@article {bnh-8318, title = {Improved predictions of severe weather to reduce community impact {\textendash} final project report}, number = {721}, year = {2022}, month = {02/2022}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Extreme weather often occurs at relatively small scales.\  Accurate forecasts and understanding of such small-scale processes require high-resolution modelling.\  Forecasts are especially useful in severe weather events, since they play an essential role in allowing communities, industry and emergency services to prepare for and mitigate the impacts. Because forecasts are inherently uncertain in the severity, location and duration of an event, preparation needs to be more widespread than the eventual impact {\textendash} but this over-preparation comes at a cost.\  Detailed prediction of the probabilities of severe impacts would avoid the risk of failing to alert areas with the chance of an impact, while minimising the cost of over-warning.\ 

This project has studied the dynamics, predictability, and processes of severe weather, including fire weather, with the purpose of understanding phenomena with severe impact, improving forecasts of severe weather, and better depicting forecast uncertainty in these events. These goals help facilitate better risk management, improve user preparation, reduce adverse outcomes, and enable more effective mitigation.

The project has featured two main strands.

The first strand comprised case studies of severe weather events. For these, we have combined high-resolution numerical weather prediction (NWP) with a wide range of in situ and remotely sensed observations, to better understand both the high-impact event in question, and other events of that class. All except one of the studies used a version of the Bureau{\textquoteright}s operational NWP system, ACCESS. The events comprised two severe mid-latitude systems (an east coast low, and a severe thunderstorm and tornado outbreak), two severe fires, and a tropical cyclone, thereby covering the gamut of severe weather in Australia. Two of the studies featured ensemble simulation, with the east coast low case being the first time that ensemble ACCESS had been run at this resolution within the Bureau and foreshadowing the Bureau{\textquoteright}s new operational ensemble capability. Each case discovered important fine-scale features that contributed to the severity of the event, advancing our knowledge base and ability to respond.

The second strand studied two important phenomena associated with bushfire plumes: the formation of pyrocumulus clouds and ember transport. In each case, we began with idealised, high-resolution simulations of plumes using a large-eddy model. We used this technology, in which the model is run on a 50-m grid, to capture the most energetic size range of the turbulent eddies that are prominent in fire plumes. We found that the mean travel distance of firebrands depends mainly on wind speed and fire intensity, but the spread in the landing positions shifts from being substantially crosswind at light winds, to dominantly along-wind at high winds. This spread is greatly increased by the turbulence in the plume, and the maximum spotting distance can be more than double the mean for this reason.

We also used our plume modelling to study pyrocumulus clouds and analysed the processes that lead to pyrocumulus, with special attention on the relative importance of moisture from two sources, the atmosphere and combustion, and showed that the latter is negligible except in very dry environments. This somewhat controversial result has been confirmed by a conceptual study of the thermodynamics of pyrocumulus formation.

These initial studies laid a firm theoretical framework for our subsequent development of tools to provide predictions in a form, and at a speed, that is suitable for operational use.

For moist pyroconvection, we developed a paradigm to combine the necessary meteorological and fire information, the pyrocumulonimbus firepower threshold, or PFT. The PFT is defined as the power output from a fire at which pyroCb will begin to form and depends solely on meteorological parameters. Fires hotter than the PFT will initiate pyroCb, according to this paradigm, and cooler fires do not. We also developed a way of computing an approximate PFT from either NWP or observed data and tested this in real time during the extraordinarily severe 2019-20 fire season. The results of that trial were outstandingly successful, with nearly all the 30-odd events being captured, and the forecast guidance for non-events was also reported to have been extremely valuable. The Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC have provided us with utilisation funding to take this tool another step closer to operational use. The tool has also attracted significant international interest, particularly given the recent spate of events in the USA. We have begun a utilisation project to take the PFT work further, detailed in this report.

For ember transport, we developed a simple model to predict plume-dominated transport, incorporating well-known plume modelling concepts, a model of plume turbulence, and a probabilistic model of ember transport within and beneath the plume. The results agree well with our large eddy-based simulations. This model was coupled to CSIRO{\textquoteright}s Spark fire-spread model and tested on the Kilmore East fire of Black Saturday with excellent results. The combination with Spark will make this tool suitable for future operational use, and the ember transport model could also, of course, be coupled to other fire spread simulators, including the coupled fire-atmosphere model ACCESS-Fire. Working with CSIRO and AFAC, we are putting the necessary things in place to be able to convert the prototype implementation of the ember transport parameterisation in Spark, into an operationally robust and supported system. This will both facilitate further research, and provide the framework to allow users to learn, understand and apply the system.

The value of case studies has been reinforced by our being asked to undertake five case studies of severe fires from the 2019-20 summer. This work will be done jointly with our colleagues from the CRC Coupled fire-atmosphere modelling project, who further developed the ACCESS-Fire model. We expect that this work will provide an impetus to further develop and streamline that capability.

We are also very excited about the potential of the PFT and ember transport tools. While both are relatively early in their development, with the PFT being the more mature, each is presently producing very encouraging results. We are also very conscious that each is raising further scientific questions as they address others, and that both are at the beginning of a steep development and refinement curve that we expect will further improve their accuracy and utility. We are confident that further scientific investment will yield substantial dividends.

}, keywords = {community, Impact, prediction, severe, weather}, issn = {721}, author = {Jeffrey Kepert and KJ Tory and Ching, Eng and Robert Fawcett and Serena Schroeter and W. Thurston and David Wilke and Dragana Zovko-Rajak} } @article {bnh-8116, title = {Indigenous fire and land management - impact and sustainability}, number = {680}, year = {2021}, month = {07/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Context

Significant work has been done over the life of the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre around the issues, opportunities and challenges facing remote Indigenous communities in the face of natural hazards. In the north of Australia, the predominant natural threats are cyclones, wildfire and flood, though the level of threat and impact of any of these differs considerably from region to region. There are other hazards that deeply concern remote community leaders, again, not equally across regions: heat stress and exposure, natural water resource salination and pollution, food security, toxicity and asthma issues from crude community waste burning, infrastructure issues (including road access); and related challenges; local capability to act, governance, resilience, inclusion etc.

The emergency management sector research has focused on technologies, capability, recruitment, and other aspects of EM agency preparation, response and recovery. This project responds to an identified gap in addressing the overall environment of Emergency management in remote areas. . . working together!

It is broadly recognised within Indigenous communities that EM is carried out FOR them, not WITH them. (See detailed discussion of this in the Arnhem Land context in Maypalama et. al.: 2016 and Sithole et. al.: 2021). This has generated increased interest, not only in the future engagement of communities in EM, but in the roles, if any, of EM and other agencies in the resilience of communities who, given structural and resource limitations in EM, are keen (and encouraged) to increase {\textquoteleft}self-reliance{\textquoteright} and take on more responsibilities in this space.

There is now a growing conversation nationally around government agencies and Indigenous communities collaborating more effectively. Much of this conversation has been around the perceived positive impact of traditional knowledge (particularly use of fire) on landscape health, and vulnerability to wildfire, how this may be integrated into rural fire service practice and what the real impact of this might be.

Indigenous leaders and rangers have consistently said and shown that use of fire is not separate from other (holistic) elements of caring for traditional country and that the social and cultural dimensions to land and fire management need to be acknowledged and respected to deliver the desired benefits to country and people (Sithole et. al. 2021: Maypalama et.al. 2019: James et. al. 2019: Burgess et. al. 2009). There are many aspects to this conversation and many perceived potential benefits of working together. They underpin this project{\textquoteright}s focus on partnerships to be able to explore this work together. Thus, the research brief is to:

Method

This research was conducted as a series of community-based discussions and workshops in the Northern Territory and north Queensland. NAILSMA provided resources, logistics, backgrounding and other support to local Indigenous researchers and facilitators who ran the meetings on country. This was a Participatory Action Research (PAR) method, consistent with preceding research on community resilience and partnerships by ARPNet and NAILSMA under the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC project Developing effective partnerships in remote north Australian communities: Indigenous research and leadership in Ramingining and Galiwin{\textquoteright}ku. Inherent in this approach are direct benefits to Indigenous researchers and their communities from the process and from longer term outcomes influenced by their research and advocacy with EM agency leaders.

\ Where possible, meeting notes from the NT and Qld discussions were drafted and circulated to respondents and all invitees to the final combined workshop. This was to share what had already been discussed and to help provide focus.

An Agency Reference Group (ARG) (made up predominantly of representatives from QFES, NTES and DFES, but including CDU, Red Cross, NAILSMA and BFNT people) was invited to review and respond to early workshop outcomes, and attend the final workshop. This step was to inform the ARG and Indigenous community invitees to the final workshop with a general view of both Indigenous and agency perspectives on EM priorities and partnership prospects. They were able to kick-off their face-to-face discussions with a degree of prior understanding and focus.

This final, combined workshop was hosted by Djabugay people on their land, facilitated by Barry Hunter, a Djabugay leader and consultant and supported by NAILSMA.

Findings

To inform a Future Research Strategy the research team has organised ideas from the workshop and broader project into:

The work found that gaps are evident within communities, within EM agencies and between them. Summary of the findings includes:

Research Priorities mirror the above gaps and challenges, leading to achieving practical steps in long-term relationship pathways:

Integrating Indigenous fire and land management knowledge with EM operations and systems is not about taking the knowledge, it{\textquoteright}s about building respectful and trusting relationships with Indigenous people to deliver more effective EM together.

Utilisation

This research method (Participatory Action Research) assumes that the Indigenous researchers and their communities are a focal end-user. Participating EM agencies are another key end-user, not only by benefiting from the research in the long run but through face-to-face interactions with community researchers through which opportunities and challenges in developing direct relationships with participating communities can be discussed and solutions progressed firsthand.

In this sense the research is being used as it develops, to benefit communities, relationship building and short-term achievable change. It is also aimed at the national agenda for partnerships with Indigenous land managers, seeking to inform the new Natural Hazards Research Australia[1] about future research priorities and to encourage more discussion, more experience sharing and broader engagement of Indigenous leaders and influential EM agency staff in collaborative workshops hosted by Communities in different jurisdictions on country. This latter aim reflects the success of this project{\textquoteright}s collaborations and use of this model as an ongoing forum to benefit the sector. See for example the Aims and Expectations of the final project workshop below.

\ The summary of next steps:

  1. Relevant EM agencies and community leaders to start or continue working on their relationship and achievable change now.
  2. This report, supported by participating agencies, is presented to the new Natural Hazards Research Australia as a foundation to attract a future fully funded program of collaborative PAR with community researchers and of partnered EM activity.
  3. For the next and future collaborative workshops to be planned and funding secured so they may become annual, focused, Indigenous led pillars of EM sector partnerships.
  4. Conversations continue at 3 levels: community level, transregional and across the multi-agency national conversation. This should include Qld, NT and WA EM agencies connecting more effectively with each other and supporting each other to progress partnership building at North Australia scale.
  5. Indigenous communities and land management groups, their representative organisations and supporters take whatever steps they are able to, to build resilience and capability in EM.
}, keywords = {challenges, Emergency management, fire management, Impact, indigenous, land management, opportunities, partnerships, research strategy, sustainability}, issn = {680}, author = {Glenn James and Danny Burton and Otto Bulmaniya Campion and Barry Hunter and Jimmy Morrison and Ted Gondarra and James Bayung} } @article {bnh-7964, title = {NSW Mid North Coast flood impact research}, number = {659}, year = {2021}, month = {04/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {MELBOURNE}, abstract = {

On March 18, 2021, an extreme rainfall event kicked off, resulting in severe flooding in the Mid North Coast of New South Wales. 18,000 people were evacuated, including 1,000 flood rescues. Flooding also impacted the North Coast, Hunter, Western Sydney, South Coast, Central West, and North West Regions of NSW. Flooding was also experienced in Southeast Queensland. The focus of this briefing is on flood impacts experienced on the NSW Mid North Coast.

Overview

On March 24, Risk Frontiers, with assistance from the BNHCRC, deployed a survey team to the NSW Mid North Coast region to observe and report on significant flooding in the area. Areas surveyed included, Bulahdelah, Taree, Wingham, Port Macquarie, North Haven, Laurieton, and Dunbogan. In addition to measuring flood depths and recording noteworthy damages to belongings and infrastructure, the team spoke with residents, business owners, and rescue personnel (Rural Fire Service, NSW Fire and Rescue, and State Emergency Services). Discussions covered evacuation, emergency response and communication, community resilience, and the insurability of their homes.

A couple of key issues emerged during the investigation. The first was insurance affordability in areas that were clearly at risk of flooding. Some residents and business owners we spoke with cited quotes for policies covering flood ranging from $5k - $30k per year. Our survey indicates that the full extent of damage will not be evident in claims data due to the low rates of insurance as a lot of individuals had chosen to remain uninsured due to the prohibitive costs quoted for them. Disaster mitigation needs to be considered in these areas to assist with insurance affordability.

Another common concern expressed was the lack of warning and mitigative action. For example, some residents had not considered sandbagging. Residents claimed they were either misinformed or warned too late, and then felt aspects of the process to recover were unclear.

}, keywords = {Flood, Impact, Mid North Coast, New South Wales, quick response, research}, issn = {659}, author = {Steve George and Salom{\'e} Hussein and R Crompton and Thomas Mortlock} } @article {bnh-7036, title = {Impact of Australia{\textquoteright}s catastrophic 2019/20 bushfire season on communities and environment. Retrospective analysis and current trends}, journal = {Journal of Safety Science and Resilience}, year = {2020}, month = {07/2020}, abstract = {

2019/20 Australia{\textquoteright}s bushfire season (Black Summer fires) occurred during a period of record breaking temperatures and extremely low rainfall. To understand the impact of these climatic values we conducted a preliminary analysis of the 2019/20 bushfire season and compared it with the fire seasons between March 2000 and March 2020 in the states of New South Wales (NSW), Victoria, and South Australia (SA). Forest and fire management in Australia were asked to provide data on the number of fires, burned area, life and house loss, as well as weather conditions. By March 2020 Black Summer fires burnt almost 19 million hectares, destroyed over 3,000 houses, and killed 33 people. Data showed that they were unprecedented in terms of impact on all areas. A number of mega-fires occurred in NSW resulting in more burned area than in any fire season during the last 20 years. One of them was the largest recorded forest fire in Australian history. Victoria had a season with the highest number of fires, area burned, and second highest numbers of houses lost for the same period. SA had the highest number of houses lost in the last 20 years. Black Summer fires confirmed existing trends of impact categories during the last two decades for NSW and Victoria. It showed that the smoke from the bushfires may be a significant concern in the future for the global community, as it travels to other countries and continents. Based on preliminary data, it will take many years to restore the economy and infrastructure in impacted areas, and to recover animal and vegetation biodiversity.

}, keywords = {2019/20 season, bushfires, Impact, retrospective analysis}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnlssr.2020.06.009}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666449620300098}, author = {Alex Filkov and Tuan Ngo and Stuart Matthews and Simeon Telfer and Trent Penman} } @article {bnh-6883, title = {Models and frameworks for assessing the value of disaster research}, journal = {Progress in Disaster Science}, volume = {6}, year = {2020}, month = {04/2020}, abstract = {

Funders, governments, stakeholders and end-users expect to see tangible evidence that an investment in research is a worthy use of resources. Research has impact if it makes a demonstrable contribution to the economy, society, culture, public policy, health, the environment, or quality of life, beyond academia.

This paper reviews frameworks that assess the impact of research and considers their usefulness in the conceptualisation and measurement of research impact in the disaster domain. Frameworks demonstrate impact through attribution, measurement and quantification of academic, social, and economic impacts in the short, medium and long term. While there is no specific framework in the hazard domain, adaptation of the {\textquotedblleft}pathways to research impact{\textquotedblright} tool created by Cruz Rivera et al. (2017) provides a well-considered basis for assessing disaster research impact.

}, keywords = {disaster, framework, Impact, research, Value, Wildfire}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100094}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590061720300314?via\%3Dihub}, author = {Ken Strahan and Adriana Keating and John Handmer} }