DISASTER and SOCIAL SCIENCE IN AUSTRALIA*

Wettenhall, Roger

doi:10.1111/j.1467-7717.1978.tb00102.x

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is beyond the scope of the present study to attempt to tackle this list of questions (such a response is deserving of an entire publication in its own right). However, we note here that considerable research is on going to address these questions that builds upon a long scholarship in Australia focused on hazards and their accompanying disasters31323334353637383940. Such studies, as well as many others, have laid important foundations about the what, where, when, how and why of hazards and their accompanying disasters, against which more contemporary analyses and trends might be investigated and benchmarked.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disaster declarations associated with bushfires, floods and storms in New South Wales, Australia between 2004 and 2014

Sewell

Stephens

Dominey‐Howes

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australia regularly experiences disasters triggered by natural hazards and New South Wales (NSW) the most populous State is no exception. To date, no publically available spatial and temporal analyses of disaster declarations triggered by hazards (specifically, bushfires, floods and storms) in NSW have been undertaken and no studies have explored the relationship between disaster occurrence and socio-economic disadvantage. We source, collate and analyse data about bushfire, flood and storm disaster declarations between 2004 and 2014. Floods resulted in the most frequent type of disaster declaration. The greatest number of disaster declarations occurred in 2012–2013. Whilst no significant Spearman’s correlation exists between bushfire, flood and storm disaster declarations and the strength of the El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phase, we observe that bushfire disaster declarations were much more common during El Niño, and flood disaster declarations were five times more common during La Niña phases. We identify a spatial cluster or ‘hot spot’ of disaster declarations in the northeast of the State that is also spatially coincident with 43% of the most socio-economically disadvantaged Local Government Areas in NSW. The results have implications for disaster risk management in the State.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disaster declarations associated with bushfires, floods and storms in New South Wales, Australia between 2004 and 2014

Sewell

Stephens

Dominey‐Howes

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The problem of material convergence has been identified in all major disasters (Fritz and Mathewson, 1957; Boileau et al, 1978; Wettenhall, 1979; Scanlon, 1991; Neal, 1994; Holguín‐Veras et al, 2007). Regrettably though, there have been very few attempts to analyze its effects on logistics and material convergence has not been explicitly considered in analytical models for PD‐HL.…”

Section: Commercial and Humanitarian Logisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the unique features of post‐disaster humanitarian logistics

Holguín‐Veras

Jaller

Wassenhove

et al. 2012

J of Ops Management

482

329

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Logistic activity can be thought of as a socio‐technical process whereby a social network of individuals orchestrates a series of technical activities using supporting systems such as transportation and communications. To understand the functioning of the entire system requires proper consideration of all its components. We identify seven key components: the objectives being pursued, the origin of the commodity flows to be transported, knowledge of demand, the decision‐making structure, periodicity and volume of logistic activities, and the state of the social networks and supporting systems. Based on our analysis of the differences between commercial and humanitarian logistics, we pinpoint research gaps that need to be filled to enhance both the efficiency of humanitarian logistics and the realism of the mathematical models designed to support it. We argue that humanitarian logistics is too broad a field to fit neatly into a single definition of operational conditions. At one end of the spectrum we find humanitarian logistic efforts of the kind conducted in long‐term disaster recovery and humanitarian assistance, where operational efficiency – akin to commercial logistics – is a prime consideration. At the other, post‐disaster humanitarian logistic operations involved in disaster response and short‐term recovery activities represent a vastly different operational environment, often in chaotic settings where urgent needs, life‐or‐death decisions and scarce resources are the norm. The huge contrast between these operational environments requires that they be treated separately.

show abstract

“…When Australia was federated in 1901, disaster management was not one of the legislative areas transferred to the Federal Government (Britton and Wettenhall, ). Disaster management, however, was not recognized as an important, discrete area of government policy until the ‘disaster years’ (1967–1974) – an 8‐year period in which four major disasters (two cyclones, a bushfire and a flood) battered population centres across Australia – collectively causing 150 fatalities and 1.23 billion dollars (roughly 5 billion dollars in 2014 equivalent monetary terms) in damage for the insurance industry alone (Wettenhall, ; Gill, ; Britton and Wettenhall, ). Since the 1970s, each of the State/Territory Governments gradually passed disaster legislation to define their role during disaster events.…”

Section: Managing Disasters In Australia – the State Emphasismentioning

confidence: 99%

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

DISASTER and SOCIAL SCIENCE IN AUSTRALIA*

Cited by 7 publications

References 6 publications

Disaster declarations associated with bushfires, floods and storms in New South Wales, Australia between 2004 and 2014

Disaster declarations associated with bushfires, floods and storms in New South Wales, Australia between 2004 and 2014

On the unique features of post‐disaster humanitarian logistics

Towards New Disaster Governance: Subsidiarity as a Critical Tool

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About