@article {bnh-8208, title = {Nandong smong and tsunami lullabies: Song and music as an effective communication tool in disaster risk reduction}, journal = {International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction}, volume = {65}, year = {2021}, month = {08/2021}, abstract = {

Growing international appreciation of the increasing risk posed by natural hazard events acknowledges the effects that climate change and increasingly vulnerable populations will have on future costs and casualties of disasters. As concerns about the impacts of natural hazard events increase, researchers and practitioners are interested in identifying effective processes to build individual and community resilience. To date, despite resources, time and effort being made by governments and NGOs to encourage disaster risk reduction (DRR) programs at national, regional and local levels, most communities remain poorly prepared, and improvements have only been incremental.

One way to gain insight into systems that may improve local community resilience is to examine (rare) examples where communities have avoided the worst impacts of a natural disaster through implementation of recognizable DRR strategies. One example is Simeulue Island in Indonesia. Simeulue was only 43\ km from the epicenter of the earthquake that initiated the Indian Ocean tsunami in December 2004. The 15\ m tsunami waves destroyed all but two of the islands 171 schools, 60 bridges, 41 medical centers and left 85\% of the population homeless; but only 7 out of the 80,000 inhabitants died [1]. Music and song have been identified as an important part of Simeulue{\textquoteright}s DRR success [2-4]. This paper discusses the nature of the songs of Simeulue and considers the socio-cognitive processes whereby music was co-opted to entrain risk information about tsunami and their avoidance into the Simeulue community{\textquoteright}s Sense of Coherence ({\textquoteleft}SOC{\textquoteright}). The findings indicate that the people of Simeulue applied techniques now understood to optimize learning. While highly effective, they rely on rudimentary human skills and have consequently been overlooked or ignored in most formal DRR contexts.

}, keywords = {communication, disasters, DRR, education, Music, Song, Story}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102527}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221242092100488X?dgcid=author}, author = {Sutton, S and Paton, Douglas and Burgelt , Petra T. and Saut Sagala and Ella Meilianda} } @conference {bnh-6505, title = {Are we future ready? It depends on who you ask }, booktitle = {AFAC19 powered by INTERSCHUTZ - Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC Research Forum}, year = {2019}, month = {12/2019}, publisher = {Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience}, organization = {Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The key problem faced in preparing for future disasters is a problem of imagination. It is a problem embedded in the stories we tell about what we imagine might happen. These stories tend to focus on a {\textquoteleft}bell curve{\textquoteright} distribution of disaster events, combining our own lived experience with the stories of others. This combination of personal experiences and the stories of others forms the basis of our perception of risk and vulnerability. This is a dynamic and ongoing process. The story is never finished, nor is it complete, as we selectively incorporate or reject information depending on its source, content and compatibility with the existing narrative.

The existing narrative for natural hazard management incorporates perceptions of probability; generally, {\textquoteleft}disaster consequences will tend to hover close to the mean and every now and then we will be tested{\textquoteright}. As the volume of hazards grows the narrative is more deeply imbued with concepts of coping and {\textquoteleft}lessons learned{\textquoteright}. If certain narratives are allowed to flourish uncontested within an organisation an ironic consequence can be a failure of imagination and coping. A failure to be future ready.

This paper is a discussion about the extent to which we{\textquoteright}re future ready using the Johari window as a heuristic and reflecting on a case study from Indonesia.

Download the full peer reviewed research proceedings\ from the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC Research Forumhere.

}, keywords = {Emergency management, future disasters, risk management, Vulnerability}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/australian-journal-of-emergency-management-monograph-series/}, author = {Sutton, S and Paton, Douglas and Burgelt , Petra T. and Ella Meilianda and Saut Sagala} } @article {BF-2341, title = {Preparing for bushfires: understanding intentions}, journal = {Disaster Prevention and Management}, volume = {15}, year = {2006}, month = {2006}, pages = {566 - 575}, abstract = {Purpose {\textendash} 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. Design/methodology/approach {\textendash} 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. Findings {\textendash} The analyses demonstrated that preparedness intentions reflect the outcomes of different ways of reasoning about their relationship with bushfire hazards and that {\textquotedblleft}preparing{\textquotedblright} and {\textquotedblleft}not preparing{\textquotedblright} represent discrete processes. Each outcome was supported by different attitudes towards preparing and by different predictor variables. Research limitations/implications {\textendash} Preparing and not preparing for natural hazards should be conceptualised as separate processes and additional research into their origins and precursors is required. Practical implications {\textendash} Separate risk communication strategies are needed to counter reasons for {\textquotedblleft}not preparing{\textquotedblright} and facilitate {\textquotedblleft}preparing{\textquotedblright}. 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. Originality/value {\textendash} 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.}, doi = {10.1108/09653560610685893}, author = {Paton, Douglas and Kelly , Gail and Burgelt , Petra T. and Doherty , Michael} }