Creating “Community”? Preparing for Bushfire in Rural <scp>V</scp>ictoria

Fairbrother, Peter; Tyler, Meagan; Hart, Alison; Mees, Bernard; Phillips, R. T.; Stratford, Julie; Toh, Keith

doi:10.1111/ruso.12006

Cited by 23 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Traditionally, these agencies have prioritized response to disasters, although they have also become more involved in disaster mitigation and adaptation activities. In particular, they have become key actors for engagement and education with local communities to enhance household disaster preparation (Boura, ; Handmer et al ., ; Filmer, ; Lowe et al ., ; Fozdar and Roberts, ; Dunstan, ; Fairbrother et al ., ). Furthermore, they have become increasingly involved in planning activities, notably in conjunction with hazard mapping (Groenhart et al ., ; Holland et al ., ).…”

Section: The ‘Other’ Disaster Actorsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The term community is common in the emergency management literature, but as Fairbrother et al . () note, it is a term that can mean several things: locality, a sense of belonging and/or social networks. For the most part, when referred to in the disaster literature, community refers to locality – specific areas that have experienced, or are vulnerable to, disasters.…”

Section: The ‘Other’ Disaster Actorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards New Disaster Governance: Subsidiarity as a Critical Tool

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Major natural disasters are events where day‐to‐day governance activities are disrupted and a large range of different actors – governmental and non‐governmental – are required to (re)act. Given the inherently chaotic nature of disaster events, and the diverse groups responding to their attendant impacts, clarity about how authority and responsibility are allocated across key disaster management actors is essential. This raises numerous pertinent questions: Are there areas of shared competence between different disaster management actors? Is there a need for them to act in common? Is credible cooperation feasible? Can responsibilities be allocated in a clear and effective manner? In this paper, drawing upon the subsidiarity principle, we provide a review of the academic literature using the role of different actors in disaster management in Australia as the case. The objective of the paper is to synthesise what is known and to, thereby, provoke greater conversation and research of responsibilities during disaster events in Australia and beyond. The ultimate contribution is to help understand how the roles of different disaster management actors can be better reconciled to ensure more effective and efficient outcomes. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

show abstract

Section: The ‘Other’ Disaster Actorsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: The ‘Other’ Disaster Actorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards New Disaster Governance: Subsidiarity as a Critical Tool

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These preliminary fieldbased findings suggest that there may be unique barriers and motivations to engaging in collective action compared to more individualized action (Amel et al 2017). Outreach that changes beliefs about others in one's community (e.g., the programs summarized in Geiger and Swim 2016, Fairbrother et al 2013) may be particularly important for motivating behaviors that require high levels of collective action.…”

Section: Noncollective Action Problems Vs Collective Action Problemsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Programs that facilitate face-to-face communication, increase the perceived value of collective and individual outcomes of acting, and highlight how many others are engaging in the action may be effective (Table 1, column 4). Fairbrother et al (2013) describe a program like this in Australia that brought neighbors together to discuss fire issues and found that it effectively increased resident wildfire preparedness because it led to the creation of valued collective goals and a shared sense of responsibility among neighbors. For areas with very small lots, findings from step-level public good studies may apply (Table 1, column 3).…”

Section: Wildfire Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clarifying the degree and type of public good collective action problem posed by natural resource management challenges

Niemiec¹,

McCaffrey²,

Jones³

2020

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly, scholars have sought to understand the role of collective action across property boundaries to address natural resource management challenges. Although the growing focus on collective action for natural resource management has led to many new and potentially useful insights for governance and outreach, we suggest that researchers and practitioners may benefit from taking a step back to think about the degree and type of collective action that is needed for each particular social-ecological context. We use the examples of invasive species management, fire management, and habitat conservation to argue that categorizing certain natural resource management challenges by the degree and type of public good collective action problem (i.e., continuous and step level) they create can provide insight into effective policy and management solutions for each problem. In so doing, we build on experimental psychology and economics research that suggests that outreach and governance solutions that work for one type of public good collective action problem may be less effective for addressing another type of problem that does not require collective action. We conclude by arguing for more studies examining: (1) how aspects of the social and ecological context determine the degree and type of public good collective action problem posed by natural resource management challenges, and (2) how the drivers of land manager decision making and the resulting effective governance solutions vary by the type and degree of public good collective action problem.

show abstract

“…Sociologists began using community to explore social interaction during the industrial revolution of the nineteenth century and the earthshaking changes it produced (Fairbrother et al 2013). The concept played a critical role "in the birth and formation of the discipline" (Cope et al 2016, p. 3), creating a bridge between macroscopic and microscopic analysis, relating not only to social networks, but also divisions of labor and distribution of resources (Wellman 1979).…”

Section: A Brief (And Partial) History Of Sociological Communitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a fusion of two lines of thought: creating convergence between Aldo Leopold and sociology through the community concept

Auken

2020

Socio Ecol Pract Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aldo Leopold made great contributions to our understanding of the interconnections between people and their environments, and community is central to his best-known work. The social dimensions of the land-community concept were not his focus, however, and subsequent research on Leopold has not emphasized such issues. Community was foundational to sociology, and while the concept faded from prominence during the significant social change of the postwar era, some scholars in the field continue to debate its meaning and salience more than 130 years later. They generally do not discuss Leopold, though, and the "fusion" of ecological and sociological thought that he desired remains elusive. I propose a convergence via the integrative landscape interactional field extension of community. The goal is to revitalize the community concept and strengthen the connection between ecological and sociological research, while helping us better understand the reality of humans and their environments-how we live and might live in particular places.

show abstract

Creating “Community”? Preparing for Bushfire in Rural Victoria

Abstract: The term "community" has a long and contested lineage in social analysis and debate. This lineage, however, is not generally recognized in policy and public debates on community and bushfire in Australia.

Cited by 23 publications

References 34 publications

Towards New Disaster Governance: Subsidiarity as a Critical Tool

Towards New Disaster Governance: Subsidiarity as a Critical Tool

Clarifying the degree and type of public good collective action problem posed by natural resource management challenges

Toward a fusion of two lines of thought: creating convergence between Aldo Leopold and sociology through the community concept

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About