@mastersthesis {bnh-5149, title = {Flood management in a changing climate}, year = {2017}, month = {05/2017}, pages = {405}, school = {Australian National University}, address = {Canberra}, abstract = {

In 2010-2011 Australia experienced its most expensive floods in history with costs to insurers and state and federal governments exceeding A$10 billion. Climate and population changes are likely to increase future flood threats and economists estimate that by 2050, even without factoring in climate change, Australia{\textquoteright}s natural disaster damage bill could reach $33 billion per year. Flood management is thus a key area for improving adaptive capacity. While\ the causes of flooding are well-known, effective solutions have proved elusive and some flood management options may be maladaptive in the longer term. There were contradictions in flood management literature. Some sources categorized structural measures such as dykes and levees as adaptation measures. Others warned about their negative impacts. Meanwhile, innovative approaches used overseas appeared little known or used in Australia. Although structural measures were often criticized in adaptation literature, there was a lack of guidance about how to reduce reliance on them. Similarly, resilience researchers with a social-ecological systems perspective argued the need to identify policy and institutional interventions that would make it possible to move from undesirable to more desirable resilience domains. The challenge was therefore to determine how best to adapt to increasing flood risk, and how to facilitate the adoption of adaptive approaches. A key question was whether adaptive approaches used elsewhere were transferrable to Australia. Given the dominance of resilience theory in modern disaster management, a related research aim was to determine whether or not disaster resilience policy was likely to achieve adaptive outcomes. Literature review was the primary research method, supplemented with semi-structured interviews. Sources included recent flood reviews, academic literature, policy and legal documents. These were used to develop comparative case studies from China, The Netherlands, the United States and Australia. This was extended to cover global organizations for the resilience component of the work. Data analysis drew on literature relating to adaptation, resilience, comparative public policy, institutional theory and emergency management. Resilience interpretations were identified in a systematic way using a modified emergency management framework, complemented with narratives. Results revealed that resilience interpretations varied according to country, with Australia tending to be the least adaptive and the Netherlands the most. This reflects changes in attitudes towards structural mitigation. While support for structural mitigation remains strong in Australia, recent flood events in other countries have exposed its weaknesses. This has resulted in a shift to reduce levee dependency, accompanied by support for alternatives such as ecosystem based measures and development relocation. Such measures encounter significant barriers in Australia, making policy transfer problematic. Nevertheless, case studies revealed opportunities to improve program implementation, and investigation of path dependency associated with structural mitigation identified opportunities to alter feedbacks. Regarding application of resilience theory to disaster management, it was found that while resilience is a useful concept for researchers, there are problems when it is operationalised. A better focus for practitioners would be to negotiate long-term adaptation pathways.

}, url = {https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/117237}, author = {Caroline Wenger} } @article {bnh-4008, title = {The oak or the reed: how resilience theories are translated into distaster management policies}, journal = {Ecology and Society}, volume = {22}, year = {2017}, month = {11/2017}, abstract = {

Although many researchers explore disaster resilience as an ongoing process or as a measurable property with indicators, few study whether disaster resilience policies are likely to lead to outcomes that are adaptive over the longer term. Some measures intended to increase local resilience may actually decrease the ability to cope with large-scale disasters. In the context of flood management, this work looks at activities supported in the name of resilience and whether they will result in long-term adaptive outcomes. It is proposed that the interpretation of {\textquotedblleft}resilience{\textquotedblright} in emergency management has been influenced by pre-existing disaster management concepts, such as the prevent-prepare-respond-recover (PPRR) framework. These have not been adequately reassessed in the light of resilience theories. Disaster resilience was examined using the PPRR framework as a lens. With a focus on flooding, national disaster resilience policy documents from four countries and the global arena were studied to find out which activities were linked to resilience and whether this varies between countries. Subnational policies were also examined in areas that had recently experienced major flooding. Resilience interpretations in some countries were found to support resistance strategies while others were more accommodating. The continued development of floodplains, facilitated by structural mitigation, is an example of a highly resilient but maladaptive feedback loop. This results in risk accumulation and higher consequences during extreme floods. Research explores ways interventions could alter feedbacks and transform to more desirable resilience regimes. It is proposed that negotiating long-term adaptation pathways should be the ultimate aim for planners and emergency managers rather than resilience, which tends to support the status quo. Emergency management concepts and frameworks need to be amended in the light of resilience theories to make it easier to achieve adaptive outcomes.

}, doi = {10.5751/ES-09491-220318}, url = {https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol22/iss3/art18/}, author = {Caroline Wenger} } @article {bnh-3570, title = {Translating resilience theories into disaster management policies}, number = {251}, year = {2017}, month = {05/2017}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

In the context of flooding, research aimed to identify how disaster resilience was interpreted in four countries (China, USA, Netherlands, Australia) and by international organisations. To do this, it assessed the types of activities supported by disaster resilience policies. A particular concern was the use of resistance versus accommodation strategies, the former characterised by structural engineering approaches such as levees to exclude floodwaters, while the latter uses a number of approaches to enable people to live with flooding, such as ecosystem-based approaches and preparedness. Debates about the merits of these two approaches are reminiscent of the ancient Greek fable, {\textquoteleft}The oak and the reed{\textquoteright} by Aesop (hence the paper{\textquoteright}s title).

}, issn = {251}, author = {Caroline Wenger} } @article {bnh-2359, title = {Better use and management of levees: reducing flood risk in a changing climate}, journal = {Environmental Reviews}, volume = {23}, year = {2015}, month = {02/2015}, abstract = {

Many nations rely on dykes and levees to mitigate flood risk. However, a myriad of problems has prompted views that levees are ultimately maladaptive and should be used as a measure of last resort. This leads to questions not only about the place of levees in future flood risk management, but also whether anything can be done to reduce their impacts. A detailed review of flood events from Australia, China, the Netherlands, and the USA was used to develop a case study for each country. Case studies present existing levee problems, future flood threats, and national strategies to address them. These were used as a basis to analyse the transferability of adaptive flood approaches. While many countries are attempting to restore floodplain storage, thereby reducing their reliance on levees, others are increasing their investment in levee construction. This review explores factors that affect the transferability of adaptive approaches, including issues, such as problem recognition, affordability, and program delivery. It was found that countries vary in their ability to recognise levee problems, and the level at which decisions are made influences the likelihood of adaptive solutions being adopted. Analysis suggests that federal systems face particular challenges and their capacity to adopt adaptive approaches may be impaired if institutional barriers are not addressed. Regardless of the overall approach to manage flood risk, the experiences of all case study countries offer some broadly applicable lessons for improving the use and management of levees, reducing their adverse impacts, and improving the integration of natural flood mitigation.

}, keywords = {Flood, Policy}, doi = {10.1139/er-2014-0060}, url = {http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/eprint/JuAnSyApuH5P9DqD9WWD/full$\#$.VjrE2LcrKUk}, author = {Caroline Wenger} } @article {bnh-1944, title = {Building walls around flood problems: The place of levees in Australian flood management}, journal = {Australian Journal of Water Resources}, volume = {19}, year = {2015}, month = {06/2015}, pages = {3-30}, chapter = {3}, abstract = {

Recent Australian floods have resulted in many changes to levee provisions in Queensland, Victoria and New South Wales. It is therefore timely to review levee issues and current state arrangements. This paper investigates the use of levees as an adaptation measure to address climate change. It also looks at the performance and reliability of Australian levees, environmental impacts, and the relationship between levees and the development of flood prone land. Despite recent changes, there continues to be much scope for improving floodplain development planning and the assessment and management of levees. Development controls continue to be inadequate and this will fuel future demand for levee protection, while lack of development controls behind levees is likely to lead to greater consequences when levees fail, a scenario more likely due to loss of climate stationarity. While levees provide incremental adaptation, they do not offer a long-term solution. However, transformational adaptation measures used in many places overseas are poorly supported by Australian funding programs. Long-term adjustments need to be planned and funded and appropriate incentives and decision-making structures need to be put in place.

}, keywords = {Climatic changes; Floodplain management; Planning; Levees; Evaluation; Flood damage prevention; Finance; Government policy; Floods; Environmental aspects}, issn = {1324-1583}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.7158/W15-008.2015.19.1}, url = {http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=283076229770305;res=IELENG}, author = {Caroline Wenger} } @inbook {bnh-2360, title = {Sink or Swim: alternative approaches to flood disaster reconstruction and mitigation}, booktitle = {River Basin Management in the Twenty-First Century: understanding people and place}, year = {2014}, pages = {pp. 418-445}, publisher = {RC Press}, organization = {RC Press}, address = {Boca Raton, Florida}, author = {Caroline Wenger} } @article {bnh-2361, title = {Climate change adaptation and floods: Australia{\textquoteright}s institutional arrangements}, year = {2013}, month = {2013}, institution = {National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility}, address = {Gold Coast}, isbn = {978-1-925039-92-4}, url = {https://www.nccarf.edu.au/sites/default/files/attached_files_publications/Wenger_2013_Case_study.pdf}, author = {Caroline Wenger} } @conference {bnh-2362, title = {Living with floods: key lessons from four Australian flood reviews and similar reviews from the Netherlands, China and the USA}, booktitle = {53rd Floodplain Management Association Conference, Tweed Heads}, year = {2013}, month = {05/2013}, publisher = {Floodplain Management Association Conference}, organization = {Floodplain Management Association Conference}, address = {Tweed Heads, NSW}, author = {Caroline Wenger and Karen Hussey and James Pittock} } @article {bnh-2363, title = {The use of the 1:100 year standard in the United States: insights for Australia?}, journal = {Australian Environment Review}, volume = {27}, year = {2012}, pages = {pp. 337-346}, author = {Caroline Wenger and Karen Hussey and James Pittock} }