@article {bnh-8215, title = {Cost-effective mitigation strategy development for building related earthquake risk {\textendash} Melbourne case study}, number = {707}, year = {2021}, month = {09/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Earthquake hazard was not fully recognised in Australian building design until the mid-1990{\textquoteright}s. This oversight has resulted in a legacy of vulnerable buildings that can be readily damaged in moderate to severe Australian earthquakes. In particular, older unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings built with the architectural styles, materials and construction details used in the United Kingdom are particularly vulnerable. Australian earthquakes have highlighted the vulnerability of this building type. These events include the Adelaide Earthquake of 1954, the Meckering Earthquake of 1968, the Newcastle Earthquake of 1989 and the Kalgoorlie Earthquake of 2010, all of which damaged pre WWII masonry buildings in particular.\  Buildings of this style are present in the older centres of our major cities, and Melbourne has a very significant number of these. As shown in this research, in number nearly half of the buildings in the Melbourne central business district are of this type of construction. The damage to these buildings can greatly add to human casualties as a result of falling masonry elements. Further, the severity of damage and losses can impede the recovery of cities like Melbourne physically, economically and socially. Finally, many of these buildings have heritage value to communities that residents may want preserved.

This document reports on the final deliverable for Project A9 Cost-effective mitigation strategy development for building related earthquake risk of the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Collaborative Research Centre (CRC). It builds on the masonry component research of the University of Adelaide in this project and is a milestone for Geoscience Australia. The work follows the utilisation project entitled {\textquotedblleft}Earthquake Mitigation of WA Regional Towns: York Case Study{\textquotedblright}, that was jointly delivered by GA and the University of Adelaide. The utilisation project developed original condition and mitigated vulnerability models for six URM building types. In this project, these outcomes have been applied to the much larger Melbourne CBD exposure.

The project had the following key components:

The work required the development of the three fundamental risk elements of earthquake hazard, community exposure and building vulnerability. It also entailed the assessment of the economic loss measures associated with human injury, contents losses, rental income, commercial property leasing, and business activity. Additionally, it included the application of the semi-intangible value placed on human life to society. Each of these are described below.

Earthquake hazard

This study has drawn upon the latest understanding of the Melbourne region earthquake hazard by utilising the recently released National Seismic Hazard Assessment (NSHA 2018) (Allen et al, 2018a). The bedrock hazard from this assessment shows Melbourne to have a {\textquotedblleft}low{\textquotedblright} earthquake hazard by global standards but significant by Australian standards. The hazard is further amplified by the presence of the sediments deposited by the Yarra River.\  These soil effects increase the hazard, particularly those in the study region south of the Yarra River. The effects of soil amplification can double the severity of shaking in some areas.

Community exposure

The definition of the building assets in the study region utilised several sources. The available state government building data integrated into the National Exposure Information System (NEXIS) was accessed and supplemented by an engineering survey database developed and maintained by GA for the Australian Reinsurance Pool Corporation. This was further refined by a desktop review of all masonry buildings utilising available street level imagery. In total there were 1,543 buildings in the study region, and 687 of these were identified as URM.

The assessment of human activity was achieved by utilising research undertaken outside of this project. This research utilised a population model developed by downscaling a destination zone based telecommunication model with pedestrian counts, the Melbourne traffic control systems movement counts, and building floor area information. Using this work it was possible to define the local human exposure at the time of the scenario event, particularly those in damaged buildings and those potentially exposed to falling masonry during a rapid onset earthquake event.

Building vulnerability

The building vulnerability assessment work for the URM building stock was a direct utilisation of the six vulnerability types identified in the earlier York WA mitigation study. This included the vulnerability in present condition, and that with mitigation measures applied to the vulnerable elements. To complete the context, the vulnerability of other building types was attributed using a suite of models developed through an adaptation of US HAZUS models, reference to \ heuristically developed models from a GA facilitated UN workshop (Maqsood et al, 2014), and through heuristic adjustments by the project team. This vulnerability of non-URM buildings remained a constant in the study as mitigation of these buildings was not considered.

Economics of cost assessment

The economic assessment considered a broad range of measures. These ranged from the direct costs to property owner, building occupiers, and businesses through to health care costs and the partially intangible value placed on the loss of a human life. The aim was to provide scalable information on benefits versus cost to a range of decision makers and investors. Importantly, the measures where not comprehensive and so represent a lower bound to the actual avoided impacts mitigation achieves. For example, the cost of emergency response, clean-up and community recovery support were not considered. Neither was a macro-economic perspective developed to capture non-impacted businesses that would benefit from a stimulus in business activity such as in the construction industry, the supply of home appliances, soft furnishings and drapery. Significantly, the value of avoided heritage building loss was considered through the utilisation of metrics developed by a UWA led CRC project.

Scenario impacts and risks

The study considered a single rare earthquake scenario having an annual likelihood of 1/5,000 of causing the targeted bedrock shaking severity beneath the Melbourne CBD, or greater. This likelihoods corresponds with a 1\%, chance of this shaking severity being exceeded in the next 50 years. For the event the injuries and other losses within the scope of this study were assessed using the human exposure corresponding with 11:00am of Monday through to Thursday. The losses ranged from $737m for building damage only, through to $1.66b for the other monetary costs considered.\  The value of human life lost increased this to $3.97b. Where 25\% of the masonry building stock was retrofitted, over 30 years, these losses reduced by approximately 16\%.

The reduction in injuries if this event occurred in 30 years time was also evaluated. Serious injuries reduced by 16 and deaths by 98 persons. Urban Search and Rescue logistics would also reduce correspondingly.

In a similar manner, the long term financial risk of the Melbourne CBD study region was evaluated for building damage. It was presented as the average annualised loss for the URM building stock and for the entire study region buildings. It was also forecast 30 years into the future and the financial risk reduced by 38\% for the URM building stock and by 10\% across the entire study region buildings.

Discussion and outcomes

Earthquakes occur frequently in Australia with over 100 events greater than magnitude 3.0 (ML) recorded within the Australian continent every year by Geoscience Australia. The smaller and more frequent events are typically non-damaging, whereas the less frequent larger events can be very damaging when they occur close to a community. This plays out in the economics of strengthening older structures where the benefits of avoided building damage and contents losses through retrofit for earthquake are not a full offset for the significant costs.\  Other avoided costs associated with business losses, lost wages, health care costs, and the value placed on human life, do increase the sum significantly but are not realised by the property owner. While not all avoided costs were considered, this project indicates that the justification for retrofit based solely on a financial investment may be difficult to demonstrate for URM buildings in Melbourne.

As was also illustrated by the earlier York study, there are other considerations for the retrofit of URM buildings in the Melbourne CBD and in other older business districts in the city. If a rare earthquake occurred locally during a period of high public exposure there would be considerable loss of life. This research has shown that if a 5,000 year Return Period (RP) event (5.5 Mw) occurring on a business day approximately 100 people would die with close parallels to the 2011 Christchurch Earthquake outcome for masonry structures (42 fatalities). This may point to cheaper levels of retrofit with the objective of tying back elements that could cause casualties, rather than having the aim of avoiding economic loss.

Further, following a rare, but credible, earthquake high value heritage buildings would be lost. The research has shown that the willingness to pay by just the residents of the City of Melbourne LGA adds a notional 10\% of the total benefits of the mitigation program.

SUMMARY

The project has applied a range of retrofit measures for a suite of six URM building types developed as part of Project A9 to a very large population of URM building found in the Melbourne CBD. These measures have been demonstrated to reduce the physical vulnerability of each building. The project has also translated this vulnerability change into broader metrics that form an evidence base to inform decisions to retrofit.

The project has also demonstrated the benefit of retrofit through a virtual retrofit of a major city CBD. These benefits include reduced post event logistics for emergency management and the local government, reducing financial losses to building owners, businesses, and reducing injuries and fatalities. It has also demonstrated that retrofit reduces the long term financial cost of earthquake hazard, thereby making risk transfer through insurance uptake more affordable. Finally, it has demonstrated how valuable heritage structures can be progressively preserved for the future by protecting them from future credible earthquakes.

}, keywords = {buildings, earthquake, Melbourne, mitigation, risk, strategy}, issn = {707}, author = {Hyeuk Ryu and Martin Wehner and Jaroslav Vaculik and Valdis Juskevics and Mark Edwards and Michael Griffith and Itismita Mohanty and Stuart Butt and Neil Corby and Trevor Allen and Robert Hewison} } @article {bnh-6901, title = {Cost-effective mitigation strategy development for building related earthquake risk}, number = {565}, year = {2020}, month = {05/2020}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The CRC project Cost-effective mitigation strategy development for building related earthquake risk\ is seeking to address the need for an evidence base to inform decision making on the mitigation of the earthquake risk posed by vulnerable Australian buildings. It aims to develop information related to more vulnerable Australian building types in the following areas:-

This report describes progress made against the last component which undertook some trial runs to estimate business income loss and rental income loss and provided a complete work plan for estimating direct health care cost.

The economic loss modelling approach aims to encompass the information needs of a range of decision makers. These view benefits through different {\textquotedblleft}lenses{\textquotedblright} and at differing scales. For this research they include:-

This report presents the methodological progress in estimating the proprietary and wage/salary income loss due to business interruption, direct health care costs and the casualty costs to society due to injury and loss of life in the context of the forthcoming Melbourne city case study. The report corresponds with the 30 June 2019 project milestone deliverable {\textquotedblleft}Reporting on Economic Evaluation of Mitigation Strategies and Building Level{\textquotedblright}.

}, keywords = {buildings, cost-effective, earthquake risk, mitigation strategy}, issn = {565}, author = {Itismita Mohanty and Mark Edwards and Hyeuk Ryu and Martin Wehner} } @article {bnh-7186, title = {Earthquake mitigation of WA regional towns: York case study - final report}, number = {596}, year = {2020}, month = {08/2020}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {MELBOURNE}, abstract = {

Earthquake hazard was only fully recognised for Australian building design in the early 1990{\textquoteright}s following the Newcastle Earthquake of 1989. This has resulted in a significant legacy of Australian buildings that are inherently more vulnerable to low to moderate earthquake generated ground motion. Having accessible knowledge of the most effective measures to retrofit older masonry buildings will enable and encourage the strengthening of buildings resulting in more resilient communities.

Western Australia has a region of elevated seismicity inland from Perth where there are located several older regional towns having a predominance of older unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings. In 1968 the town of Meckering was devastated by an earthquake (Gordon et al, 1980), which destroyed the town{\textquoteright}s URM building stock and damaged URM buildings in other neighbouring towns. The town of York, situated approximately 37km from the epicentre was also significantly damaged (Everingham et al, 1982). The combination of high hazard and vulnerability in this region points to a need for informed mitigation measures.

This project entailed undertaking a mitigation implementation study of York, Western Australia{\textquoteright}s oldest inland town, which has many valuable historical buildings that are vulnerable to damage by a large earthquake. This utilisation project sits beneath and draws upon the vulnerability and economic modelling research outcomes of the BNHCRC project {\textquotedblleft}Cost-effective Mitigation Strategy Development for Building related Earthquake Risk{\textquotedblright}. Utilising the outcomes of the project a range of mitigation strategies have been virtually applied to the town{\textquoteright}s URM buildings. This has enabled an assessment of the effectiveness of these interventions on community risk and emergency management (EM) logistics in the context of rare, but credible, earthquakes.

In this report the research and its outcomes are presented and discussed. Further, recommendations are made for future retrofit strategy implementation in York and more broadly in Western Australia. In particular, a new NDRP project is described that will build upon this BNHCRC project in testing the application of the measures in actual retrofit work undertaken in York. This BNHCRC project has been led by the University of Adelaide (UoA) with project partner Geoscience Australia (GA). The end users are the Shire of York and the WA Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) with valuable contributions made by the WA Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage. Through the workshop activity reported there have also been valuable guidance from Engineering Heritage, WA, and the Insurance Australia Group (IAG).

}, keywords = {earthquake, mitigation, regional towns, york}, issn = {596}, author = {Martin Wehner and Hyeuk Ryu and Michael Griffith and Mark Edwards and Neil Corby and Itismita Mohanty and Jaroslav Vaculik and Trevor Allen} } @article {bnh-6782, title = {Progress report on case study CBD precinct}, number = {552}, year = {2020}, month = {03/2020}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The CRC Project A9 entitled {\textquotedblleft}Cost-Effective Mitigation Strategy Development for Building Related Earthquake Risk{\textquotedblright} is seeking to address the need for an evidence base to inform decision making on the mitigation of the earthquake risk posed by vulnerable Australian buildings. It aims to develop information related to more vulnerable Australian building types in the following areas:

This project also includes a case study to demonstrate the utility of the research with central Melbourne identified as the locality. Central Melbourne has a concentration of older unreinforced masonry buildings so the case study will examine the current risk posed by these and how they can be mitigated through application of the measures developed in this CRC project. Significantly this project will link to the concluding utilisation project on York and will integrate research outcomes on heritage value to be developed by the CRC project {\textquotedblleft}Economics of Natural Hazards{\textquotedblright} led by the University of Western Australia. This progress report describes the scope, the research elements and status of these, and the process by which they are being integrated into the final research outcomes. It also provides background to a requested variation to delay the final deliverable and associated CRC payment to enable other research outputs to be integrated.

This report corresponds with the 30 September 2019 project milestone deliverable {\textquotedblleft}Progress Report on Case Study CBSD Precinct{\textquotedblright}, BNHCRC reference 3.1.2.

}, keywords = {buildings, cbd, Decision making, earthquake risk, mitigation}, issn = {552}, author = {Hyeuk Ryu and Martin Wehner and Mark Edwards and Itismita Mohanty} } @article {bnh-5480, title = {Cost-effective mitigation strategy development for building related earthquake risk: progress report on economic loss modelling }, number = {472}, year = {2019}, month = {03/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The CRC Project A9 entitled {\textquotedblleft}Cost-Effective Mitigation Strategy Development for Building Related Earthquake Risk{\textquotedblright} is seeking to address the need for an evidence base to inform decision making on the mitigation of the earthquake risk posed by vulnerable Australian buildings.\  It aims to develop information related to more vulnerable Australian building types in the following areas:-

This report describes progress made against the last component which is directed at economic loss modelling.\  The work has been guided by, and is consistent with, the project team consensus achieved at a single day workshop convened at Swinburne University on the 23rd October 2015.

The economic loss modelling approach aims to encompass the information needs of a range of decision makers.\  These view benefits through different {\textquotedblleft}lenses{\textquotedblright} and at differing scales.\  For this research they include:-

In this report a background is provided on the motivations for this project.\  The current findings of an ongoing literature survey are presented, and the economic modelling frameworks proposed by the project team are described.\  This report corresponds with the Geoscience Australia component of the 30 June 2016 project milestone deliverable {\textquotedblleft}Progress Report on Economic and Damage Loss Models{\textquotedblright}.

}, keywords = {cost-effective, Disaster management, earthquake modelling}, author = {Itismita Mohanty and Mark Edwards and Hyeuk Ryu and Martin Wehner} } @article {bnh-5215, title = {Australian natural hazards exposure information framework: guidelines for national consistency and comprehensive information}, year = {2018}, month = {12/2018}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, issn = {445}, author = {Krishna Nadimpalli and Itismita Mohanty and Yogi Vidyattama and Mohsen Kalantari and Abbas Rajabifard} } @article {bnh-5199, title = {Cost-effective mitigation strategy development for building related earthquake risk: reporting on economic loss models}, year = {2018}, month = {12/2018}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This report forms part of the output from Project A9 entitled {\textquotedblleft}Cost-Effective Mitigation Strategy Development for Building Related Earthquake Risk{\textquotedblright} within the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre.

Earthquakes have the potential to cause widespread damage to Australian communities and the economic activity that occurs within them. Recent earthquake events have illustrated this, including the Newcastle Earthquake (1989) and the Kalgoorlie Earthquake (2010). This potential is largely due to the fact that much of the Australian building stock has not been designed nor constructed with adequate consideration of earthquake hazard.\ 

Mitigation intervention is needed to reduce this risk but an evidence base is lacking to inform investment. In particular, there is a need for economic measures of the benefits of retrofit as an offset to the sometimes large costs
of upgrading structures for earthquake. This need exists in many other countries.

As part of this research an extensive literature review has been published to inform the best approach for assessing the costs of business interruption and the losses associated with injury and death. Frameworks have also been developed for a range of Australian decision makers. Decision makers include building owners, owners of both business premises and the business within, local government, state government and national government. The scale of decision making metrics range from individual building level up to business precinct level exposures and the interdependence of building performance within them. The information and models required as inputs into the framework have been identified along with how these will be met, either with outputs from this CRC project, or from other sources.

This report builds on the previous work and provides the experimental estimates for different components of economic loss that might occur in the event of an earthquake scenario. These are specifically business income loss, rental income loss and health care expenditure. The report considers these in the context of the future Greater Melbourne region (excluding Mornington Peninsula) as a case study.\ 

Current research on the economic loss modelling is on track. Future work will estimate the actual business interruption loss values for assessing precinct level economic activity disruption.

}, issn = {435}, author = {Itismita Mohanty and Mark Edwards and Hyeuk Ryu and Martin Wehner} } @article {bnh-6663, title = {Business exposure information framework}, number = {542}, year = {2017}, month = {12/2017}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Bushfire and Natural Hazards are features of the Australian climate and landscape and the threats will continue (COAG, 2011). These hazards can have profound personal, social, economic and environmental impacts. The impacts of these disasters demand the need to advance the efforts of planning, preparation, response and recovery to improve community resilience. Disaster management is a collective responsibility of all levels of government, society, businesses and individuals. For disaster resilience, emergency management planning should consider risk and risk treatments across the built, economic, social and environmental assets (COAG, 2011). Exposure {\textquotedblleft}what is at risk{\textquotedblright} information is fundamental for assessing risk from natural hazards and therefore nationally consistent information is required for evidence based prioritising and targeting interventions. To address this, consistent methodologies and frameworks are required to enable information sharing and accurate interpretation.

In natural hazards and disasters decision making Exposure is a key component and constitutes people, buildings, infrastructure (transport, energy, communications and water), businesses, hazardous substances, primary and major industries. This report is an outcome of research funded by Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC to develop an {\textquotedblleft}Australian Natural Hazards Business Exposure Information Framework{\textquotedblright}. The framework is aimed at supporting the development of nationally consistent and centralised business and economic exposure information to enable the decision making in disaster management to the evidence based. This research has reviewed the current literature and information providers; engaged end users and researchers for future requirements, and conducted a gap analysis.

The literature review has helped to understand the relevant practices and future trends at international, national, regional and local levels. In particular, the review highlighted the business and economic exposure data requirements to enable researchers to develop models for better impact analysis.

The project has conducted an on-line survey of existing exposure information capabilities in Australia to ascertain existing data and information capabilities for disaster response and recovery. Overall a lack of national consistency in existing data and information capabilities is a limiting factor in evidence based decision making.

The project also conducted a Stakeholder Engagement Workshop with an aim to identify the exposure information needs of researchers and other end users in Australia. The workshop provided an opportunity for thirty six participants representing decision makers, emergency managers, planners, researchers, asset managers and the insurance sector to outline their future requirements. The collective views of data managers, researchers and end users have informed the basis for exposure information\  requirements to develop a consistent, standardised exposure information framework that will support vulnerability assessments for disaster risk reduction and socio-economic impact analysis.

Information on some exposure elements is critical for some end users and may not be of interest for others. To reduce the complexity, the framework categorises the information provision into three levels depending on user requirements such as policy and planning; response and recovery; and research and analysis. Australian Natural Hazards Exposure Framework (ANHEF) levels and their aims, description and boundaries are outlined in Built Environment Exposure Information Framework Report. There is some fundamental information and common elements that underpins the entire exposure framework such as spatial enablement; land use categorisation; insurance status and metadata outlined in Built Environment Exposure Information Framework Report.

The business exposure information framework presents the exposure elements required to develop information systems to support the impact analysis of both micro-economic (business sectors) and macro-economic (regional) for disaster risk reduction from a variety of natural hazards. The micro-economic variables considered in the framework include business entity, type, size, operations, space usage, workforce and input requirements. Whereas the macro-economic variables include the size and performance of the economy, industry sectors and labour force characteristics to assess the local economy.

The document outlines a generic framework to underpin the utilisation and is focused on end user requirements. The report identifies a list of exposure elements across different components of the business and economic activity that are presented in the summary tables.

}, keywords = {business exposure, disaster, framework, modelling, risk reduction}, issn = {542}, author = {Krishna Nadimpalli and Itismita Mohanty and Mohsen Kalantari and Abbas Rajabifard} } @article {bnh-3798, title = {Cost-effective mitigation strategy for building related earthquake risk: final report on economic loss modelling}, number = {246}, year = {2017}, month = {07/2017}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This report forms part of the output from the Cost-Effective Mitigation Strategy Development for Building Related Earthquake Risk project within the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre.

Earthquakes have the potential to cause widespread damage to Australian communities and the economic activity that occurs within them. Recent earthquake events have illustrated this, including the Newcastle Earthquake (1989) and the Kalgoorlie Earthquake (2010). This potential is largely due to the fact that much of the Australian building stock has not been designed nor constructed with adequate consideration of earthquake hazard.

Mitigation intervention is needed to reduce this risk but an evidence base is lacking to inform investment. In particular, there is a need for economic measures of the benefits of retrofit as an offset to the sometimes large costs of upgrading structures for earthquake.

This need exists in many other countries. As part of this research a literature survey of research published internationally is underway to inform the best approach for assessing the costs of business interruption and the losses associated with injury and death. The findings of this work to date are described and are informing the research program.

This report also describes the frameworks developed for a range of Australian decision makers. Decision makers include building owners, owners of both business premises and the business within, local government, state government and national government. The scale of decision making metrics range from individual building level up to business precinct level exposures and the interdependence of building performance within them. The information and models required as inputs into the framework have been identified along with how these will be met, either with outputs from this CRC project, or from other sources.

The research on the economic loss modelling has produced a functional model. Future work will add refinements to the model such as casualty cost modules adapted from published material. In the succeeding year business interruption loss models will be developed and framework/methodology developed for assessing precinct level economic activity disruption.

}, issn = {246}, author = {Itismita Mohanty and Mark Edwards and Hyeuk Ryu and Martin Wehner} } @article {bnh-3861, title = {Launceston flood risk mitigation assessment - June 2016 floods: suburb of Newstead}, number = {339}, year = {2017}, month = {10/2017}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Launceston is floodprone and located within the Tamar River floodplain at the confluence of the Tamar, North Esk and South Esk Rivers in Tasmania. Launceston has been subjected to 35 significant floods since records began, with the 1929 flood considered to be the worst (Fullard, 2013). A new Launceston Flood Authority was established in 2008 to design, construct and maintain existing and new flood levees. To replace the existing deteriorated levees a flood mitigation initiative was completed in 2016 to provide Launceston with reliable flood protection up to the 200 year Annual Recurrence Interval (ARI) event (Fullard, 2013).

However, this flood mitigation initiative did not extend to Newstead, a suburb in the east of Launceston, with the suburb consequently not protected from floods. Therefore, a new levee was proposed to protect the properties in Newstead from future floods. The cost of the proposed levee was estimated to be $580,000 along with an annual maintenance cost of $10,000 (Fullard, 2016).

Geoscience Australia was funded to undertake a project to conduct a Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) of the proposed flood levee in Newstead as a variation to its current project (BNHCRC, 2017a) within the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC (BNHCRC). The project stakeholders included the CRC, Tasmanian Department of Premier and Cabinet, Tasmanian State Emergency Service, the City of Launceston, Launceston Flood Authority and Northern Midlands Council.

This report provides the details of the CBA of the proposed flood levee along with consideration of several other mitigation options as researched within the BNHCRC flood mitigation project.

}, isbn = {978-0-9941696-8-6}, issn = {339}, author = {Maqsood, T and Martin Wehner and Itismita Mohanty and Neil Corby and Mark Edwards and Fiona L Gibson and Rogers, Michael J.} } @article {bnh-3803, title = {Launceston flood risk mitigation - June 2016 floods}, number = {257}, year = {2017}, month = {10/2017}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

With Launceston experiencing severe flooding in June 2016, this project reviewed the costs and benefits of mitigation work (upgraded levees) which began in 2010. Flood mitigation is an expensive exercise, and this research highlights the benefits through avoided impacts of the flood levee mitigation program, against the cost of construction.

Findings show that the upgrading of the levee system, completed in 2014, resulted in avoiding losses of about $216 million (had the pre-existing levees failed), which is approximately four times the total investment in the new levee system. This investment in building the new levee system was found to be a sound economic decision based on the estimated costs at the time of decision making, alongside improved estimates of benefits from this study. The actual benefits of these mitigation works to the community extend beyond the direct benefits as assessed in this project, to the intangible and indirect benefits that have not been included.

It was found that sea level rise scenarios would only have a limited impact on building losses. However, the combined impact of sea level rise and increased rainfall intensity due to climate change on the total losses may be significantly greater and could be further investigated.

The study assessed:

}, isbn = {978-0-9941696-7-9}, issn = {257}, author = {Maqsood, T and Martin Wehner and Itismita Mohanty and Neil Corby and Mark Edwards} } @article {bnh-2701, title = {Built environment exposure information framework}, number = {165}, year = {2016}, month = {05/2016}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Natural disasters in Australia continue to highlight the disasterous mediating impact of the built environment on communities. Built environment exposure is the major component of exposure to natural hazards. However, there is no comprehensive information system available in Australia that provides fundamental and consistent knowledge around the elements of exposure of buildings, infrastructure, population and businesses under different natural hazards and the associated risk. The absence of a robust and quantitative evidence base is impeding the development and implementation of strategies for disaster management policy and planning. This study is to develop a Australian Natural Hazards Exposure Information Framework (ANHEF) that links strongly with National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (COAG, 2011). COAG (2011) states that {\textquotedblleft}Disaster resilience is the collective responsibility of all sectors of society, including all levels of government, business, the non-government sector and individuals. If all these sectors work together with a united focus and a shared sense of responsibility to improve disaster resilience, they will be far more effective than the individual efforts of any one sector.{\textquotedblright}

Consistent and reliable information on natural hazard exposure is crucial for disaster risk mitigation and evidence-based decision making. Exposure is referred to as the elements that have been, or could be, subject to the impact of natural hazards within an area (Middelmann et al, 2005, p.1). The elements that are at risk include buildings, assets, population, economic activities, services, utilities and infrastructure (EMA, 2004, p.48). Describing these elements in a nationally consistent exposure information framework will provide a reliable base to inform decision making for natural hazard risk reduction. There are few such capabilities in Australia to provide exposure information such as Geoscience Australia{\textquoteright}s (GA) National Exposure Information System (NEXIS) and a database developed by Emergency Information Coordination Unit (EICU) in New South Wales. NEXIS was developed with an aim to support GA{\textquoteright}s risk and impact analysis projects and provision of advice for climate change adaptation policy development through it is not comprehensive enough to underpin the entire spectrum of decision making for disaster risk reduction.

To manage the disasters\ effectively and efficiently, there is a compelling requirement to develop a nationally consistent framework for collection, collation and provision of expsoure information for researchers and decision makers.

}, issn = {165}, author = {Krishna Nadimpalli and Itismita Mohanty} } @article {bnh-2702, title = {Preliminary report on economic loss modelling}, number = {164}, year = {2016}, month = {05/2016}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This report forms part of the output from entitled {\textquotedblleft}Cost-Effective Mitigation Strategy Development for Building Related Earthquake Risk{\textquotedblright} within the
Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre.


Earthquakes have the potential to cause widespread damage to Australian communities and the economic activity that occurs within them. Recent earthquake events have illustrated this, including the Newcastle Earthquake (1989) and the Kalgoorlie Earthquake (2010). This potential is largely due to the fact that much of the Australian building stock has not been designed nor constructed with adequate consideration of earthquake hazard.
Mitigation intervention is needed to reduce this risk but an evidence base is lacking to inform investment. In particular, there is a need for economic measures of the benefits of retrofit as an offset to the sometimes large costs of upgrading structures for earthquake.


This need exists in many other countries. As part of this research a literature survey of research published internationally is underway to inform the best approach for assessing the costs of business interruption and the losses associated with injury and death. The findings of this work to date are described and are informing the research program.


This preliminary report also describes the frameworks developed for a range of Australian decision makers. Decision makers include building owners, owners of both business premises and the business within, local government, state government and national government. The scale of decision making metrics range from individual building level up to business precinct level exposures and the interdependence of building performance within them. The information and models required as inputs into the framework have been identified along with how these will be met, either with outputs from this CRC project, or from other sources.


Current research on the economic loss modelling is on track. Future work will complete the literature survey and develop casualty cost modules adapted from those published for use in this project. In the succeeding year business interruption loss models will be developed and framework/methodology developed for assessing precinct level economic activity disruption.

}, issn = {164}, author = {Mark Edwards and Itismita Mohanty and Hyeuk Ryu and Martin Wehner} }