understand and use the projections in stakeholder engagement. There was interest in understanding the impacts of climate change projections on ecosystems (e.g. ecosystem shift), and the consequent impacts on the production of ecosystem services. It was emphasised that any modelling should be able to be used by the regional bodies with their stakeholders to allow for community input (i.e. no black box models). The online regrowth benefits tool was of great interest to the regional bodies, as spatial mapping of carbon farming opportunities would be relevant to their funding requirements. The NSW CMAs identified an interest in development of the tool for NSW vegetation types. Needs relating to socio‐economic information included understanding the socio‐economic determinants of carbon farming uptake and managing community expectations. A need was also identified to understand the vulnerability of industry groups as well as community to climate change impacts, and in particular understanding how changes in the flow of ecosystem services would interact with the vulnerability of these groups to impact on the linked ecologicalsocio‐economic system. Responses to disasters (particularly flooding and storm surge) and recovery responses were also identified as being of interest. An ecosystem services framework was highlighted as a useful approach to synthesising biophysical and socioeconomic information in the context of a systems based, resilience approach to NRM planning. A need was identified to develop processes to move towards such an approach to NRM planning from the current asset management approach. Examples of best practice in incorporating climate science into planning, using scenarios for stakeholder engagement in planning and processes for institutionalising learning were also identified as cross‐cutting needs. The over‐arching theme identified was the need for capacity building for the NRM bodies to best use the information available at any point in time. To this end a planners working group has been established to support the building of a network of informed and articulate NRM agents with knowledge of current climate science and capacity to use current tools to engage stakeholders in NRM planning for climate change adaptation. The planners working group would form the core group of the community of practice, with the broader group of stakeholders participating when activities aligned with their interests. In this way, it is anticipated that the Project will contribute to building capacity within the wider community to effectively plan for climate change adaptation.

Community engagement for disaster resilience : flood risk management in Jakarta, Indonesia

Understanding dynamics of interactions between community groups and government agencies is crucial to improve community resilience for flood risk reduction through effective community engagement strategies. Overall, a variety of approaches are available, however they are limited in their application. Based on research of a case study in Kampung Melayu Village in Jakarta, further complexity in engaging community emerges in planning policy which requires the relocation of households living in floodplains. This complexity arises in decision-making processes due to barriers to communication. This obstacle highlights the need for a simplified approach for an effective flood risk management which will be further explored in this paper. Qualitative analyses will be undertaken following semi-structured interviews conducted with key actors within government agencies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and representatives of communities. The analyses involve investigation of barriers and constraints on community engagement in flood risk management, particularly relevant to collaboration mechanism, perception of risk, and technical literacy to flood risk. These analyses result in potential redirection of community consultation strategies to lead to a more effective collaboration among stakeholders in the decision-making processes. As a result, greater effectiveness in plan implementation of flood risk management potentially improves disaster resilience in the future.