Search

Catastrophic and unprecedented wildfires have unfolded across fire-prone landscapes globally over the last three years, with highly publicized loss of human life, property destruction and ecological transformation. Indigenous peoples within many nations have persuasively argued that traditional fire management can enhance existing wildfire mitigation strategies. However, there are considerable barriers to the further incorporation of Indigenous practices into existing wildfire policy. This paper explores the potential of Indigenous fire management to achieve broader institutionalization, emphasizing the social labour involved producing and sustaining intercultural collaboration in bureaucratic contexts. Our focus is southern Australia where Indigenous peoples' fire management, often termed 'cultural burning', has been facilitated by an Indigenous-led social movement and growing state support. We draw on interviews conducted with Aboriginal and white land and hazard management practitioners actively engaged in intercultural fire management collaborations largely occurring on public lands. In the absence of institutional clarity, established networks and accreted experience these practitioners work to generate enthusiasm, stabilise Aboriginal peoples' environmental authority and nullify pervasive societal fears surrounding the risk of fire. The case study demonstrates the significance of interpersonal factors in the emergence and maintenance of fraught intercultural collaborations. Despite global optimism, such insights highlight how the revival of Indigenous fire management in nations such as Australia is highly contingent and depends upon routine persuasive labour and fragile intercultural diplomacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of disaster loss assessment attempts to provide comprehensive estimates of the cost of disasters. Assessment of intangibles remains a major weakness. Existing costing frameworks have acknowledged losses to cultural – as distinct from economic, social, human or environmental – capital. However, the inclusion of cultural line items has usually been conducted in an ad hoc and under-theorised way, with little empirical evidence. This paper presents the possibility of using cultural capital itself as an overarching category for specifically cultural losses. It further focuses on the specific concept of sense of place as one area that has been neglected even in frameworks that consider other kinds of intangibles, and argues, on both theoretical and pragmatic grounds, that a collective or shared sense of place can be subsumed within cultural capital loss estimates. Christchurch provides an illustration of the idea as relevant and comparable empirical material is available from before and since the 2011 earthquake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decade, major landscape wildfires (or ‘bushfires’ in Australia) in fire-prone countries have illustrated the seriousness of this global environmental problem. This natural hazard presents a complex mesh of dynamic factors for those seeking to reduce or manage its costs, as ignitions, hazard behaviour, and the reactions of different human and ecological communities during and after hazard events are all extremely uncertain. But while those at risk of wildfire have been subject to significant research, the social dimensions of its management, including the role of science, have received little attention. This paper reports on a case study of the Barwon-Otway area of Victoria in Australia, a high wildfire risk area that has recently been a pilot site for a new risk mitigation strategy utilising the wildfire simulation model PHOENIX RapidFire. Against simple equations between ‘more science’ and ‘less uncertainty,’ this paper presents results from interviews and a workshop with practitioners to investigate how scientific research interacts with and informs both wildfire policy and practice. We suggest that attending to cultural and social specificities of the application of any technical innovation—such as next generation modelling—raises questions for future research about the roles of narrative, performance, and other knowledges in the sedimentation of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scenario exercises have become instrumental across multiple fields, from their original usage in business and military planning, to being ubiquitous in environmental planning and policy formation. This article critically reviews whether there are explicit and imminent divisions between how scenario exercises are used and discussed, with particular focus on the literature of qualitative scenarios concerning environmental challenges. The authors interrogate what scenario exercises are in actual practice, in the context of what they are used for and how they are designed, before then considering the criteria for determining ‘success’ for a scenario exercise. The particular focus of the literature analysed is in the emergence of the discipline of ‘environmental scenarios’, being scenarios concerned with 21st Century environmental challenges such as the influence of climate change on the notion of natural hazards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Natural hazards are complex events whose mitigation has generated a diverse field of specialised natural science expertise that is drawn upon by a wide range of practitioners and decision-makers. In this paper, the authors bring natural science research, risk studies and science and technology studies together in aid of clarifying the role scientific uncertainties play in the mitigation of natural hazards and their associated risks. Given that uncertainty is a necessary part of scientific practise and method, those engaged in risk mitigation must manage these scientific uncertainties in their decision-making just as, equally, social science researchers, stakeholders and others hoping to understand risk mitigation must understand their character and influence. To this end, the authors present the results of an extensive literature review of scientific uncertainties as they emerge in relation to wildfire and flood risk mitigation in Australia. The results are both a survey of these major uncertainties and a novel categorisation within which a variety of expert and non-expert audiences might discuss and translate the scientific uncertainties that are encountered and managed in risk mitigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conservation targets perform beneficial auxiliary functions that are rarely acknowledged, including raising awareness, building partnerships, promoting investment, and developing new knowledge. Building on these auxiliary functions could enable more rapid progress towards current targets and inform the design of future targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]