End User representatives
New public policy positions for bushfire and flood risk planning, preparedness, response and recovery rely on best practice scientific evidence. However, scientific evidence does not always meet the knowledge needs of practitioners. Scientific studies are fragmented and highly specialised, constantly evolving, and span diverse disciplinary approaches. They are also produced, understood and used in relation to other sources of knowledge – professional expertise, local knowledge, law and politics.
Given that uncertainty is an inherent part of scientific practice and method, how do those engaged in risk mitigation manage these scientific uncertainties in their decision-making?
Efforts to anticipate and mitigate natural hazards have generated a diverse field of natural science.
By moving beyond simplistic assumptions that science can be directly translated into policy and practice, this project is analysing how risk professionals and others express and manage differingopinions about the different uncertainties inherent to mitigation practice. This work is supporting practitioners to explain and justify mitigation practices to other risk mitigation professionals, the public, the media, and courts and inquiries.
The project seeks a better sciencegovernance match in risk mitigation through three tasks:
- Investigating the diversity and uncertainty of bushfire and flood science, and its contribution to risk mitigation policy and planning;
- Exploring how diverse individuals use and understand scientific evidence and other knowledges in their bushfire and flood risk mitigation roles; and,
- Analysing how this interaction produces particular kinds of opportunities and challenges in the policy, practice, law and governance of bushfire and flood risk mitigation.
Key activities include papers in the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Environment and Planning, and the Australian Journal of Emergency Management, the completion of surveys and scenario exercises as part of case studies in the Barwon-Otway region in Victoria, and Darwin.
Attempts to anticipate and mitigate natural hazards have generated a diverse field of natural science that is drawn upon by a wide range of practitioners and decision-makers. Uncertainty is a necessary part of scientific practice, but how can we navigate it?
Two case studies from the north and south Australia examine how science is being used to change how we anticiate and mitigate natural hazards illustraate some common opportunities and challenges
|Economics of natural hazards||Prof David Pannell||University of Western Australia|
|Pre-disaster multihazard damage and economic loss estimation model||Prof Mehmet Ulubasoglu||Deakin University|
|Decision support system for assessment of policy and planning investment options for optimal natural hazard mitigation||Prof Holger Maier||University of Adelaide|
|Policies, institutions and governance of natural hazards||A/Prof Michael Eburn||Australian National University|