An Economic Analysis of Bushfires Management Programs

Allocating scare resources for fire management strategies requires information on the extent of economic losses from bushfires and the efficiency of alternatives. Despite the severity of bushfires, there is no agreed approach in Australia for estimating economic losses from fires nor for evaluating the economic efficiency of alternative suppression strategies. The poster proposes approaches to assess the economic effects of bushfires on local and state economies and sets out models to evaluate the economic efficiency of two key bushfire management strategies: presuppression and suppression. The first model arises from questions concerning the value of pre-suppression (before the fire) fuel reduction activities, and the estimation of an economically optimal fire management budget. The fuel reduction burning aims to reduce losses from a major fire event. To determine how the budget should be allocated, a modification of the Cost plus Net Value Change model is being used. This model has the advantage that each of the influencing parameters is easy to adjust or even change for different areas in Australia. The second model allows straightforward comparisons of approaches to bushfire suppression, through a fire simulation model. The simulation allows comparisons of alternative strategies under similar fire conditions. The economic utility in suppression of fire engines, dozers and aircraft is evaluated using Cost Benefit Analysis and a Cost plus Loss framework. The paper presents useful tools for decision makers to make damage assessment from fire, resource allocation on pre-suppression and guidelines for operational decision making on suppression approaches.Resource /Energy Economics and Policy, A11, H4, Q51, Q54,

Valuing adaptation under rapid change

AbstractThe methods used to plan adaptation to climate change have been heavily influenced by scientific narratives of gradual change and economic narratives of marginal adjustments to that change. An investigation of the theoretical aspects of how the climate changes suggests that scientific narratives of climate change are socially constructed, biasing scientific narratives to descriptions of gradual as opposed rapid, non-linear change. Evidence of widespread step changes in recent climate records and in model projections of future climate is being overlooked because of this. Step-wise climate change has the potential to produce rapid increases in extreme events that can cross institutional, geographical and sectoral domains.Likewise, orthodox economics is not well suited to the deep uncertainty faced under climate change, requiring a multi-faceted approach to adaptation. The presence of tangible and intangible values range across five adaptation clusters: goods; services; capital assets and infrastructure; social assets and infrastructure; and natural assets and infrastructure. Standard economic methods have difficulty in giving adequate weight to the different types of values across these clusters. They also do not account well for the inter-connectedness of impacts and subsequent responses between agents in the economy. As a result, many highly-valued aspects of human and environmental capital are being overlooked.Recent extreme events are already pressuring areas of public policy, and national strategies for emergency response and disaster risk reduction are being developed as a consequence. However, the potential for an escalation of total damage costs due to rapid change requires a coordinated approach at the institutional level, involving all levels of government, the private sector and civil society.One of the largest risks of maladaptation is the potential for un-owned risks, as risks propagate across domains and responsibility for their management is poorly allocated between public and private interests, and between the roles of the individual and civil society. Economic strategies developed by the disaster community for disaster response and risk reduction provide a base to work from, but many gaps remain.We have developed a framework for valuing adaptation that has the following aspects: the valuation of impacts thus estimating values at risk, the evaluation of different adaptation options and strategies based on cost, and the valuation of benefits expressed as a combination of the benefits of avoided damages and a range of institutional values such as equity, justice, sustainability and profit.The choice of economic methods and tools used to assess adaptation depends largely on the ability to constrain uncertainty around problems (predictive uncertainty) and solutions (outcome uncertainty). Orthodox methods can be used where both are constrained, portfolio methodologies where problems are constrained and robust methodologies where solutions are constrained. Where both are unconstrained, process-based methods utilising innovation methods and adaptive management are most suitable. All methods should involve stakeholders where possible.Innovative processes methods that enable transformation will be required in some circumstances, to allow institutions, sectors and communities to prepare for anticipated major change.Please cite this report as: Jones, RN, Young, CK, Handmer, J, Keating, A, Mekala, GD, Sheehan, P 2013 Valuing adaptation under rapid change, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, pp. 192.The methods used to plan adaptation to climate change have been heavily influenced by scientific narratives of gradual change and economic narratives of marginal adjustments to that change. An investigation of the theoretical aspects of how the climate changes suggests that scientific narratives of climate change are socially constructed, biasing scientific narratives to descriptions of gradual as opposed rapid, non-linear change. Evidence of widespread step changes in recent climate records and in model projections of future climate is being overlooked because of this. Step-wise climate change has the potential to produce rapid increases in extreme events that can cross institutional, geographical and sectoral domains.Likewise, orthodox economics is not well suited to the deep uncertainty faced under climate change, requiring a multi-faceted approach to adaptation. The presence of tangible and intangible values range across five adaptation clusters: goods; services; capital assets and infrastructure; social assets and infrastructure; and natural assets and infrastructure. Standard economic methods have difficulty in giving adequate weight to the different types of values across these clusters. They also do not account well for the inter-connectedness of impacts and subsequent responses between agents in the economy. As a result, many highly-valued aspects of human and environmental capital are being overlooked.Recent extreme events are already pressuring areas of public policy, and national strategies for emergency response and disaster risk reduction are being developed as a consequence. However, the potential for an escalation of total damage costs due to rapid change requires a coordinated approach at the institutional level, involving all levels of government, the private sector and civil society.One of the largest risks of maladaptation is the potential for un-owned risks, as risks propagate across domains and responsibility for their management is poorly allocated between public and private interests, and between the roles of the individual and civil society. Economic strategies developed by the disaster community for disaster response and risk reduction provide a base to work from, but many gaps remain.We have developed a framework for valuing adaptation that has the following aspects: the valuation of impacts thus estimating values at risk, the evaluation of different adaptation options and strategies based on cost, and the valuation of benefits expressed as a combination of the benefits of avoided damages and a range of institutional values such as equity, justice, sustainability and profit.The choice of economic methods and tools used to assess adaptation depends largely on the ability to constrain uncertainty around problems (predictive uncertainty) and solutions (outcome uncertainty). Orthodox methods can be used where both are constrained, portfolio methodologies where problems are constrained and robust methodologies where solutions are constrained. Where both are unconstrained, process-based methods utilising innovation methods and adaptive management are most suitable. All methods should involve stakeholders where possible.Innovative processes methods that enable transformation will be required in some circumstances, to allow institutions, sectors and communities to prepare for anticipated major change

The changing landscape of disaster volunteering: opportunities, responses and gaps in Australia

There is a growing expectation that volunteers will have a greater role in disaster management in the future compared to the past. This is driven largely by a growing focus on building resilience to disasters. At the same time, the wider landscape of volunteering is fundamentally changing in the twenty-first century. This paper considers implications of this changing landscape for the resilience agenda in disaster management, with a focus on Australia. It first reviews major forces and trends impacting on disaster volunteering, highlighting four key developments: the growth of more diverse and episodic volunteering styles, the impact of new communications technology, greater private sector involvement and growing government expectations of and intervention in the voluntary sector. It then examines opportunities in this changing landscape for the Australian emergency management sector across five key strategic areas and provides examples of Australian responses to these opportunities to date. The five areas of focus are: developing more flexible volunteering strategies, harnessing spontaneous volunteering, building capacity to engage digital (and digitally enabled) volunteers, tapping into the growth of employee and skills-based volunteering and co-producing community-based disaster risk reduction. Although there have been considerable steps taken in Australia in some of these areas, overall there is still a long way to go before the sector can take full advantage of emerging opportunities. The paper thus concludes by identifying important research and practice gaps in this area

GEOPOLÍTICA NO PACÍFICO SUDOESTE E OS CONFLITOS RECENTES NAS ILHAS SALOMÃO

This paper focuses on the recent ethnic conflicts on the Solomon Islands and their geopolitical dimensions. Located on the so called “arc of instability”, a region that includes East Timor and other island states along Australia’s north-east coast; the Solomon Islands consists of an archipelago where several different groups lived in relative isolation for centuries. The country gained independence from Britain in 1978. Friction between different ethnic and cultural groups within the country exploded in violence in the late nineties on the island of Guadalcanal including the country’s capital, Honiara, and nearly led to civil war. After the United Nations declined to intervene, there were unsuccessful attempts to resolve the crisis by negotiations. An international force, led by Australia, was sent to the country in 2003 intending to restore law and order and the legitimate government. We aim to understand not only the reasons for the crisis, but the international community’s response to it as well. Key words: Solomon Islands; Australia; Melanesia; South-West Pacific; United Nations.Este artigo aborda os recentes conflitos étnicos nas Ilhas Salomão e suas dimensões geopolíticas. Localizadas no chamado “arco da instabilidade”, uma região que inclui Timor Leste e outros Estados insulares ao longo da costa nordeste da Austrália, as Ilhas Salomão compreendem um arquipélago onde misturam-se diversos grupos que por séculos viveram em relativo isolamento. O país obteve a independência do Império Britânico em 1978. Crescentes conflitos étinicos explodiram em violência no final dos anos noventa na ilha de Guadalcanal, incluindo a capital Honiara, e deixaram o país à beira da guerra civil. Diante da apatia das Nacões Unidas, e de tentativas infrutíferas de buscar uma solição negociada para a crise, uma força internacional liderada pela Austrália foi enviada em 2003 com o objetivo de restaurar o governo legítimo, a lei e a ordem. Aqui busca-se compreender não somente as razões que levaram o país à crise, mas também a reação da comunidade internacional, e particularmente da Austrália, frente aos acontecimentos. Palavras-chave: Ilhas Salomão; Austrália; Melanésia; Pacífico Sudoeste; Nações Unidas

Negotiating risk and responsibility through law, policy and planning

The 2011 National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (COAG 2011) sets the context for natural disaster management as a 'shared responsibility' of all sectors of government and society, as part of building a more comprehensive approach to emergency management. However, it remains difficult to change relationships and practices to share responsibility, either between emergency management agencies and other government sectors, or between governments and at-risk communities. This paper reports on the research of three independent but complementary projects established through the Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre to identify the legal, policy and planning structures and processes that could enhance integration of emergency management imperatives across public policy sectors, agencies and portfolios. This article distils and summarises some key conclusions regarding a central, yet seriously under-acknowledged facet, of developing public policy for natural hazard risk in Australia: the political and social negotiation of risk and responsibility. This is an overview paper and many of the issues raised require further exploration

Government liabilities for disaster risk in industrialized countries: a case study of Australia

This paper explores sovereign risk preferences against direct and indirect natural disasters losses in industrialized countries. Using Australia as a case study, the analysis compares expected disaster losses and government capacity to finance losses. Utilizing a national disaster loss dataset, extreme value theory is applied to estimate an all-hazard annual loss distribution. Unusually but critically, the dataset includes direct as well as indirect losses, allowing for the analysis to consider the oft-ignored issue of indirect losses. Expected annual losses (direct, and direct plus indirect) are overlaid with a risk-layer approach, to distinguish low, medium and extreme loss events. Each risk layer is compared to available fiscal resources for financing losses, grounded in the political reality of Australian disaster financing. When considering direct losses only, we find support for a risk-neutral preference on the part of the Australian government for low and medium loss levels, and a risk-averse preference in regard to extreme losses. When indirect losses are also estimated, we find that even medium loss levels are expected to overwhelm available fiscal resources, thereby violating the available resources assumption underlying arguments for sovereign risk neutrality. Our analysis provides empirical support for the assertion that indirect losses are a major, under-recognised concern for industrialized countries. A risk-averse preference in regard to medium and extreme loss events recommends enhanced investment in both corrective and prospective risk reduction in relation to these risks level, in particular to reduce indirect losses

Climate Change Meets the Law of the Horse

The climate change policy debate has only recently turned its full attention to adaptation - how to address the impacts of climate change we have already begun to experience and that will likely increase over time. Legal scholars have in turn begun to explore how the many different fields of law will and should respond. During this nascent period, one overarching question has gone unexamined: how will the legal system as a whole organize around climate change adaptation? Will a new distinct field of climate change adaptation law and policy emerge, or will legal institutions simply work away at the problem through unrelated, duly self-contained fields, as in the famous Law of the Horse? This Article is the first to examine that question comprehensively, to move beyond thinking about the law and climate change adaptation to consider the law of climate change adaptation. Part I of the Article lays out our methodological premises and approach. Using a model we call Stationarity Assessment, Part I explores how legal fields are structured and sustained based on assumptions about the variability of natural, social, and economic conditions, and how disruptions to that regime of variability can lead to the emergence of new fields of law and policy. Case studies of environmental law and environmental justice demonstrate the model’s predictive power for the formation of new distinct legal regimes. Part II applies the Stationarity Assessment model to the topic of climate change adaptation, using a case study of a hypothetical coastal region and the potential for climate change impacts to disrupt relevant legal doctrines and institutions. We find that most fields of law appear capable of adapting effectively to climate change. In other words, without some active intervention, we expect the law and policy of climate change adaptation to follow the path of the Law of the Horse - a collection of fields independently adapting to climate change - rather than organically coalescing into a new distinct field. Part III explores why, notwithstanding this conclusion, it may still be desirable to seek a different trajectory. Focusing on the likelihood of systemic adaptation decisions with perverse, harmful results, we identify the potential benefits offered by intervening to shape a new and distinct field of climate change adaptation law and policy. Part IV then identifies the contours of such a field, exploring the distinct purposes of reducing vulnerability, ensuring resiliency, and safeguarding equity. These features provide the normative policy components for a law of climate change adaptation that would be more than just a Law of the Horse. This new field would not replace or supplant any existing field, however, as environmental law did with regard to nuisance law, and it would not be dominated by substantive doctrine. Rather, like the field of environmental justice, this new legal regime would serve as a holistic overlay across other fields to ensure more efficient, effective, and just climate change adaptation solutions