Many communities experience repeated disruptions from natural disasters, and the effects of these events could be minimised through better risk management, planning and prevention. However, effective management of disaster risk is reliant on accurate and accessible information about natural hazards. To improve the quality and accessibility of risk information, South Australia has developed the Zone Emergency Risk Management System (ZERMS) Project.

Managed by the South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission (SAFECOM), the project has addressed multiple hazards across the full prevention, preparedness, response and recovery (PPRR) spectrum. Utilising rigorous risk assessment methodology, the project works collaboratively with key stakeholders to better understand risk and build resilience across the social, economic and environment sectors of our community.

The core aim of the project was to better understand the risks SA communities faced, by conducting risk assessment workshops across 10 hazard types. The ZERMS project team interpreted the National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines (NERAG) and developed templates, tools and consistent processes for the workshops. The ZERMS project was the first time the NERAG methodology was rigorously applied in Australia. The team has since shared this knowledge and tools with other Australian jurisdictions adopting the NERAG methodology.

Stakeholders were invited to workshops. At each workshop (107) between 20-30 agencies were represented often contributing to lively discussions and debate. The outputs are included in the Emergency Management Plans.

Key benefits from the overall process have included that stakeholders have developed: a better understanding of the Zone context and the specific elements at risk in each Zone; the existing controls; the risks arising from different levels of event severity across different types of hazard; and the EM arrangements and capabilities across local and state government agencies and other organisations.

The National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines (NERAG): The bumpy road to national consistency 

Since 2010, there has been a national version of the international risk management guidelines published for assessing risk of natural disasters, known as NERAG. 

The NERAG has been described in a key recommendation of the draft report from the Productivity Commission Inquiry into Natural Disaster Funding as a consistent means of assessing disaster mitigation proposals. NERAG assessments are proposed as a means of prioritising strategic investments into risk reducing mitigation. 

States and territories have been encouraged to take up these guidelines as a means of consistently assessing risks of emergencies, with mixed results. Some states have embraced NERAG risk assessments at state and regional levels and published the results, while others have been reticent to undertake such work.

When endorsed in 2010, there was also national agreement to review the NERAG after three years. The process was originally meant to take around six months, but is only concluding now after more than two years.

This paper describes the reviewed NERAG, its refinements, and its associated products to encourage greater and more consistent adoption.  It is also an interesting case study of the difficult process many of us go through to achieve nationally agreed consistency in our policies and practices.

A framework for an integrated model that supports multi-hazard mitigation planning  

Hazard mitigation planning is multi-faceted. First, plans should be holistic, considering a number of community goals in addition to risk management. Second, plans should guide development over the long term, and need to consider how the frequency, magnitude and consequences of hazards change over time. To assess future changes, a large number of environmental and anthropogenic factors that affect hazard risk need to be estimated, yet strong uncertainty exists in estimating these factors. Third, implemented plans have a wide social, environmental and economic impact; impacts across these systems need to be assessed. Finally, resources for mitigation are limited; benefits of mitigation need to be clear to make a business case to decision makers and the public. Due to these facets, decision-support systems (DSS) are invaluable when planning mitigation.

This paper presents an integrated model for mitigation planning. To assess the impact of mitigation options across the wider social, economic and environmental system, the proposed DSS integrates flood, bushfire, earthquake, and coastal surge risk models with social, natural and build environment models. The integrated model is used to estimate the values of multiple decision criteria, to enable holistic planning. Criteria estimated by the DSS include hazard, vulnerability, risk, cost benefit analysis and other social and environmental variables. To understand how these criteria change over the long term, models of climate, demographics and economic change are used. To enable the spatial assessment of the criteria, a land-use model is used, which also allows the consideration of spatial planning and land management mitigation options, in addition to structural and educational measures. Finally, the integrated model is linked with optimisation, which is designed to screen through planning options, and, hence, discover innovative sets of policy options.