@book {bnh-8323, title = {Making Sense of Natural Disasters: The Learning Vacuum of Bushfire Public Inquiries}, year = {2022}, pages = {135}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, organization = {Palgrave Macmillan}, edition = {1}, address = {Cham}, abstract = {

This book examines the ways in which emergency management organizations make sense and learn from natural disasters. Examining recent bushfires in Australia, it demonstrates that whilst public inquiries that follow such disasters can be important for learning and change, they have ultimately created a learning vacuum insofar as their recommendations repeat themselves. This has kept governments and society focused on learning lessons about the past, rather than for the future. Accordingly, this book recommends a new approach to sensemaking and learning focused on prospective planning rather than retrospective recommendations, and where planning for the future is seen as the shared responsibility of the government, society, and the emergency management community in Australia and beyond.

}, keywords = {bushfires public reviews, governance, Natural disasters, organizational learning, public inquiries, risk management}, isbn = {978-3-030-94778-1}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94778-1}, url = {https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-94778-1$\#$about}, author = {Graham Dwyer} } @article {bnh-8189, title = {Established and emerging uses of predictive services in Victoria}, number = {697}, year = {2021}, month = {08/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {MELBOURNE}, abstract = {

The recent 2019-20 Black Summer bushfire season brought both sector and public attention to the important role that predictive services can play in mitigating and preventing the loss of life and assets from bushfires.

This research study focused on two key questions:

  1. What are the key features of effective relationships between Fire Behaviour Analysts (FBANs) and their users within emergency management?
  2. How might the predictive services role and predictive services outputs be developed in the future?

We explored these questions by conducting twenty-five (25) semi-structured interviews with key practitioners who either perform the FBAN role or use predictive services in Victoria.

Our findings are categorised into 7 topics:

1. Interviewee background: The interviewees included people who represent the following operational roles: FBAN, State Regional Commander, State Agency Commander, Level 3 Incident Controller, Level 3 Public Information Officer, Level 3 Planning Officer, Level 3 Operations Officer, and Level 3 Situation Officer.

2. FBAN outputs: We collected data from FBANs and other operations staff who occupy roles which interact with and/or use the outputs produced by FBANs from within the broad emergency and incident control arrangements provided for within the Australasian Inter-service Incident Management System.

We found that the FBAN advice and products are used to:

Most interviewees agreed that the design and framing of outputs should be standardised for public dissemination, however, there was less consensus that such standardisation is required for operational purposes.

3. Trust in FBAN outputs: We found that in general:

Trust is an important factor in the high-pressure contexts of incident and land management, including both interpersonal trust and trust in particular tools and systems. We found that trust seems to depend, in part, upon users{\textquoteright} perceptions of a given FBAN{\textquoteright}s skills, level of experience, and knowledge of the area or context in which they are offering predictive intelligence. For FBANs, both having fireground experience and {\textquotedblleft}local knowledge{\textquotedblright} and being able to convince users that one has fireground experience and {\textquotedblleft}local knowledge{\textquotedblright} seem to be important factors in eliciting the trust of some users.

4. Timeliness of FBAN outputs: We explored whether FBANs produced advice and outputs in a timely manner. We found that:

For example, a {\textquotedblleft}quick and dirty{\textquotedblright} map of potential fire spread was seen to be acceptable during first attack. However, the pressure related to timeliness decreases during an extended attack and is substantially decreased during pre-event planning and planned burning, or in any instance where there is potentially more time for FBANs to converse with end-users, collect and validate intelligence and tailor the outputs to the end-users{\textquoteright} needs.

5. Benefits of releasing FBAN outputs publicly: We explored whether participants felt predictive outputs produced by FBANs (e.g., fire spread predictions) should be released to the community (i.e., affected communities and the general public) to facilitate their decision-making and planning during periods of significantly elevated fire danger (e.g., days of {\textquotedblleft}Extreme{\textquotedblright} fire danger rating). We found that:

Participants noted that there is a moral imperative to release information to assist members of the public in their decision-making in relation to fire hazards. Further, there was a sense amongst many participants that, by releasing FBAN products publicly, emergency management organisations could support trust-building between agencies and communities and better demonstrate their transparency and accountability when working with the community to plan for and respond to bushfires.

6. Risks of releasing FBAN products publicly: We explored with the participants whether they felt that it was a risk to release FBAN outputs to the community to facilitate their decision-making and planning on days of significantly elevated fire danger. In general, participants reported that there were low levels of risk associated with releasing FBAN outputs to the community to facilitate community decision-making and planning.

We found that, where there was unease amongst participants in relation to releasing FBAN outputs publicly, it was because of:

7. The future of the FBAN role: We explored whether participants felt that the FBAN role will continue to be important within the broad emergency and incident control arrangements. We found that:

With this in mind, it is important to understand that the development of predictive services must ensure that it is further integrated into emergency management arrangements outside the State Control Centre. Specifically, viewed in relation to other project findings, it is clear that for such development and integration to be effective, FBANs will be required to spend more time interacting with users. Such interactions may sometimes occur outside fire seasons, though it is also apparent that they also need to occur throughout the fire season, on firegrounds and in Incident Management Centres and Regional Control Centres, in order to grow FBANs{\textquoteright} skillsets, maintain trust with users, educate users about their outputs and adapt those outputs to user needs. Various users had suggestions about how predictive services might better serve their needs, the vast majority of which related to the refinement of output types and modes of presentation to incidents and situations as they emerge.

Following this feedback also means exploring the different ways that FBAN skillsets and competencies can be used to assist key decision-makers such as Incident Controllers and community information and warning teams which continue to be so important in terms of planning and responding to bushfires. These skillsets and competencies - at both state and regional levels - also have relevant application to conduct of planned burning, and both users and FBANs suggest that more use can be made of FBAN skillsets and competencies to assist the states land and fire management agencies in achieving fuel management goals.

Based on these findings, we make 4 recommendations, detailed as follows:

Recommendation 1: that emergency management agencies explore which FBAN outputs could be released to the community to support their planning and decision-making during bushfire season.

Recommendation 2: that emergency management agencies explore how FBANs and predictive service outputs can be utilised to better support other relevant functions such as the conduct of planned burning and public information.

Recommendation 3: that emergency management agencies explore the ongoing training and development needs of FBANs.

Recommendation 4: that emergency management agencies work with FBANs to develop continuous learning processes which can be used to improve predictive services after bushfire and planned burning seasons.

In terms of utilisation, our recommendations will require an implementation strategy which needs to be mindful of the requirements to continue to plan for and respond to ongoing incidents that require predictive services. Accordingly, we propose a staged approach to utilisation that is channelled through the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC Black Summer research group.

Finally, we have confidence that these findings and recommendations are relevant to many other jurisdictions in Australia, including Western Australia, Tasmania, South Australia, Australian Capital Territory, Queensland, and New South Wales, given their similarity in bushfire hazards, incident management systems, and the role and scope of predictive services.

}, keywords = {analysts, black summer, FBANs, Fire behaviour, predictive, services, Victoria}, issn = {697}, author = {Chloe Begg and Graham Dwyer and Timothy Neale and Ian Pollock} } @article {bnh-7947, title = {Learning to learn from bushfire: Perspectives from Victorian emergency management practitioners}, journal = {Australian Journal of Public Administration}, year = {2021}, month = {04/2021}, abstract = {

The Black Summer Fires of 2019/2020 remind us not only that Australia is arguably the most bushfire prone area in the world but also that we have much to learn in terms of how we learn from such events. Bushfires interact with emergency management systems in a manner that is complex and unpredictable which all too often results in damages and losses, so significant that governments establish public inquiries to forensically examine what happened and why afterwards. Too often, such processes have resulted in emergency management practitioners (EMP) being blamed, not to mention scapegoated and even vilified for damages and losses from major bushfire events. With recent bushfire events (as well as other crises surrounding Covid-19) highlighting the excruciating demands placed on EMP and an escalating scepticism about whether public inquiries improve preparation for future bushfires, this paper explores the question: what can we learn about public inquiries based on the experiences of EMP?

}, keywords = {Bushfire, emergency management practitioners, Learning, public review processes, royal commission}, doi = { https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12476}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8500.12476}, author = {Graham Dwyer} } @article {bnh-8302, title = {Struggling to make sense of it all: the emotional process of sensemaking following an extreme incident}, journal = {Human Relations}, year = {2021}, month = {12/2021}, abstract = {

Organizations operating in extreme contexts regularly face dangerous incidents they can neither prevent nor easily control. In such circumstances, successful sensemaking can mean the difference between life and death. But what happens afterwards? Our study of emergency management practitioners following a major bushfire reveals a process of post-incident sensemaking during which practitioners continue to make sense of the incident after it ends, during the subsequent public inquiry, and as they try to implement the inquiry{\textquoteright}s recommendations. Different varieties of sensemaking arise during this process as practitioners rely on different forms of coping to develop and share new understandings, which not only make sense of the original incident, but also enable changes to help the organization deal with future incidents. Our study also shows that practitioners experience a range of emotions during this process, some of which inhibit sensemaking while others {\textendash} particularly different forms of anxiety {\textendash} can facilitate it. Our study makes an important empirical contribution to recent theoretical work on varieties of sensemaking and provides new insights into the complex role of emotions in sensemaking in extreme contexts.

}, keywords = {Coping, crises and disasters, emotions, inquiries, organisational change, sensemaking}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177\%2F00187267211059464}, url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00187267211059464}, author = {Graham Dwyer and Cynthia Hardy and Haridimos Tsoukas} } @article {bnh-6592, title = {Post-inquiry sensemaking: the case of the {\textquoteleft}Black Saturday{\textquoteright} bushfires}, journal = {Organization Studies}, year = {2020}, month = {01/2020}, abstract = {

We examine post-inquiry sensemaking by emergency management practitioners following an inquiry into the most damaging bushfire disaster in Australia{\textquoteright}s history. We theorize a model of post-inquiry sensemaking with four distinct but overlapping phases during which sensemaking becomes more prospective over time. In addition to providing important insights into what has, hitherto, been a neglected arena for sensemaking studies, i.e. post-inquiry sensemaking, we contribute to the understanding of sensemaking more generally. Specifically, we show the complex nature of the relationship between sensemaking and equivocality, explain how multiple frames enhance sensemaking, and explore temporality in sensemaking over time.

}, keywords = {interpretive scheme, Learning, organizational learning, sensemaking theory, single case study, vicarious learning}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840619896271}, url = {https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0170840619896271}, author = {Graham Dwyer and Cynthia Hardy and Steve Maguire} } @mastersthesis {bnh-5280, title = {We have not lived long enough: sensemaking and learning from bushfires in Australia}, year = {2017}, month = {06/2017}, school = {The University of Melbourne}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Why did the bushfires of 7 February 2009 in Victoria take so many lives? Why were those bushfires so extreme, so feral, so catastrophic, so devastating? What can be done to ensure that so many lives are not lost, that so much devastation is not caused, in such bushfires in the future? (Parliament of Victoria, Opening Remarks, Chair of the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission, 2009: 1) Victoria, Australia, is arguably the most fire-prone area in the world. Increasingly, with climate change, atmospheric scientists claim that we are experiencing longer drought periods, higher wind speeds and warmer temperatures which are giving rise to a greater bushfire threat in an already extremely bushfire-prone environment. Given such circumstances, it is likely that Victoria{\textquoteright}s emergency management organisations will increasingly find themselves responding to bushfires characterised as complex, harmful and rare. Therefore, my study seeks to understand how emergency management organisations make sense of and learn from bushfires in Victoria so that they can be better prepared for bushfires in the future. To do so, I focus on the Royal Commission, which followed the {\textquotedblleft}Black Saturday{\textquotedblright} bushfires, commonly referred to as Australia{\textquoteright}s worst ever natural disaster. My study comprises a qualitative and interpretive methodology to explore how emergency management organisations implement recommendations emanating from public inquiries, and the role that sensemaking plays in this. In addition, given the devastating impact that disasters such as bushfires can have, I also explore how emotions influence the sensemaking process associated with implementing recommendations in such organisations. Through this dual-focused approach I build new theory in relation to the ways in which individuals in organisations make sense of and learn from public inquiry recommendations after disasters, while highlighting the role of both negative and positive emotions in this process.

}, url = {https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/handle/11343/158069}, author = {Graham Dwyer} } @article {bnh-2674, title = {We have not lived long enough: Sensemaking and learning from bushfire in Australia}, journal = {Management Learning}, volume = {47}, year = {2016}, month = {02/2016}, chapter = {45}, abstract = {

Organisations increasingly find themselves responding to unprecedented natural disasters that are experienced as complex, unpredictable, and harmful. We examine how organisations make sense and learn from these novel experiences by examining three Australian bushfires. We show how sensemaking and learning occurred during the public inquiries that followed these events, as well as how learning continued afterward with the help of {\textquotedblleft}learning cues.{\textquotedblright} We propose a model that links public inquiry activities to changes in organisational practices. Given the interesting times in which we live, this model has important implications for future research on how new organisational practices can be enacted after public inquiries have concluded their work.

This article is available as a free download.\ 

}, url = {http://mlq.sagepub.com/content/47/1/45.abstract}, author = {Graham Dwyer} } @article {bnh-2232, title = {We have not lived long enough: Sensemaking and learning from bushfire in Australia}, journal = {Management Learning}, year = {2015}, month = {04/2015}, abstract = {

Organizations increasingly find themselves responding to unprecedented natural disasters that are experienced as complex, unpredictable, and harmful. We examine how organizations make sense and learn from these novel experiences by examining three Australian bushfires. We show how sensemaking and learning occurred during the public inquiries that followed these events, as well as how learning continued afterward with the help of {\textquotedblleft}learning cues.{\textquotedblright} We propose a model that links public inquiry activities to changes in organizational practices. Given the interesting times in which we live, this model has important implications for future research on how new organizational practices can be enacted after public inquiries have concluded their work.

}, doi = {10.1177/13500507615577047}, url = {http://mlq.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/04/01/1350507615577047.abstract}, author = {Graham Dwyer and Cynthia Hardy} }