@article {bnh-8283, title = {Development of a national set of Community Service Announcements for flood risk}, number = {706}, year = {2021}, month = {11/21}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This report details a five-month utilisation project linked to the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC {\textquoteleft}Flood Risk Communication{\textquoteright} core research project[1]. The project aim was to deliver a nationally agreed set of public flood risk messages, informed by research and agreed by a national working group comprising SES representatives from all Australian states and territories.

Specifically, the messages developed in this project are {\textquoteleft}Community Service Announcements{\textquoteright} (CSAs) intended for initial use by ABC Emergency. These CSAs would typically be used in radio broadcasts during or in the lead up to, significant flood or storm events.

These CSAs are messages of around 30 {\textendash} 60 seconds duration; however, they may be combined to produce longer segments. In rolling emergency broadcasts, they provide breaks between status updates and warnings from the relevant state or territory emergency services and on-the-ground reporting. These flood CSAs contain public safety information about flood risks, desired behaviours and calls to action, and sources of help or support.

The project was highly collaborative, made possible by the creation of a Flood CSA working group (CSA WG). The CSA WG comprised representatives of all state and territory emergency service agencies with responsibility for response in floods, mostly State Emergency Services (SES), along with a representative of the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), and representatives from the CSA product end user {\textendash} ABC Emergency. This group was facilitated and supported by the report author and research Chief Investigator (CI) who also worked to incorporate research informed insights into the messaging, and a partner investigator (PI) from the research end user organisation, the Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council (AFAC).\ 

The project comprised three stages: scoping; co-development; testing and finalising.

  1. SCOPING - this stage used consensus decision-making to identify and prioritise message topics and content areas.
  2. CO-DEVELOPMENT{\textendash} this stage involved message drafting and iterative review by the CSA WG to agree a provisional set of CSA messages.
  3. TESTING AND FINALISING {\textendash} this stage involved testing of the CSA messages through a series of focus groups with the public and a final round of review and refining based on their feedback to produce the final set of CSAs.

The final stage in this project is the end user production of the CSAs, i.e., professional recording and implementation ready for use. This last stage is outside the scope of the BNHCRC-funded project.

This report included details of the approaches taken and the outcomes in Stages 1 to 3.

The scoping stage of the project included use of a survey to aid the consensus process. Following agreement on the main content areas the second stage was co-development. In this stage the CSA WG was divided into small cross-jurisdictional {\textquoteleft}cluster{\textquoteright} groups to draft messages in two or three content areas, and this was followed by a whole-of-group iterative review process. A set of 26 provisional CSA messages were produced at the end of this stage.

In the final stage the ABC end user produced a set of first-pass audio recordings of each CSA. These were used for message testing with the public. Seven virtual focus groups were run with a total of 39 members of the public. Sample demographics were collected during this process to ensure national coverage across the sample and inclusion of a mix of genders, ages, and flood exposure. In addition, based on CSA message content, important sample characteristics were monitored to ensure inclusion of relevant target audiences in the sample, i.e., parents of younger children and youths/teenagers, drivers, large and small animal owners, and people living in rural locations.

Message testing included assessment of initial impressions, message understanding (words, structure), message ambiguity (intent, confusion), and relevance/utility to self and other. Focus group feedback was then fed back into a final set of edits for a last series of reviews and refining to produce the final set of agreed CSAs.

Nationally agreed Community Service Announcements

The final set of Flood CSAs comprises 26 messages. This includes messages that can be used in all phases of flood and storm events, although the majority are designed for use during an event. The messages cover a broad range of flood risk content including the need to prepare and leave early, risks associated with driving in floods, storms, and flash flooding, playing, and having contact with floodwater, issues for a range of animal owners, and safety considerations when cleaning up after flooding.

Following finalisation of the CSAs, these messages were approved by the AFAC SES Community Safety Group on 28 October 2021. These messages and the approach taken to develop them has now been written into an AFAC Procedural Guideline, which was endorsed by AFAC Council on 28 October 2021 and is available via the AFAC website[1].

The ABC has also finalised the production of the CSAs and these were distributed and available for broadcast from 8 November 2021.

Although the CSAs were created in response to a request by the ABC, and with their involvement, there is the opportunity for other broadcasters to use them too. It is important that those interested in using these CSAs consult the local State Emergency Service agency on which messages will be broadcast to ensure that this messaging complements and reinforces emergency services{\textquoteright} communications during the flood/storm emergency.

}, keywords = {communication, community service announcements, Emergency, flood risk}, issn = {706}, author = {Mel Taylor} } @article {bnh-5485, title = {Cost-Effective Mitigation Strategy Development For Flood Prone Buildings: Flood Damage Models For Floodplain Management Workshop}, number = {473}, year = {2019}, month = {03/2019}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

This document reports on the proceedings and outcomes of a flood vulnerability workshop held at RMIT University in Melbourne on 14 June 2018. The workshop was convened as part of a research utilisation project under the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre (BNHCRC) project entitled {\textquoteright}Costeffective mitigation strategy development for flood prone buildings{\textquoteright}. Key workshop aims were to finalise the project scope with key stakeholders, establish a Project Steering and identify case study communities for consideration. The research utilisation project entails working with a variety of stakeholders with the aim of translating detailed flood vulnerability information into practical guidance for flood risk managers. It involves developing and testing a number of resolution options (from asset specific vulnerability assessments to more generalised methods) in a series of case studies. The workshop structure featured presentations and discussion following a logical flow from context setting, scope refinement and consensus through to governance and next steps. The key workshop aims described above were achieved and a series of {\textquoteleft}next steps{\textquoteright} were identified and documented in this report.

}, keywords = {building risk, cost-effective, Flood, flood risk, floodplain}, author = {Dale, K and Maqsood, T and Mark Edwards and Krishna Nadimpalli} } @article {bnh-5573, title = {What do we really mean by {\textquoteleft}floodwater{\textquoteright} and is it ever ok to enter?}, volume = {32}, year = {2019}, month = {05/2019}, abstract = {

Flood safety messages used extensively and consistently in Australia are {\textquoteleft}If it{\textquoteright}s flooded, forget it{\textquoteright}, {\textquoteleft}Never drive, ride or walk through floodwater{\textquoteright}, {\textquoteleft}Don{\textquoteright}t play in flood water{\textquoteright}. These messages are clear, unambiguous and definitive. The problem is, people continue to enter floodwater.

In partnership with State Emergency Services across Australia, we are looking at flood risk communication and examining the two behaviours most closely linked to flood fatalities; driving into and recreating in floodwater. This is part of the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC Flood Risk Communication research.

}, keywords = {communication, Emergency management, flood risk, floodwater}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/ajem-april-2019-what-do-we-really-mean-by-floodwater-and-is-it-ever-ok-to-enter/}, author = {Mel Taylor and Katharine Haynes} } @article {bnh-5020, title = {Predictive applications of Australian flood loss models after a temporal and spatial transfer}, journal = {Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk }, volume = {9}, year = {2018}, month = {03/2018}, pages = {14}, chapter = {416}, abstract = {

In recent decades, considerably greater flood losses have increased attention to flood risk evaluation. This study used data-sets collected from Queensland flood events and investigated the predictive capacity of three new Australian flood loss models to assess the extent of physical damages, after a temporal and spatial transfer. The models{\textquoteright} predictive power is tested for precision, variation, and reliability. The performance of a new Australian flood loss function was contrasted with two tree-based damage models, one pruned and one un-pruned. The tree-based models are grown based on the interaction of flood loss ratio with 13 examined predictors gathered from flood specifications, building characteristics, and mitigation actions. Besides an overall comparison, the prediction capacity is also checked for some sub-classes of water depth and some groups of building-type.

It has been shown that considering more details of the flood damage process can improve the predictive capacity of damage prediction models. In this regard, complexity with parameters with low predictive power may lead to more uncertain results. On the other hand, it has also been demonstrated that the probability analysis approach can make damage models more reliable when they are subjected to use in different flooding events.

}, keywords = {damage assessment, Disaster risk reduction, flood risk, Natural hazards, predictive capacity}, url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19475705.2018.1445666}, author = {Roozbeh Hasanzadeh Nafari and Tuan Ngo} }