Search results

Of all the deaths associated with disasters, bushfires account for 40% of these fatalities. The resulting fatalities are consequent upon householders’ decision-making, leading to late or non-evacuation from at-risk communities. However, while decision-making is a function of risk perception, this paper aims to investigate householders’ perceptions of bushfire risks following the catastrophic Black Summer bushfires of 2019/2020.

An inductive research approach was adopted. Thirty semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit qualitative data from southeastern NSW, Australia householders. The data were collected via face-to-face and online Zoom. Each interview was recorded, transcribed using Otter.AI and thematically analyzed with NVivo 12 Pro (Braun and Clarke, 2006, 2019). In addition, inter-rater reliability was done by engaging an independent researcher to code the de-identified data independently. The codes were cross-checked for reliability and adjusted where necessary.

It was found that bushfire risk perceptions were high among the householders in bushfire at-risk communities following the 2019/2020 Black Summer bushfires. High levels of perceptions were recorded among the participants regarding the likelihood of bushfire occurrence, concern for bushfires, severity of bushfires and vulnerability to bushfire threats.

The study’s results do not reflect all householders in the southeastern part of NSW. It was limited to 30 householders who indicated their intentions to participate and are living in the study area. Therefore, future studies should be undertaken with more participants from broader geographical areas, including emergency responders like firefighters, recovery officers and non-government organizations in charge of recovery operations. This study will add to the prioritization of risk perceptions.

All else being equal, elevated bushfire risk perceptions among participants can potentially decrease the fatalities linked with bushfires and their subsequent ripple effects. This holds particularly true when residents opt for early self-evacuation from at-risk communities.

The paper contributes to developing a better understanding of the bushfire risk perceptions underlying the evacuation decision-making of the residents in bushfire at-risk communities in south-eastern NSW of Australia.

The paper contributes to the existing knowledge on bushfire risks by providing insights into residents’ perceptions after the catastrophic 2019/2020 Black Summer bushfires. As a qualitative study, it describes bushfire risk perceptions on four themes: likelihood, concern, severity and vulnerability, which is uncommon in many bushfire studies.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the process of collective leadership in emergency management organisations. More specifically, the authors investigate the conditions that enable or prevent collective leadership amongst key actors in the emergency management network in bushfire investigations. We also examine how chief investigators facilitate the conditions to effectively distribute leadership and the role of social networks within this process.

A qualitative case study approach was undertaken, and 18 semi-structured interviews were carried out with chief investigators, 6 at each of three agencies in Australia. A framework for understanding collective leadership (Friedrich et al., 2016) was used to examine key leadership constructs, baseline leadership and outcomes relative to bushfire investigations.

Findings demonstrate that there is no evidence of collective leadership at the network level of bushfire investigations. There is mixed evidence of collective leadership within bushfire investigation departments, with the Arson Squad being the only government agency to engage in collective leadership. The authors found evidence that government bureaucracy and mandated protocols inhibited the ability of formal leaders to distribute leadership, gauge a clear understanding of the level of skill and expertise amongst chief investigators and poor communication that inhibited knowledge of investigations.

The study was limited to three bushfire investigative agencies. A future study will be carried out with other stakeholders, such as fire investigators and firefighters in the field.

For the government, emergency management agencies and other stakeholders, a key enabler of collective leadership within the emergency management network is the presence of a formal leader within a network. That leader has the authority and political ability to distribute leadership to other experts.

The paper contributes to developing a better understanding of the efficacy and challenges associated with the application of collective leadership theory in a complex government bureaucracy. There are positive implications for the safety of firefighters, the protection of the broader community, their properties and livestock.

The authors address the lack of literature on effective leadership processes amongst emergency management agencies. The paper contributes to extending collective leadership theory by unpacking the processes through which leadership is distributed to team members and the role of institutions (i.e. fire investigation bureaucracy) on social networks within this integrative process. The authors provide new insights into the practice of collective leadership in complex bureaucratic organisations.

The purpose of this study is to identify strengths and weaknesses in knowledge sharing between related post-bushfire investigative agencies. Based on this study, such a sharing of knowledge is essential to enhance collaboration amongst practitioners in the reduction and management of the risk of bushfires.

The authors use a case study methodology; the research design is based on comparative analysis of six post-bushfire investigative departments in Italy and Australia (Victoria). A total of 44 bushfire investigators were interviewed between 2012 and 2013, across the two countries. Using focus groups and face-to-face interviews, the extent and quality of intra- and interagency knowledge sharing is analysed.

Despite the desire to collaborate, there are three main conditions that prevent an effective interagency collaboration within the bushfire investigation network, namely, separation, unidirectionality and interpersonal disengagement. This study finds that knowledge sharing suffers from a missing “feedback system” culture, where agencies give each other feedback with strictly bureaucratic purposes, rather than create an ongoing learning mechanism that develops after every investigation. At agency level, we also find that, sharing investigative knowledge and experience through daily and planned meetings is a standard practice to police members; but this is not found in the fire agencies. When made cross-country comparisons between Australia and Italy, the existence of common courses, joint manuals and the sharing of human resources witnessed in Australia (Victoria) is something that would benefit Italian agencies still trapped in a competitive and jurisdictional mindset. At the same time, Australian agencies might want to reconsider the separation between bushfire suppression and investigation, a distinction that has been made clear in Italy through the creation of full-time bushfire investigator positions.

This paper contributes to the improvement of interagency collaboration through the development of an investigative “social knowledge”. It reinforces the assumption that, to reduce and effectively manage the risk of bushfires, a combined effort from different stakeholders involved in forensic investigation is necessary.

Given the lack of research undertaken in the area of bushfire investigation, the current paper represents a unique piece of work. It is unusual, not only in identifying the current issues within the bushfire investigation network but also in providing agencies with theoretical and practical insights on how to reduce the extremely high number of bushfires and their risks.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the level of physical preparation for bushfire among Victorian residents in established high risk bushfire locations, and to assess whether these levels of preparation changed over time.

Data were analysed from a telephone survey among Victorian residents (n=614-629) living in high risk bushfire locations over a three-year period (2012-2014). The survey measured residents’ bushfire awareness, knowledge, planning, preparation and engagement with bushfire services. This paper focusses on the extent to which respondents undertook physical preparatory bushfire activities over the three-year period using: first, principal components analysis to generate a single preparation variable by identifying a smaller number of uncorrelated variables (or principal components) from a larger set of data, second, analysis of variance to assess differences in preparation scores between years, and third, Tukey’s honest significant difference test to confirm where the differences occurred between groups.

Results indicated only moderate levels of physical preparation for bushfires amongst respondents. The activities that respondents rated the lowest were: “having protective covers for windows” and “having firefighting equipment to protect the house”. A significant difference in total preparation scores over time was observed, F(2, 1,715)=6.159, p<0.005, with lower scores in 2012 compared with 2013 and 2014 scores.

This study found some marginal improvements in levels of physical bushfire preparation from 2012 to 2014. However, the results indicate only moderate levels of preparation overall, despite respondents living in established high risk locations.

This study provides evidence for the current levels of preparedness in high risk bushfire communities, and emphasises the need for future initiatives to focus on specific bushfire preparation activities but also to consider the broader range of interventions that are likely to contribute to desired safety outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce and critique frameworks of communication in Australian bushfire management. Achieving bushfire preparedness is a complex process that centres on meaningful communication and relationships between fire emergency agencies and the residents at risk. However, the practice of bushfire communication in Australia might better be described as bricoleur-like, applying and adapting whatever is at hand from the broader media panoply, rather than involving a more deliberative and comprehensively planned approach to preparedness.

This paper builds on different frameworks of communication, beyond the traditional transmission and power models, to establish alternative ways in which communication may take place in bushfire preparedness. It is built from coupling theoretical and social science approaches to communication and through interviews and fieldwork in four states across Australia. The aggregation of these data became the basis to examine how communication was taking place among these constituents.

Communication as transmission still remains dominant from the perspective where expertise is marshaled among fire agency specialists and disseminated to the public. Communication as power highlights that the persistence of the transmission process can reinforce power dynamics, diminishing empowerment, participation and capacity-building for change by the community. Recognising the importance for understanding audiences, communication as marketing pays closer attention to attitudes to influence behaviour. Finally, communication as community elaborates the conversational aspects of knowledge flow, through social networks, bringing a particular focus to bear on the greater need for community agency.

The authors put forward these frameworks as ways to analyse, critique and propose different ways that communication can, and does, occur, resulting in different kinds of interaction and impact. The authors argue that an awareness of such frameworks is significant in assisting the communities and fire authorities in bushfire preparedness.

The purpose of this paper is to identify resourcing challenges that face housing rebuild following the 2009 Victorian “Black Saturday” bushfires in Australia and to examine the impacts of resource shortages on longer term community recovery.

The research methodology included a longitudinal study which consists of a questionnaire survey, field‐based interviews and observations to track trends evident in the survey.

A total of 28 months after the bushfires, reconstruction in the worst‐affected area, the Shire of Murrindindi, was proceeding slowly despite the institutions and procedures set up for recovery. This slow reconstruction was due to the unavailability of building resources. Changed Building Standards, increased building markets outside the bushfire zone, lack of economic incentives, combined with home owners’ socio‐economic vulnerabilities, created a chain of impacts on households’ ability to get resources.

The evidence in this paper points to emergent resource issues that impeded recovery progress in the bushfire zone. These issues primarily come from technical decisions on building controls, economic conditions, and risk perceptions of construction professionals. Findings from this longitudinal study will inform the recovery planning of government agencies in future events.

This paper makes the case for a new approach to looking at resourcing problems following a major disaster. This study demonstrates that recovery planning needs to include a resource perspective which explains both impacts of recovery polices on resource availability and impacts of resourcing dynamics on the wider recovery environment.

To examine the relationship between behavioural intentions and preparing for bushfire hazards and to test the hypothesis that intentions can inform how people reason about their relationship with environmental hazards.

Survey data were collected from 280 residents in high bushfire risk areas and analysed using multiple regression analysis. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with a theoretical sample drawn from those who completed the survey. Data were analysed using grounded theory analysis strategies using the ATLAS.ti data analysis programme following the procedures for open, axial, and selective coding.

The analyses demonstrated that preparedness intentions reflect the outcomes of different ways of reasoning about their relationship with bushfire hazards and that “preparing” and “not preparing” represent discrete processes. Each outcome was supported by different attitudes towards preparing and by different predictor variables.

Preparing and not preparing for natural hazards should be conceptualised as separate processes and additional research into their origins and precursors is required.

Separate risk communication strategies are needed to counter reasons for “not preparing” and facilitate “preparing”. Strategies should accommodate the attitudes and beliefs that underpin these outcomes. To facilitate sustained preparedness, strategies should assist people to negotiate issues required to arrive at a decision to adopt protective measures.

Provides novel insights into the relationship between people and natural hazards. It identifies a need to re‐think how risk communication strategies are developed and delivered.

After the catastrophic 2009 bushfires in the state of Victoria, Australia, the State Government provided information and advice, short-term and temporary accommodation as well as financial assistance to bushfire-affected communities. A tension developed between quickly rebuilding housing and re-establishing known social and economic networks versus a slower and more deliberative process that focuses on long-term community outcomes. Whilst there was a widespread assumption that quick rebuilding would be beneficial, resulting in immediate pressure to do so, it became evident that many people were not prepared to, or even did not want to rebuild. Thus it became important to provide time and support for people to consider their options away from the immediate pressures to rebuild that are often inherent in post-disaster recovery processes. This became known as “holding the space” and included the introduction of interim supports such as building temporary villages and other supports which enable people to achieve appropriate interim accommodation without having to rebuild immediately. However, even two years after the bushfires a significant proportion of people remained undecided whether they wanted to rebuild or not. The post-bushfire experience pointed to a number of lessons including the importance of appropriate timing of post-disaster activities, careful targeting of financial assistance, need for developing better and lower cost interim housing options and pre-impact planning. Given the complex nature of rebuilding following a disaster, design professionals should focus not just on the final house, but also look at housing options that blur the distinction between temporary and permanent. Their designs should be quick to build, offer a good quality of life, be affordable for most and be flexible in design for future use.

This paper aims to explore the themes and nature of sentiment of Twitter content that discussed the Australian bushfire disaster 2019–2020 and its associated wildlife devastation, with considerations for the future of Australia’s tourism industry.

A large, qualitative data set consisting of all publicly available Twitter posts during the period of the Australian bushfires from December 2019 to March 2020 that mentioned the bushfires and wildlife are explored.

The devastation of wildlife through the Australian bushfire disaster elicited emotionally charged Twitter content from both Australian and overseas users. Positive sentiment focused on offering support to areas impacted by wildlife devastation. Negative sentiment concentrated on linking the Australian bushfires disaster to global discussions surrounding the climate emergency, and a perceived lack of political action.

Despite the intensity of media attention directed towards the Australian bushfires disaster 2019–2020, there has been little scholarly research exploring social media content specifically focused on the wildlife devastation and its association with, and implications for, the tourism industry.

This paper aims to present on-going research on the role of social networks in community preparedness for bushfire. Social networks are significant in helping communities cope in disasters. Studies of communities hit by a catastrophe such as landslides or heatwaves demonstrate that people with well-connected social networks are more likely to recover than others where their networks are obliterated or non-existent. The value of social networks is also evident in bushfire where information is passed between family, friends and neighbours. Social interactions are important in creating opportunities for residents to exchange information on shared risks and can lead them to take collective actions to address this risk.

This paper presents on-going research on social networks of residents living in fire-prone areas in Australia to investigate how knowledge related to bushfire might flow, either in preparation for, or during a hypothetical emergency. A closer examination of social relations and characteristics within networks is critical in contextualizing this knowledge flow. This understanding will contribute to collected evidence that social networks play a particularly important role in collective action in building adaptive capacity.

The types of networks studied reflects how people’s emergent roles and their inter-relatedness with one another helps to build adaptive capacity and greater awareness of the risks they face from fire. In doing so, the paper questions individualized attributes of “leaders” that disaster literature can over-emphasize, and critiques notions “vulnerability” in a social network context. It demonstrates that social capital can be generated through emergent, contextual, processual factors.

The paper contributes critical knowledge and evidence for fire agencies to engage with community networks and support those people who are playing a vital catalytic, bridging and linking role to strengthen their potential for adaptive capacity in mitigating bushfire risk.