Published works

Over the past decade, there has been an increasing amount of public attention focused on the contributions that Aboriginal people, and their knowledge and practices, make to resilience and sustainability agendas in Australia. Given the emerging commitment of natural hazards agencies in southern Australia to engagement and collaboration with Aboriginal people, the increasing level of legal recognition accorded to Aboriginal peoples’ land rights, and Aboriginal peoples’ own investment and interest in engaging in forms of natural hazard management, it is important that researchers support this work to understand and document how beneficial and respectful collaborations can be fostered.

The second year of the Hazards, culture and Indigenous communities (HCIC) project has focused on completing fieldwork for the case studies and practitioner survey, continuing to produce scholarly and industry-focused publications and maintaining strong end-user engagement. Our preliminary findings show that:

• the natural hazard sector is well positioned to provide leadership on public sector collaborations with Aboriginal peoples. The collegial and placed-based work establishes a community of practice which supports learning/doing together. The life and death context prioritise social equity matters that might be intractable or neglected in other policy contexts.
• intercultural collaborations are not well supported by existing sector policy. Collaborations are often not the product of formal sector policy frameworks but are dependent on interpersonal dynamics between individuals who take on additional responsibilities. Thus, these collaborations are vulnerable to changes in staffing and funding.
• Aboriginal people remain underrepresented in the natural hazard management sector. According to the evidence available, Aboriginal people are disproportionately under-represented in state agencies responsible for land and hazard management. There is a need for agencies to collect more consistent and detailed data on employment in order to support their accountability to Indigenous peoples and their communities.
• challenging ‘what is normal?’ is central to this work. Culture and learning/doing go hand in hand. Thus, it is necessary to consider the ‘how’, ‘why’, ‘what’, ‘when’, ‘where’ and ‘who’ of risk mitigation in relation to similar and different cultures.

These findings are arising out of our key activities from the project. In this year, we report on:

• the completion or publication of key reports and academic papers—an article that examines the challenges and opportunities faced by Dja Dja Wurrung peoples in their collaborations in bushfire management on Country; a book chapter that discusses the ACT case study in relation to national Disaster Justice issues; a report based on a knowledge exchange trip to Western Australia; an article that explores intercultural collaborations in fire management across southern Australia; and a short report that evaluates Indigenous employment in the natural hazards sector
• presentations and poster displays by project members given for a range of industry and academic audiences, including a collaborative dialogue at AFAC18
• the finalisation of both case studies and the practitioner survey
• ongoing end-user engagement through regular meetings, newsletter circulation and the solicitation of feedback on key project outputs.

Significantly, as part of our end-user engagement, we convened a workshop at AFAC18 that recommended:

• a network be established for Aboriginal people who are volunteers and/or agency staff in the emergency management sector
• the Australasian Fire and Emergency Services Authorities Council have an Aboriginal reference group, drawn from this network, to provide an Aboriginal ‘voice’ at their meetings.

These recommendations were passed onto our end-user team to take forward. They are also informing the preparations for the AFAC20 conference in Adelaide.