@article {bnh-8329, title = {Analysis and characterisation of bushfire-meets-prescribed burn events from the 2019-20 fire season - Black Summer final report}, number = {683}, year = {2022}, month = {03/2022}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The objective of this project was stated in the Research Services Agreement as: {\textquotedblleft}to develop a novel dataset that will capture information about individual bushfire-meets-prescribed burn events. The initial focus will be on those interactions that occurred during the 2019/20 fire season.{\textquotedblright} In other words, the project was to design a database that will allow evaluation of prescribed burns from planning stages to ultimate outcomes, and start using the data for some cases. In this report, we begin by outlining this dataset and its sources of information, though we have not populated it. Instead, we list potential evaluations that could be done with and conduct two evaluations with components of the data.

The core of the proposed fire-meets-fire dataset is matched reporting from the Burn Plan (before) and Burn Report (on completion), especially area, fuel, moisture and weather variables. Some of this is not routinely reported in the current Elements System (for example 21\% of burns had no actual area burnt recorded and most burns were missing fuel information). The dataset should also ingest information from fire severity mapping (which is now routine) and smoke impact. If the burn meets a bushfire a new range of information is available and should be ingested, including the severity of the bushfire within the burn. The advantage that the burn gave to firefighters is hard to gauge simply from fire severity, so additional information is needed, most importantly from firefighter interviews, but also by more detailed GIS examination of bushfire behavior.

There are many evaluations that could be done with this dataset, from simple metrics such as percent of planned area actually burnt, to refinement of weather prescriptions for burns to whole-of-program evaluations applied to all burns such as the severity analysis presented here.

Sections 3 and 4 are examples of whole of program evaluations. Section 4 is an analysis of severity reduction in the 2019/20 bushfires relating the occurrence of high severity fire in ~100,000 points to the fire history at those points, and controlling for vegetation, weather and topography. This found that in dry sclerophyll, recent burning (up to ~five years) reduced the probability of high severity fire and even more so if that previous burn was at low severity.

Section 4 uses visual interpretation of the 2019/20 bushfire severity and progression mapping to attribute each previous prescribed burn with its effect on the bushfire. This ranged from stopping the bushfire altogether (having a common boundary) to simple severity reduction (was the bushfire severity reduced in the burn?). We found that 30\% of burns from 2014 were encountered by the bushfires. Of these 509 burns, 13\% of them were aligned with the final fire boundary, 42\% of recent burns (one or two years old) caused some unburnt patches within the burn, and 68\% caused a severity reduction. Burns older than this had much less effect, and we found two cases where a burn left an unburnt shadow behind it (meaning shadows are very rare events). We were able to cross-reference our interpretation for 14 burns to interviews from another pilot project. This revealed broad agreement, but also highlighted several cases where a burn gave firefighters an advantage that could not be found in the GIS. Three of these were cases where the bushfire slowed down (sometimes for several days), allowing firefighters time to prepare. There were two cases where burns outside of the burn perimeter effectively reduced spotting activity.

The project demonstrates what can be done to evaluate prescribed burning programs and that a wide range of data is required to do this thoroughly. The 2019/20 bushfire season was extraordinary in many ways. Our analysis suggests that one of these ways was that prescribed burns only reduced fire behavior if they were one or two years old. Analyses of previous seasons generally find a longer lasting effect. Even so, there were many instances where prescribed burns helped firefighters, including in ways that are not obvious in GIS analyses.

}, keywords = {2019-20, analysis, black summer, Bushfire, characterisation, prescribed burn}, issn = {683}, author = {Owen Price and James Barker and Simin Rahmani and Wilkinson, Carrie and Donald MacDonald} } @article {bnh-8038, title = {Economic Analysis Screening Tool: Guidelines}, number = {665}, year = {2021}, month = {05/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {MELBOURNE}, abstract = {

This document provides an overview of the Economic Analysis Screening Tool (EAST) and its development, as well as the instructions on how to use it and how to interpret the results derived from it. EATS was developed by researchers from the University of Western Australia as part of the BNHCRC funded project {\textquotedblleft}Economics of Natural Hazards.{\textquotedblright}

These Guidelines should be used in conjunction with EAST and should be considered an integral part of the Tool package. We recommend users read these Guidelines before using EAST.

}, keywords = {analysis, EAST, economic, guidelines, screening, tool}, issn = {665}, author = {Veronique Florec and Abbie Rogers and David J Pannell} } @article {bnh-8120, title = {Economics of natural hazards - final project report}, number = {666}, year = {2021}, month = {07/2021}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

The key aim of our project was to provide evidence on the economic, social, and environmental impacts of natural hazards, in order to help hazard managers make better decisions about the allocation of resources for the mitigation of natural hazards impacts. Using the tools and materials we have created in this project, our end-users will be better equipped to estimate the tangible (market) and intangible (non-market) impacts of natural hazards and assess how mitigation investments may reduce those impacts.

With this aim in mind, our main focus has been the development of tools and materials that make it easier for natural hazards managers to estimate the value of mitigation, integrate intangible (non-market) values in economic analyses of mitigation, and evaluate the difference it makes to include non-market values. Our goal has always been to provide managers with the tools they need to be able to make better decisions and have the evidence to back up their decisions.

Our project delivered 5 key outcomes:

  1. We launched an online platform for the Value Tool for Natural Hazards (a searchable database of the best available non-market value estimates relevant to natural hazards).
  2. We conducted a non-market valuation study that filled a major knowledge gap identified in the non-market values literature (i.e. the values of cultural heritage, social disruption and mental health, and how these are affected by natural hazards) and updated the Value Tool with the data from this study.
  3. We developed the Economic Analysis Screening Tool (EAST) for the evaluation of the (market and non-market) costs and benefits of mitigation options.
  4. We created a Free Online Video Course on the economics of natural hazards, using drawings and simple examples to explain key economic concepts and how they are applied to evaluate different mitigation options.
  5. We conducted an online training course on how to use economics in natural hazards management and delivered it to 4 different groups of end-user managers and practitioners.

All outcomes of the project had a utilisation focus and were developed in conjunction with our end-users. We spent a significant amount of time understanding our end-users{\textquoteright} challenges in order to create products that can help them make better decisions using economic analysis. We used their feedback to improve the tools developed and make them more accessible.

The work from this project has been published in 4 peer-reviewed publications, 8 conference papers and technical reports, 3 posters presented at conferences, and 4 online resources (see Project Publications section in this report).

}, keywords = {analysis, EAST, economics, mitigation, Natural hazards, natural hazards management, Policy, Value Tool}, issn = {666}, author = {Veronique Florec and Abbie Rogers and David J Pannell} } @article {bnh-7106, title = {The Australian Natural Disaster Resilience Index: Volume II {\textendash} Chapter 6: Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis}, number = {493}, year = {2020}, month = {07/2020}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

In this chapter

Section 6.1 Explains the role of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in composite index construction.

Section 6.2 Describes the uncertainty analysis applied to the Australian Natural Disaster Resilience Index.

Section 6.2 Describes the sensitivity analysis applied to the Australian Natural Disaster Resilience Index.

}, keywords = {analysis, ANDRI, computation, disaster resilience, index design, sensitivity, uncertainty}, isbn = { 978-0-6482756-2-6}, issn = {493}, author = {Melissa Parsons and Ian Reeve and James McGregor and Graham Marshall and Richard Stayner and Judith McNeill and Peter Hastings and Sonya Glavac and Phil Morley} } @mastersthesis {bnh-8090, title = {Wildfire suppression {\textendash} an international analysis of operations, strategy and firefighter safety}, volume = {Doctor of Philosophy}, year = {2020}, month = {10/2020}, pages = {430}, school = {Edith Cowan University}, abstract = {

Wildfire suppression remains an inherently dangerous yet increasingly frequent task for fire services throughout Australia and the world. Each year firefighters from career and volunteer agencies respond to wildfires that impact the urban interface. When such an event occurs during a period of intense fire behaviour the conditions are often incompatible with life for persons either caught in the open or those seeking refuge in a vehicle. In order to improve firefighter safety and operational effectiveness at the rural urban interface (RUI) during landscape scale wildfires, this dissertation serves to examine critical components of wildfire response, most notably wildfire suppression strategies and tactics applied during a landscape scale wildfire event and the procedures and protective systems utilised in the event of firefighter entrapment and burnover.

The theme of the research is firefighter safety and suppression effectiveness during mega-wildfire response at the rural urban interface (RUI), also known as the wildland urban interface (WUI). Mega-wildfires are those landscape wildfires that overwhelm firefighting resources, typically generate their own localized weather systems, and require campaign style efforts lasting extended durations. Wildfire events including Margaret River (2011), and Yarloop (2016) in Western Australia, the devastating Californian and Greece wildfires (2018) and the unprecedented wildfires throughout eastern Australia in late 2019 / early 2020 meet this category. The RUI is the land where towns and cities exist alongside forest and other vegetation that supports the development of an established headfire with a quasi-steady rate of spread (RoS) across the landscape. In such instances, firefighters are called on to protect vulnerable communities and critical infrastructure from the ember storms, radiant heat and flames that accompany the head fire. In doing so, firefighters face great personal peril. If the incorrect suppression tactics or strategies are applied, or if wildfire behaviour suddenly changes, firefighter entrapment and burnover resulting in significant injury or fatality remains an all too common consequence.

The studies not only quantify the severity of the conditions firefighters encounter when attempting to protect life, property and the environment at the RUI, but also find traditional wildfire suppression strategies and tactics at the RUI need to be reexamined. Whilst the field of wildfire engineering is in its infancy, the studies suggest its development and adoption into wildfire suppression operations has the potential to improve both operational effectiveness and firefighter safety.

}, keywords = {analysis, firefighter, international, operations, safety, strategy, suppression, Wildfire}, url = {https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/2349/}, author = {Greg Penney} }