TY - JOUR
T1 - How a risk focus in emergency management can restrict community resilience - a case study from Victoria, Australia
AU - Paschen, Jana-Axinja
AU - Beilin, Ruth
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© IAWF 2017.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - The research investigated understandings of risk and resilience in emergency management (EM) policy and practice. The core findings illustrate how a complex of institutionalised socio-cultural expectations and standardised processes-that is, evidence-based response models to deal with and communicate uncertainty-influence the operationalisation of resilience in EM. We observe that a focus on disaster risk as a quantifiable product of physical hazards is an attempt to control uncertainty and leads to engineered or technology-centred response solutions. Accordingly, community resilience is principally seen as the product of risk reduction, incident response and recovery interventions. The research shows that resultant command and control management practices produce limited-and limiting-interpretations of community resilience as disaster resilience. This can restrict existing and emergent community responses to risk, and the ability to imagine and enact more systemic types of community resilience. For instance, the short-term disaster focus tends to neglect the social and institutional root causes of community vulnerability and generic risk information is detached from everyday community experience. Using wildfire in Australia as its case study, this paper discusses the social, cultural and practical challenges of operationalising social-ecological resilience in EM.
AB - The research investigated understandings of risk and resilience in emergency management (EM) policy and practice. The core findings illustrate how a complex of institutionalised socio-cultural expectations and standardised processes-that is, evidence-based response models to deal with and communicate uncertainty-influence the operationalisation of resilience in EM. We observe that a focus on disaster risk as a quantifiable product of physical hazards is an attempt to control uncertainty and leads to engineered or technology-centred response solutions. Accordingly, community resilience is principally seen as the product of risk reduction, incident response and recovery interventions. The research shows that resultant command and control management practices produce limited-and limiting-interpretations of community resilience as disaster resilience. This can restrict existing and emergent community responses to risk, and the ability to imagine and enact more systemic types of community resilience. For instance, the short-term disaster focus tends to neglect the social and institutional root causes of community vulnerability and generic risk information is detached from everyday community experience. Using wildfire in Australia as its case study, this paper discusses the social, cultural and practical challenges of operationalising social-ecological resilience in EM.
KW - policy practice
KW - social-ecological resilience
KW - uncertainty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85010445067&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1071/WF16064
DO - 10.1071/WF16064
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85010445067
SN - 1049-8001
VL - 26
SP - 1
EP - 9
JO - International Journal of Wildland Fire
JF - International Journal of Wildland Fire
IS - 1
ER -