Planning to Reduce Risk: The Wildfire Management Overlay in Victoria, Australia

Abstract

In a world where climate change is a ‘given’, the concepts of vulnerability, resilience and risk are now pivotal in public policy debates in many countries. Within this context, planning controls are designed to facilitate safe, sustainable and prosperous communities. In line with March's (2007, 11) observation that ‘one important “reason to plan” is the reduction of risk’, Victoria's Wildfire Management Overlay (WMO) was developed with the aim of mitigating wildfire risk through the identification of high risk areas and ensuring that minimum fire protection measures are implemented. The need for such an Overlay is becoming increasingly apparent as climate change contributes to the growing frequency and intensity of bushfires in Australia. Empirical research has found that, by following WMO prescriptions, the risk of a dwelling igniting from direct flame or radiant heat generated in a one in 50‐year fire event can be greatly minimised. Yet not all local Councils in Victoria have built the WMO into their land use planning processes and schemes. Barriers to adoption include: lack of political will, a distrust of ‘over‐regulation’, lack of training and mentoring of planning staff, and potential conflicts with vegetation conservation objectives.

The spatial domain of wildfire risk and response in the wildland urban interface in Sydney, Australia

“…As urban populations expand, so do the number of houses in the WUI in Australia (Hughes and Mercer, 2009) and in the USA (Schoennagel et al, 2009), and house losses increase accordingly (Schoennagel et al, 2009). The probability of loss (consequential risk) is a conditional function of ignition, spread and the vulnerability of urban environments and structures (Bradstock and Gill, 2001).…”

The challenge of applying governance and sustainable development to wildland fire management in Southern Europe

“…Stakeholders' participation is in line with the democratic man- 19 Should we briefly consider other non EU-countries where fire is a most pressing problem, the approach to WFM would be different: in Australia, for instance, local government planning schemes are emphasized. More specifically, the Victoria Wild Fire Management Overlay innovatory approach, which has been subsequently followed by other states such as New South Wales and South Australia, has identified bushfire-prone areas, bushfire protection areas and entails the elaboration of bush fire risk management plans at the local level (Hughes and Mercer, 2009). Another example might be the California Fire Plan, which attempts both, to protect assets at risk through focused prefire management and to increase initial attack success (www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/FR/main/.../fireplan.cfm).…”

Land Use and Wildfire: A Review of Local Interactions and Teleconnections

“…And yet, to our knowledge integrating wildfire and land use planning is quite rare. While the State of California now requires wildfire planning in its county plans, and some Australian regions have similar laws [82] our research indicates that many regions still do not coordinate land use planning and wildfire prevention. This is perhaps due to the outdated thought that fire is a destructive force to be eliminated, rather than a force that can be planned for [83].…”