@article {bnh-8363, title = {Indigenous-informed disaster recovery: Addressing collective trauma using a healing framework}, journal = {Progress in Disaster Science}, volume = {16}, year = {2022}, month = {12/2022}, abstract = {

Indigenous knowledges are increasingly recognised for their value in disaster resilience, with particular attention to\ traditional ecological knowledges. Yet the expansive and holistic\ worldviews\ of Indigenous peoples offer an even broader set of knowledges and perspectives, such as the field of Indigenous healing, that are highly relevant to systemic challenges in disaster resilience and recovery. This theoretical paper explores the potential for an Indigenous-informed healing framework to address collective trauma from disasters. It begins by addressing key matters of concern in knowledge sharing between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. It then considers Indigenous healing as an international field of knowledge and practice, distilling consistent features across a range of texts. These shared features in Indigenous peoples{\textquoteright} healing traditions include: holistic approaches to wellbeing; social rather than solo processes; identifying and treating the roots of trauma; strengths-based and community-led processes; the need for socially and culturally safe spaces; and Indigenous notions of responsibility, justice and forgiveness. We then analyse points of difference and resonance with disaster recovery literature, in a novel effort to bring the fields of Indigenous healing and disaster recovery together through respectful and thoughtful dialogue. In doing so, this paper seeks to inform much-needed efforts to enhance culturally responsive practices in working with Indigenous peoples affected by disasters. The exploration also identifies that a healing-informed approach to disaster recovery offers opportunities to better support all communities affected by disasters, by unsettling assumptions and enabling holistic understandings of complex interactions between multiple disasters, community contexts and systemic inequities. To meet the many challenges facing the sector now and into the future, innovations fostered by such cross-disciplinary explorations are crucial.

}, keywords = {disaster, Healing, indigenous, recovery, resilience, Trauma}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2022.100257}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590061722000448}, author = {Phoebe Quinn and Bhiamie Williamson and Lisa Gibbs} } @article {bnh-8321, title = {Informing post-fire recovery planning of northern NSW rainforests}, number = {721}, year = {2022}, month = {03/2022}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = { Melbourne}, abstract = {

In historic times rainforests have comprised less than 2\% of the total forested area of NSW (Baur 1987) yet they have played a pivotal role in the states early timber industry, and the development of conservation policy, and are the only plant community in NSW to have been included in the name of a World Heritage property. The Gondwanan rainforests evolved in an environment of dependable rainfall and low fire frequency. They have persisted through multiple climate oscillations and glacial/inter-glacial cycles in refugia scattered through the Great Escarpment uplift landform. They now represent a collection of relictual species whose origins can be traced to the Eocene Epoch 55-37 million years ago when cool temperate taxa such as Nothofagus first appears in the fossil record.

In northern New South Wales, temperate rainforests are typically considered to be vulnerable to climate-change related natural hazards such as extended spring droughts and wildfires. Numerous reviews predict that extreme climatic events are likely to increase in frequency and/or intensity in coming decades (CSIRO 2019, 2020) and that wildfires will become larger, more intense, and more frequent. The vulnerability of temperate rainforests to fire is assumed to be the result of their limited intrinsic post-fire regenerative capacity, their susceptibility to canopy scorch and bark damage, and extrinsic factors such as their landscape position as patches within extensive areas of elevated fuel hazard in wet sclerophyll forest and woodland plant communities. The impacts of wildfires on temperate rainforests are heightened because wildfires are naturally infrequent, the vegetation is poorly adapted to fire, and fuel biomass is abundant and contiguous in the surrounding landscape.

During the 2019/20 wildfire season, 18.1\% of the extent of NSW{\textquoteright}s rainforest vegetation classes experienced either low, moderate, high, or extreme severity wildfire, a scale un-anticipated in earlier land management risk planning. While the proportion of each class varied, the greatest impacts occurred in Dry Rainforest and Northern Warm Temperate Rainforest. Across the Gondwana Rainforest of Australia World Heritage property (Gondwana Rainforests), 16 of the 28 reserves in the NSW section saw some fire impacts. This resulted in 8.6\% of the 112,145 ha of rainforest in these reserves experiencing either low, moderate, high, or extreme severity wildfire. The extent of the fire impacts was greatest in the Hastings-Macleay, New England, and Washpool-Gibraltar Range sections of the Gondwana Rainforests. The focus of the current study is the Hastings-Macleay section.

The 2019/20 wildfire season coincided with the lowest annual rainfall recorded in the Hastings-Macleay study area since local records commenced in 1959. Soil moisture deficits in rainforest were at their lowest recorded levels at the end of an extended spring drought in northern NSW. An analysis using data from a decade of soil moisture monitoring indicated that when soil moisture in rainforest reached 10-20\%, the rainforests become susceptible to fuel ignition and sustaining a wildfire.

In November 2019 multiple ignitions and running wildfires were occurring across northern NSW, and fire-fighting resources were prioritised to life and property protection. On November 9th 2019, an unprecedented seventeen wildfires were at Emergency Warning level on the same day in NSW, fire behaviour was erratic and rainforests were igniting and sustaining running fires. The wildfires impacted directly on long-term research plots established in 1959 in Werrikimbe and Willi National Parks in landscapes with extensive localised climate monitoring equipment. Resources were rapidly deployed within weeks of the wildfire impacting the research infrastructure to capture key elements of fire behaviour and commence post-fire assessments. With the financial support of the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC and NSW NPWS, citizen science volunteers began to measure the impacts of the wildfires and describe the recovery trajectory of the rainforest stands within the parks.

The long-term research plots provide a baseline to understanding pre-fire rainforest stand dynamics and condition. The 60 years of accumulated data highlighted the high biomass, slow growth rates, and highly episodic nature of tree regeneration in these rainforests. Annualized tree mortality was less than 1\%, and canopy dieback was associated with previous selective harvesting in the 1960s. Fine fuel biomass is low and inputs are strongly seasonal. Basal fire scars were present on trees across the stands surveyed prior to the 2019/20 wildfire season, indicating past wildfires had occurred in these rainforests during the past century, and it appears the majority of established trees were resilient to their effects. Evidence from char heights indicates the predominant fire behaviour experienced by the larger rainforest trees is low-intensity litter fires that progress slowly through the rainforest stands. This was corroborated in discussions with fire managers who had witnessed fires across multiple northern NSW rainforest reserves. Evidence from archival fire reporting and mapping suggests that the typical fire season in the 1950s peaked in November and now peaks two months earlier. These rainforests are approaching the driest months in early spring when lightning ignitions are also at their seasonal maximum.

Wildfires entered rainforest from front or flank spread leading to attrition of trees on rainforest margins. Monitoring dominant trees for 12 years in smaller rainforest stands demonstrated that they can tolerate multiple fires until their structural integrity weakens and fails. In 2019/20 ember attack was widespread in rainforest, but generally led to the ignition of small, localised areas (\<100 m2) or of individual trees. Mortality rates associated with the wildfires were 20-30\% across all tree species, with the proportion increasing with the severity of the wildfire event. This figure may prove to be an underestimate as lagged tree mortality effects from wildfires have been reported elsewhere for rainforests. The majority of burnt trees regenerated with basal coppicing. Seedling regeneration of tree species was infrequent due to the lack of a soil or canopy seed bank. Coppicing was more abundant where fire severity was low. Large trees with well-developed buttress hollows and scars were more likely to ignite due to the accumulation of dry wood and fuel at their base compared to smaller trees. Larger, older trees that had more pre-existing fire scars were more likely to die and collapse after burning. This is potentially an age effect where older and larger (diameter and height) trees have been subjected to more fire-induced wounds and hollows.

The temperate rainforests of northern NSW have been subject to wildfires in the past, and have a level of resilience to them. However, the susceptibility of the canopy dominant rainforest trees to basal wounding and collapse is a concern due to the longevity and age of these trees, their role in maintaining the rainforest microclimate, and their importance as habitat to a very diverse cargo of epiphytic bryophytes. Options to manage wildfire risk using conventional zoning and fuel hazard management may be limited. Fuel hazard was not particularly high during the 2019/20 wildfire season in the Hastings-Macleay section of Gondwana Rainforests, with most areas burnt in 2019 also having been burnt in 2013. Regardless, landscape-level fuel hazard management will not address the risk of individual mature rainforest tree ignition during conditions of significant ember attack when rainforest fine fuel biomass is naturally low.

A range of proposals are made to improve the knowledge base to better inform the spatially explicit wildfire risk assessment process trialled following the 2019/20 wildfire season. The central recommendation is the scoping of a systematic Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting (MER) system for the Gondwana Rainforests of Australia World Heritage property (Gondwana Rainforests) that focuses on establishing a baseline to track trends in the nominated World Heritage outstanding universal values or criteria. The system will require an integrated remote sensing and ground-based plot monitoring approach stratified by rainforest type and location. The monitoring plots established for this study can be readily integrated into the proposed MER system, and can be used to test the significance of ongoing or lagged tree mortality and to validate models of post-wildfire tree mortality and regeneration.

The current study has informed post-fire recovery planning by assessing the significance of the impacts of the 2019/20 wildfire season on rainforest stand structure, composition, tree mortality, and regeneration strategies. While the field measurements were in progress, recovery planning workshops hosted by the Commonwealth and NSW governments were attended and preliminary results were provided. The availability of existing long-term rainforest monitoring experiments dating from the 1950s, sections of which were burnt in November 2019, was critical to providing preliminary results within months of the fire event (Peacock 2020) to inform post-fire recovery planning. This outcome alone underscores the critical role long-term ecological monitoring systems have in rapidly supporting land managers information needs when responding to widespread natural hazards such as landscape-scale wildfires.

}, keywords = {nsw, Planning, post-fire, rainforests, recovery}, issn = {721}, author = {Ross Peacock and Baker, Patrick} } @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-8194, title = {Community-led recovery - Black Summer final report}, number = {702}, year = {2021}, month = {09/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Community-led approaches to disaster recovery are regarded as the optimal approach to sustainable disaster recovery, fostering self-reliance and self-determination within affected communities (Dibley, Mitchell, Ireton, Gordon, \& Goron, 2019; Olshansky, 2005). However, as noted by Dibley et al. (2019), {\textquotedblleft}[w]hat is less clear in the literature is how government might best foster and enable community-led recovery while maintaining their role and responsibilities in coordination after a disaster,{\textquotedblright} (p. 3, emphasis in original).

The objective of this research was to address this gap by examining ways in which governments can better support and enable communities to lead their own recovery after bushfire disaster events. Specifically, the following research questions were explored:

  1. How can government best support community-led deliberative decision-making processes in post-disaster bushfire recovery?
  2. How can government best leverage existing and emerging community organisations, structures, and networks in post-disaster bushfire recovery?

This project developed a set of resources to broaden the knowledge base and disseminate best practice, both within and beyond end-user organisations. Research findings from this project expand our knowledge on how community structures may modify the decision-making function of community recovery bodies (i.e., Community Recovery Committees), and shape residents{\textquoteright} perceptions of community recovery. These resources include:

These resources are intended to be utilised by community engagement staff, other state and local government staff, CRC members, and not-for-profit staff who are involved in recovery. In all, the resources developed as part of this study are intended to be useful beyond the current cohort of CRCs operating in the wake of the 2019/20 bushfire season, which formed the basis of this research analysis. We hope that these efforts will form the basis for recovery progress monitoring, benchmarking, and support activities within disaster-affected communities and risk areas. However, it is a complex field, and so a proposed agenda is also provided for next steps in research and applications.

}, keywords = {communications, community, recovery}, issn = {702}, author = {Lisa Gibbs and Collin Gallagher and Kate Brady and Claire Leppold and Greg Ireton and Andrew Haywood and Yvette Clarke and Stewart Davies and Fyowna Norton and Vaughn Brandenburg} } @article {bnh-8000, title = {Growing the seeds: recovery, strength and capability in Gippsland communities}, year = {2021}, month = {04/2021}, institution = {Victoria University}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

{\textquoteleft}Adversity is a cloak that shrouds great gifts. It is up to us to cast away the cloak and reveal all that lies within. This is the journey.{\textquoteright} {\textemdash} Milena Cifali, Mallacoota Time: The Lost Summer 2020

The 2019{\textendash}20 East Gippsland fires occurred during the most severe fire season ever recorded on the east coast of Australia. They burned from November 2019 to February 2020, damaging over half of the East Gippsland Shire, an area of over 1.16 million hectares. Over 400 dwellings and businesses were lost and four people lost their lives. Recovery had just begun when the COVID-19 pandemic hit. In the same way that the Black Saturday Bushfires have fundamentally changed how bushfires are seen, these events have changed how recovery will be thought about. Writing this report has been a confronting and humbling experience.

In initial conversations, it became clear that the community members who participated wanted a different conversation to the one they had been having. They were seeking to be heard and understood {\textendash} not as victims of the bushfires, but as people who needed support because of the bushfires. To accommodate this, the research has been shaped around the conversation they wanted to have, which is focused on community strengths and capabilities.

This study was undertaken when COVID-19 restrictions were in place, extending for two weeks after Melbourne{\textquoteright}s lockdown ended. As a result, this report represents a snapshot of the recovery process at that time, and contains material that may distress individuals who have been affected the bushfires and the COVID-19 pandemic.

This report does not aim to represent all community issues or speak for the whole community, but rather to identify overarching themes around capabilities raised by those who wished to participate in the study. Participants have spoken about their experiences; those observed in their home communities and other communities they are working with. We also acknowledge that since the end of Melbourne{\textquoteright}s lockdown and the easing of COVID-19-related restrictions, circumstances may have changed, affecting communities{\textquoteright} contexts; and government and non-government agencies may be acting on issues contained in this report.

The purpose of this report

The purpose of this report is to provide a starting point for assessing and understanding community capability practically, and to provide an indicative status of these in East Gippsland and Wellington Shires following the bushfires. It uses a systemic assessment of social, economic and risk contexts to examine community strengths and capabilities, and identify potential future pathways.

The first section of this report has a specific focus on the capabilities involved in community recovery and how they have been experienced by diverse groups within the East Gippsland and Wellington community. This is viewed through a strengths-focused lens. It also provides an initial assessment of the status of the capabilities identified, and the challenges, needs and opportunities that have arisen as part of the recovery experience.

The second section provides a broader picture of the comparative strengths, capabilities and needs identified in an online survey of those impacted by the bushfires in New South Wales and Gippsland through established community panels. The results show which aspects are shared more broadly, those partitioned by direct and indirect experience, and those specific to the East Gippsland community.

The third section provides an economic assessment of two local government areas {\textendash} East Gippsland and Wellington Shires {\textendash} to provide a high-level assessment of the economic influences and impacts on the intersection of the COVID-19 pandemic and bushfire recovery.

}, keywords = {black summer, Capability, communities, gippsland, recovery, strength}, isbn = {978-1-86272-829-5}, author = {Celeste Young and Roger Jones and Craig Cormick} } @article {bnh-7890, title = {Optimising post-disaster recovery interventions in Australia - final project report}, number = {649}, year = {2021}, month = {03/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Australians are all too familiar with disasters arising from natural hazards, such as bushfires, cyclones, and floods. With climate change, we face the possibility of more frequent and intense natural hazards where they occur as in new and unexpected places.

As we enter an uncertain decade, we find ourselves increasingly asking: What does a disaster-resilient Australia look like? How can we help our most vulnerable Australian communities endure the cumulative effects of frequent disasters? Amid tightening fiscal budgets, how can we make the right policy choices for our communities and economy to prosper in this new reality?

Answering these questions requires deep thinking in order to be able to support our communities, businesses, and the broader economy, and help them become more disaster resilient; to not only adapt to a {\textquotedblleft}new normal{\textquotedblright} but thrive in a changing climate. From a policy perspective, this becomes more pertinent when we consider that the average annual total economic costs of natural disasters of Australia are forecast to reach $39 billion per year by 2050 (Deloitte Access Economics, 2017).

This project has estimated the impact of four disasters in recent Australian history on income of individuals residing in disaster-hit areas. By defining individuals{\textquoteright} ability to return to their pre-disaster income levels as economic resilience, we focused on the following case studies: The 2009 Victorian Black Saturday bushfires, the 2009 Toodyay bushfires, the 2013 Tropical Cyclone Oswald, and the 2010-11 Queensland floods. Through real-life case studies, our research helps illustrate how these events{\textemdash}of different types, localities, and scales{\textemdash}impact and ripple through communities and the broader economy over time.\ 

We have employed the difference-in-differences modelling approach to pinpoint the income changes due to the disasters. That is, we compared the income levels of individuals living in the disaster-hit areas (treatment group) with incomes of those who resided in comparable areas that were not directly hit by the disaster (control group). The control group provides us with the income path that would have been expected for the disaster-hit population had the disasters not happened, and thus enables us to compute any income deviations (losses or gains) in the disaster-hit areas. To identify the economic vulnerabilities, we analysed in detail the income changes with respect to individuals{\textquoteright} demographic attributes and sectors of employment. Our primary dataset is the Australian Longitudinal Census Dataset of 2006, 2011 and 2016, which includes 5\% representative sample of the Australian population and provides data on a range of our economic, demographic, and sectoral variables.

The research has found that the extent of the economic impact of disasters on individuals{\textquoteright} income depends on the type, intensity, and location of the disaster. This finding departs from most policy assumptions, which tend to put all the disasters into the same basket when designing relief and recovery programs.

However, there are also common vulnerable groups across different disasters. We found that certain sectors, such as agriculture and accommodation and food services (of which tourism is part) tend to be the most adversely affected sectors across all types, locality and severity of disasters.

An additional clear insight obtained in this research is that {\textquoteleft}economic smallness{\textquoteright} is a point of vulnerability. In particular, low income earners, small-business owners and part-time workers are more likely to lose income following a disaster. Middle and high-income earners, full-time workers and owners of larger businesses are far less likely to lose income; indeed, they might even earn more.

Part of the reason why the {\textquoteleft}economically smaller{\textquoteright} demographic groups are vulnerable to disasters is that they are employed in disaster-sensitive sectors. Thus, the sectoral vulnerability is translated into demographic vulnerability.

We also found that time frame for recovery matters. For example, following the 2009 Victorian Black Saturday bushfires, low-income individuals and the female workforce experienced lower income levels that persisted until 2016. This contrasts with high-income earners, who despite having lost income in the short term, were able to bounce back to their original income trajectory by 2016. Even though it is intuitive to think that economic resilience levels could be different across different demographic and sectoral groups, this project brings this intuition to the fore, and documents exactly what those less resilient groups are, as well as the associated income losses (or gains).

Overall, this research has revealed disaster costs that would not normally be identified by the direct damage estimates. For example, the direct total (tangible and intangible) damages of the 2009 Victorian Black Saturday bushfires were $7 billion (Deloitte Access Economics 2016). However, we found that, following the Black Saturday bushfires, agricultural employees who lived in the fire-ravaged areas lost an average of A$8,000 in annual income for the following two years. Employees in the accommodation and food services industries lost an average of A$5,000 per annum. The indirect loss estimates are typically bypassed in the wake of disasters, as the policy community typically focuses on the direct damage estimates when assessing the economic costs of disasters.

This research has also demonstrated that the burden of lost income due to the disasters is not borne equally. That is, the income gap routinely increased after disasters. For example, following the 2010-11 Queensland floods, the difference between those on low and middle incomes in the\ Brisbane River Catchment area\ increased by about $7,000 a year. This meant that the poor became poorer following disasters in Australia. In addition, female workers tend to lose income after some disasters compared to their male counterparts. Moreover, the income divide persisted in the medium term after some disasters. This finding of rising inequality is novel for Australia and was not documented previously.

In an earlier phase of this research program, during 2014-15, we studied the nation-wide impacts of floods and bushfires and their effects on economic sectors in Australia. This research used national accounts data from six Australian states for the period 1978-2014, and explored whether and how floods and bushfires as well as extreme weather (i.e. extreme precipitation and temperature) impacted the course of sectoral activity in the overall Australian economy.\  We found that Australia{\textquoteright}s sectoral output is sensitive to floods {\textendash} Australia lost more than two years{\textquoteright} worth of agricultural output during the period 1978-2014 due to floods. Bushfires, on the other hand, do not affect overall output, though they exhibit sectoral effects. The project Optimising Post-Disaster Recovery Interventions in Australia complements this earlier research by studying individuals{\textquoteright} income changes through four case studies.

The policy implications of this research are clear and important. Decision makers need to have a more disaggregated view to understand the economic impact of disasters. Our findings show that socioeconomic vulnerabilities are concentrated in certain demographic groups and sectors of the economy. In addition, both the poor and female employees exhibit lower economic resilience to disasters, in that they may not be fully able to return to their pre-disaster income trajectory in the medium-term. This highlights the potential for disasters to widen income inequality over time.

In a nutshell, this research suggests that policymakers need to better understand the socioeconomics of disasters and formulate public policies to better distribute scarce budgets and resources towards vulnerable socioeconomic groups and employment sectors that are more sensitive to disasters.

In terms of utilisation, the project has focused on generating awareness and provoking thoughts among the policy and wider community regarding economic effects of disasters on individuals. The project has produced four research reports pertaining to each case study, along with four policy briefs that summarized each report. The project also produced demographic profiling analyses for each disaster analysed. The findings from these four case studies were disseminated to a national audience through a webinar in August 2020, and the feedback received was overwhelmingly positive. The project has also published two articles in {\textquoteleft}News and Views: Australian Journal of Emergency Management{\textquoteright} and was featured in two articles in the Fire Australia magazine, which helped share the results with the emergency management sector. Finally, our demographic profiling analysis on the VIC Black Saturday bushfires and associated findings have been cited and discussed in the recent CSIRO Report to the Prime Minister Morrison on climate and disaster resilience (CSIRO, 2020).

The project has also made strong media engagement about its findings. These media outputs included, two articles in The Conversation, several radio interviews on the economic impact of bushfires (including two at ABC Radio National {\textquotedblleft}The Money{\textquotedblright} program with Richard Aedy, ABC North Queensland, South Korean eFM), a number of national newspaper articles, quotations and citations, several media releases made by the media team at Deakin University.

Looking ahead, we expect to disseminate our research reports and policy briefs more widely to public and private organisations in Australia. We also expect to disseminate our findings through media and policy engagement in the next bushfire season to create further awareness and provoke thoughts on how Australia can enhance the economic resilience of its communities. The project team is currently involved with new projects on the health and wellbeing analysis of Black Saturday bushfires and Queensland Floods as direct outcomes of the present project. Finally, we will be progressing a number of working papers that have greatly benefited from and been informed by our BNHCRC research program methodology and learnings.

To conclude, we believe that this project is the end of the beginning rather than beginning of the end regarding potential research projects in the economics of disasters in Australia.

}, keywords = {economics, interventions, optimising, post-disaster, recovery}, issn = {649}, author = {Mehmet Ulubasoglu} } @article {bnh-8206, title = {Recovery Capitals (ReCap): navigating the complexities of disaster recovery - final project report}, number = {673}, year = {2021}, month = {09/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Disaster recovery is a complex process, requiring support from a range of people and organisations after an event. For the past decade, the four recovery environments (built, social, economic and natural) have been used to recognise this complexity and frame recovery efforts. However, recovery efforts often remain siloed, with inadequate attention paid to the interconnectedness between environments and the particular nuances across the social environment. There is a need for accessible, engaging and evidence-based resources to provide guidance for how to apply key recovery principles in practice.

The Recovery Capitals (ReCap) project aimed to promote wellbeing after disasters by examining the disaster recovery evidence base and producing a set of resources to help guide recovery efforts. It was a collaboration between the University of Melbourne, Massey University (Aotearoa New Zealand), Australian Red Cross, and other researchers, government and non-government agencies and organisations from across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.

The ReCap project began with an examination of the evidence base for recovery risk and protective factors using a\  Community Capitals Framework (Emery, Fey and Flora, 2006). It focused on how seven forms of capital - natural, built, political, cultural, human, social, financial {\textendash} can influence wellbeing after disasters, and how they can influence each other. Through discussions between researchers and end-users, this was then adapted to develop the Recovery Capitals Framework (RCF). The RCF highlights the interconnectedness between recovery capitals, multiple dimensions regarding people, place and time and values of diversity and equity. Key messages were distilled down from the initial evidence-mapping to simplify findings and determine practically oriented considerations that we presented in a set of resources. These spanned a range of formats to cater to different users{\textquoteright} needs and included contributions from artists and graphic designers across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand to produce visually engaging material.

The ReCap resources serve a range of purposes and are designed to guide disaster recovery efforts across different community contexts. The resources can be used to build capacity rapidly after an event, as well as in pre-event recovery planning to enhance resilience prior to disasters. They can be used in a wide range of disaster contexts, and by the wide range of people engaged in disaster recovery including policy makers, {\textquoteleft}on-the-ground{\textquoteright} staff and volunteers, including those whose core work is unrelated to disasters (e.g., teachers, healthcare workers and community organisations). The ReCap resources have also been tailored to the sociocultural contexts of the two countries, particularly with regard to representing the cultural perspectives and experiences of Indigenous peoples in appropriate ways.

The Australian edition of Guide to Disaster Recovery Capitals (ReCap Guide) was piloted from July 2020, with a high degree of engagement in the piloting process from end-users and incorporation into recovery operations throughout key organisations in the Australian sector. The Aotearoa New Zealand version built on the Australian version and had Aotearoa New Zealand specific evidence added. In\  November 2020 it was shared informally with M{\={a}}ori stakeholders to evaluate the effectiveness of the messages, artwork and tone. Feedback elicited was then combined with findings collected from the dissemination of the Australian pilot Guide to improve the document{\textquoteright}s readability. Following a more formalised consultation process with the wider stakeholder group in Aotearoa New Zealand, the current iteration is being finalised and will be disseminated appropriately.

The updated set of ReCap resources were released in May 2021. They are available via www.recoverycapitals.org.au. Dissemination is underway within Australia and will begin in Aotearoa New Zealand in mid-2021. Current and planned applications of the resources include: guiding local government initiatives; featuring on the Victorian Government{\textquoteright}s Digital Recovery Guidelines Solution platform; informing national government resources and workshops; use in training within governments and not-for-profits; informing new research projects; and being embedded into a range of Australian Red Cross activities including the development and monitoring of recovery programs, needs assessment, updating resources and presentations including to the International Federation Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. In Aotearoa New Zealand, the National Emergency Management Agency, New Zealand Red Cross and various civil defence and emergency management agencies and workers are eager to draw on the Aotearoa New Zealand guide to utilise in training and guidance contexts.

These uses to date span a range of disaster types including bushfires, floods, and the COVID-19 pandemic. This demonstrates the significant potential of these resources to support evidence-based, holistic and inclusive future recovery efforts throughout Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.

Project contributors are committed to continuing to develop this body of work through ongoing collaboration between researchers and end-users, including through a new Beyond Disasters Advisory Committee which will be convened by the University of Melbourne team from late 2021. This includes efforts to build disaster resilience evidence and convert it into useful tools to guide policy and practice, and to continue to focus on gaps relating to the recovery experiences of certain groups.

Another key aspect to this project was the exploration of residential mobility following disasters, which was led by the Aotearoa New Zealand team. This work built on an earlier document produced for this project on residential mobility and wellbeing. The new iteration used a case study approach to explore relevant literature on experiences of residential mobility in Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia. It described the complexity of how and why people relocated, the contextual influences that drive mobility in response and recovery and community recovery and wellbeing. The residential mobility work informed the development of the ReCap resources, in particular the focus on equity and inclusion.

}, keywords = {capitals, collaborative, disaster, evidence-based, holistic, recovery}, issn = {673}, author = {Lisa Gibbs and Phoebe Quinn and David Johnston and Denise Blake and Emily Campbell and Andrew Coghlan} } @article {bnh-6568, title = {Barriers and enablers in the long term recovery of communities affected by natural hazards: a review of the literature}, number = {534}, year = {2020}, month = {01/2020}, institution = {Bushfire \& Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This report for the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC reviews Australian and international literature on the long term recovery of communities that have been impacted by natural hazards.\  Previous reviews have considered the immediate, short and medium term recovery and to a lesser extent long term recovery.\  However, none have focused upon the barriers and the enablers of effective long term recovery.\  This is the focus of this literature review.

The review addressed three key areas:

1)\ \ \  what does the literature say is {\textquoteleft}long-term{\textquoteright} in disaster recovery and how does that play out in disasters;

2)\ \ \  what has been done well in disaster recovery (i.e. What has been shown to have benefits for community recovery); and,

3)\ \ \  what are the key messages for successful long term disaster recovery?

The approach required a review of literature that documented and discussed the problems that can arise within a recovery phase that can determine the barriers and enablers for effective long term recovery.\  This necessarily includes consideration of the short term recovery efforts as decisions made in the short term inevitably impact upon future outcomes.

The key findings were:

}, keywords = {communities, hazard response, literature review, Natural hazards, recovery}, issn = {534}, author = {Phil Morley and Elaine Barclay and Melissa Parsons} } @article {bnh-7784, title = {Checks and balances: A business-oriented lens on disaster management and warnings}, journal = {Disasters}, year = {2020}, month = {12/2020}, abstract = {

Following disasters, small businesses are critical to community recovery. Yet, factors that affect outcomes (e.g., planning, information needs, and response to warnings) are understudied. To overcome the research record{\textquoteright}s focus on policy favoured towards disaster mitigation rather than response, this article presents a two-phased, mixed method approach. The first study comprised interviews with businesses to elucidate disaster planning approaches, knowledge and information needs, and current warning system adequacy. It revealed opportunities to build knowledge and add business-specific content to agency-issued warnings. Through an online survey, study two examined how disaster knowledge, planning and experience related to existing bushfire warnings and those modified with business-relevant content. Findings showed that planning related to experience and knowledge but not to business-related protective action intentions. Modified messages were perceived as more effective and resulted in greater action intentions for those with bushfire experience. The article provides implications for small business-oriented disaster risk communication.

}, keywords = {business, communication, community, disaster, recovery}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12473}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/disa.12473}, author = {Amisha Mehta and Scott Murray and Cindy Hammill and Paula Dootson and Rebecca Langdon} } @article {bnh-6746, title = {Navigating Uncertainty: community experiences of bushfire}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management}, volume = {31}, year = {2020}, month = {02/2020}, pages = {54-59}, abstract = {

This research examined how people directly affected by a catastrophic event respond to that event, individually and as a community. It shifts from concepts of {\textquoteleft}community-led{\textquoteright} or {\textquoteleft}recovery{\textquoteright} after an event to a more pragmatic view of community disaster recovery. A catastrophic bushfire near Forcett, in Tasmania{\textquoteright}s south-east in 2013 is used to examine people{\textquoteright}s dependence on community and place to help then navigate the event. A constructivist grounded theory approach was used to identify a model of {\textquoteleft}Navigating Uncertainty{\textquoteright}. This covers three phases of {\textquoteleft}Losing the familiar{\textquoteright}, {\textquoteleft}Restoring the familiar{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}Living with change{\textquoteright}. These phases illustrate how people experience the perilous situation where lives were threatened and homes, communities and livelihoods damaged or destroyed. In such situations, people{\textquoteright}s decision-making and action are often underpinned by individual and collective values.

}, keywords = {Bushfire, catastrophic events, community, recovery}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/ajem-october-2019-navigating-uncertainty-community-experiences-of-bushfire/}, author = {Fiona Jennings} } @conference {bnh-6405, title = {Business involvement in natural disasters in Australia and New Zealand }, booktitle = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC Research Day AFAC19}, year = {2019}, month = {12/2019}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Catastrophic natural disasters by definition overwhelm the capability and capacity of emergency management organisations, at which times, the business sector can provide additional resources to assist communities. This study analyses the involvement of businesses in disaster management in Australia and New Zealand in three severe disaster events: the Black Saturday bushfires (2009); the Queensland floods (2010-11); and the Canterbury earthquake sequence (2010-11). It finds that businesses are already assisting communities to respond and recover from disasters, but there exists significant potential for further participation given a large number of businesses did not report involvement. Businesses are motivated by commitments to their staff and customers and corporate social responsibility, reflecting more complex business objectives then solely profit generation.

}, keywords = {business, communities, disasters, Natural hazards, recovery}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/australian-journal-of-emergency-management-monograph-series/}, author = {Jonathan Van Leeuwen and Andrew Gissing} } @article {bnh-6373, title = {Defining pharmacists{\textquoteright} roles in disasters: A Delphi study}, journal = {PLoS ONE}, volume = {14}, year = {2019}, month = {12/2019}, abstract = {

Introduction Pharmacists are uniquely placed in the community to be of assistance to disaster-affected patients. However, the roles undertaken by pharmacists in disasters are identified based on their own experiences and networks. There is currently no definition or acknowledgment of pharmacists{\textquoteright} roles in disasters.

Objective To acquire consensus from an expert panel of key opinion leaders within the field of disaster health on pharmacists{\textquoteright} roles in disasters throughout the four disaster phases{\textemdash}prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery.

Methods A Delphi study consisting of three rounds of online surveys was utilised. Twenty-four key opinion leaders were contacted, with 15 completing all three rounds. The 15 expert panellists were presented with 46 roles identified in the literature and asked to rank their opinions on a 5-point Likert scale. This study used an international, all-hazard, and multijurisdictional approach. Consensus was benchmarked at 80\% and any role which did not reach consensus was re-queried in the subsequent round. The third round provided the results of the Delphi study and sought commentary on the acceptance or rejection of the roles.

Results Of the 46 roles provided to the expert panel, 43 roles were accepted as roles pharmacists are capable of undertaking in a disaster. There were five roles for the prevention phase, nine for the preparedness phase, 21 for the response phase, and eight for the recovery phase. The experts were asked to prioritise the top five roles for each of the disaster phases. The three roles which did not make consensus were deemed to be specialised roles for disaster pharmacists and not generalisable to the broader pharmacy profession.

Conclusion This study identifies pharmacists{\textquoteright} roles in disasters which have been accepted by the international disaster health community. The international key opinion leaders recommended that pharmacists could be undertaking 43 roles in a disaster, however, this is dependent on individual jurisdiction considerations. Pharmacy professional associations need to advocate to policymakers for legislative support and to ensure pharmacists are equipped with the training and education required to undertake these roles within specific jurisdictions.

}, keywords = {Delphi, disaster, Pharmacists, Preparedness, prevention, recovery, response}, doi = { https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227132}, url = {https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227132}, author = {Kaitlyn Watson and Judith Singleton and Vivienne Tippett and Lisa Nissen} } @article {bnh-6293, title = {Demographic profiling: Western Australia Toodyay bushfires 2009 case study}, number = {526}, year = {2019}, month = {12/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

In this report, we provide some high-level demographic profiling and descriptive analysis of the Shire of Toodyay, a small town in the Western Australian Wheatbelt region that was devastated by bushfires on 29 December 2009.

The profiling utilises the ABS Census as the primary data source (in line with project methodology), at either a SA2 or local government area (LGA) level, depending on available information. It also relies on official government reports for fire related statistics.

In presenting this information, we note that our demographic profiling captures the overall population-level trends, which are affected by factors including migration and population growth. This enables us to present a baseline of the overall socioeconomic characteristics and conditions of Toodyay both prior to (2006) and post the fires (2011, 2016).

This report is part of a series of demographic profiling reports which will be released for each of the project case studies.

}, keywords = {Emergency management, optimisation, post-disaster, recovery, risk analysis}, issn = {526}, author = {Farah Beaini and Mehmet Ulubasoglu} } @article {bnh-5698, title = {Optimising post-disaster recovery interventions in Australia: annual project report 2018-19}, number = {488}, year = {2019}, month = {07/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC }, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Natural disasters in Australia are very costly, and often have devastating socio-economic effects on impacted communities.

In Victoria, we have sadly seen this first-hand. This year marked the 10th anniversary of the Victorian Black Saturday Bushfires (VIC BSB), which remains the most devastating modern-day bushfire our state has witnessed.\  From our fellow BNHCRC Beyond Bushfires researchers, we know that these fires have had profound measurable effects on the mental health of people living in the bushfire-hit areas, with disruptions to income {\textendash} the focus of our own research {\textendash} demonstrated to be a key contributing stressor.

Our pioneering research program explores the impact of a number of Australian natural disasters, including the VIC BSB, on disaster-hit individuals{\textquoteright} economic resilience. By analysing Australian 2006, 2011 and 2016 Census data, we determine whether their income levels were able to recover post disaster in the short and medium term, considering demographic factors and employment sectors.\  Through real-life case studies,\  our research helps illustrate how these events{\textemdash}of different types and scales{\textemdash}impact and ripple through communities and the broader economy over time.\ 

}, keywords = {Australia, communities, Emergency management, Multi-hazard, post-disaster recovery, recovery}, author = {Mehmet Ulubasoglu} } @article {bnh-5421, title = {Optimising post-disaster recovery interventions in Australia Annual Report 2017-18}, number = {456}, year = {2019}, month = {02/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Natural disasters in Australia are very costly, and often have devastating socio-economic effects on impacted communities.

Despite this, the economic impacts of natural disasters in Australia have often been overlooked in disaster management planning. A substantial problem is the inability to estimate the full economic impact {\textendash} both primary and secondary {\textendash} of natural disasters, considering all the affected sections of the economy.

The project aims to assist the Australian federal and state policymakers in building a more sustainable natural disaster recovery model. It investigates the sector-disaggregated economic effects of a number of natural disasters on affected individuals. Through these real-life case studies, the project helps illustrate how these event{\textemdash}of different types and scales{\textemdash}impact and ripple through communities and the broader economy over time. \ 

}, keywords = {emergency management., mulit-hazard, post-disaster, recovery}, author = {Mehmet Ulubasoglu} } @mastersthesis {bnh-5696, title = {The roles of pharmacists in disaster health management in natural and anthropogenic disasters}, year = {2019}, month = {06/2019}, school = {Queensland University of Technology}, address = {Brisbane}, abstract = {

This study investigated pharmacists{\textquoteright} roles in disasters and identified the acceptance and expectations of pharmacists throughout the different stages of a disaster. Taking an all-hazard and inclusive approach, this research included key stakeholders from international disaster and emergency management organisations as well as pharmacy organisations. Pharmacists{\textquoteright} skills and knowledge are typically underutilised in disasters and it was identified that their abilities extend beyond the traditional role of logistics and supply management. There are multiple practice areas in a disaster in which a pharmacist{\textquoteright}s expertise could be valuable in patient care, logistics, governance, and public health.

}, keywords = {Disaster management, disasters, Logistics, Patient care, Pharmacists, Preparedness, prevention, recovery, response, Roles}, url = {https://eprints.qut.edu.au/130757/}, author = {Kaitlyn Watson} } @article {bnh-4547, title = {Evaluation of Survive and Thrive}, number = {359}, year = {2018}, month = {04/2018}, pages = {94}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The Survive and Thrive pilot program is an intensive two year bushfire education program for primary school students in Grade 5/6. It is delivered through a community-based partnership between local CFA brigades and local primary schools. To date, the program has been delivered in the localities of Anglesea and Strathewen. In Anglesea, the partnership between Anglesea CFA and Anglesea Primary School was established in 2013 and the program has been running for four years. In Strathewen, the partnership between Strathewen Primary School and Arthurs Creek Fire Brigade was established in 2016 and the program has been running for 18 months.

The purpose of this evaluation was to examine the short-term and intermediate-term outcomes of the program in both Anglesea and Strathewen and to identify the key mechanisms and processes that contributed to those outcomes. By identifying the mechanisms and processes that contributed to program outcomes, the evaluation also seeks to identify what aspects of the program generated the most valuable outcomes for the resources invested. An additional aim of the evaluation was to examine key factors influencing the ongoing sustainability of the program in Anglesea and Strathewen and to identify a possible pathway toward scaled implementation.

The evaluation employed a mixed-methods design involving both quantitative and qualitative methods. The qualitative measures, which included semi-structured interviews and focus group interviews were the main focus; however, these were supplemented by a quantitative survey that was administered to both children and parents.\ \ 

}, keywords = {Bushfire, child, communities., Emergency management, Natural disasters, recovery, reduction, risk}, issn = {359}, author = {Briony Towers and Kevin Ronan} } @mastersthesis {bnh-5397, title = {Navigating Uncertainty: a qualitative study of resident involvement in the 2013 Forcett Tasmania bushfire disaster}, volume = {Doctor of Philosophy}, year = {2018}, month = {03/2018}, school = {RMIT University}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This thesis is a grounded theory analysis of resident involvement in the 2013 Forcett Tasmania bushfire disaster.\  Friday 4 January 2013 was one of the most significant fire days in Tasmania since 1967.\  The fire threatened life and left a trail of destruction, animals perished, homes, livelihood and landscape were destroyed or damaged.\  Despite this there appeared to be a level of social structure and processes evident.\  Many residents carried out a range of actions and activities before, during and after the bushfire disaster.\  It appeared that residents had a way of doing things and these actions were significant.\  In the post disaster phase, many of these local processes appeared to be overlooked by the well-intentioned external help or overwhelmed by the visitor-related goodwill.\ 

The analysis presented in this thesis focuses on the local social processes.\  The main question opening the inquiry was - What is community-led recovery in the context of a bushfire hazard and disaster?\  The qualitative research design involved in-depth interviews, to develop an explanatory account of the phenomenon of interest based on the analysis of people{\textquoteright}s experience and perspectives.\  The 40 people who participated in this study were residents of the small communities impacted by the bushfire disaster, external support volunteers, and representatives of local and state government and non-government services.

The constructivist grounded theory approach that was adopted by the researcher, constructed a theory grounded in the data that was collected by research participants.\  The grounded theory {\textquoteleft}Navigating Uncertainty{\textquoteright} outlines processes of surviving a bushfire disaster.\  A psychosocial process represents an interpretive understanding of what community members encountered before, during and after the bushfire disaster.\  The substantive theory {\textquoteleft}Navigating Uncertainty{\textquoteright} is built around community member{\textquoteright}s main concerns and what they did to resolve their concerns; their decision-making and actions underpinned by the meaning they gave to their experience.\  In a context of uncertainty community members depended on processes and systems that were familiar to them which fostered a sense of stability and helped sustain them through a period of change.\  This research concludes it is necessary to understand the holistic nature of people{\textquoteright}s lived experience in disaster events.\  Recovery includes the way people interpret and manage their context throughout a bushfire disaster, not just the post-disaster phase.\  Furthermore, the research identifies the importance of safeguarding and sustaining social stability, and approaches that support the participation of community members in a way that is meaningful and respectful of their experience.

}, keywords = {Bushfire, community, disaster, grounded theory, recovery}, url = {https://researchbank.rmit.edu.au/view/rmit:162621}, author = {Fiona Jennings} } @article {bnh-4433, title = {Valuing recovery through risk ownership}, journal = { Australian Journal of Emergency Management }, volume = {33}, year = {2018}, month = {01/2018}, abstract = {

As the risks encountered by natural hazards change and become more dynamic, so too, does the task of recovering from them. To manage natural hazards, planners must plan for the unexpected; building resilience before, during and after events. Currently, recovery funding is limited to a two-year window. Devastated communities that do not recover during this time rely on ad hoc funding to support patchy recovery beyond this. Planning for long-term recovery needs to be embedded throughout the risk assessment process to be effective. This presents a number of challenges. By identifying the longer-term risks and their consequences in advance, sustained recovery can be planned for all social, environmental and economic values (assets). This will determine what recovery interventions may be needed and when they are likely be most effective.

}, keywords = {emergnecy mangement., recovery, resiliance, risk ownership}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/media/5025/ajem-33-01-17.pdf}, author = {Celeste Young} } @mastersthesis {bnh-5390, title = {Acknowledging local sociality in disaster recovery: a longitudinal, qualitative study}, year = {2017}, school = {Macquarie University}, address = {Sydney}, abstract = {

Formal recovery, reconstruction and risk reduction efforts put in place in response to major disaster events are designed to redevelop infrastructure and services for, and improve the longer-term safety of, the affected populations. However, these efforts often rely on top-down approaches that neglect the impact on and the presence of local people{\textquoteright}s everyday lives in and with their communities (local sociality). As a result, top-down recovery and reconstruction approaches may misjudge engagement with disaster-impacted communities. Existing and emerging power-relations tend to influence the aims and processes of the recovery and marginalise the voices of the affected populations, particularly the most vulnerable.

This thesis explores these issues in four case studies: the towns of St George and Grantham, in Queensland, Australia, both of which were severely impacted by flooding events between 2010 and 2012, and the Japanese towns of Koizumi and Namie, which sustained devastating damage from the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami and in the case of Namie, contamination from the Fukushima nuclear reactor in 2011. This study identifies a critical coherence in the human, social and political issues and challenges across all study areas, despite differences in the country, physical attributes of the hazards, types of damage and responses. In particular, the commonality identified across four different cases illuminate the importance of local sociality that is highly valued by the disaster-impacted people but often overlooked or downplayed by others.

The adopted qualitative, longitudinal research approach using semi-structured interviews through multiple site visits captured and identified long-term impacts and transitions in each study area involving individuals, households, local community groups, support persons and organisations and government officials.

}, keywords = {Australia, community, development, disaster relief, Japan, recovery, resilience, Vulnerability}, doi = {http://hdl.handle.net/1959.14/1260629}, url = {http://minerva.mq.edu.au:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/mq:70138}, author = {Tetsuya Okada} } @inbook {bnh-7235, title = {Participation for Disaster Resilience}, booktitle = {Community Engagement in Post-Disaster Recovery}, year = {2017}, publisher = {Routledge Taylor and Francis Group}, organization = {Routledge Taylor and Francis Group}, chapter = {6}, address = {United Kingdom}, abstract = {

This chapter addresses the question of how to enhance community participation in post-disaster housing reconstruction in order to enhance future {\textquoteleft}disaster resilience{\textquoteright}. Four {\textquoteleft}good practice{\textquoteright} reconstruction projects from the Indian states of Gujarat and Bihar are compared, to examine the long-term impact of different participatory approaches. The findings suggest a need to address strategic issues that go beyond one project life cycle of reconstruction projects. These findings are organised into an {\textquotedblleft}operational framework for community participation for resilience{\textquotedblright}, which can hopefully be a valuable tool for a wide range of disaster management agencies.

}, keywords = {community engagement, disaster, Housing, recovery, resilience}, issn = {9781315534213}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315534213}, url = {https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315534213/chapters/10.4324/9781315534213-6}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati} } @book {bnh-7485, title = {Co-Building with Bamboo}, year = {2015}, publisher = {Grass giants}, organization = {Grass giants}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Our new book celebrating 10 years of building with bamboo. Co-building is the process of building something together with community members who have no stake in the outcome. This book shows how we have evolved our design and construction approach over the past 10 years. Our co-building with bamboo included over\ 500 participants\ in\ 35 workshops\ building\ 23 structures.

}, keywords = {bamboo, community, construction, recovery}, issn = {978-0-9944338-0-0}, url = {https://www.giantgrassdesign.com/store/p1/co-building_with_bamboo.html}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Munir Vahanvati} }