SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES … · SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES ROYAL COMMISSION May 2010 1. INTRODUCTION In this 2nd Submission we wish

SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES ROYAL COMMISSION May 2010

Authority (CFA)

SIA National Administrative Office PO Box 2078, Gladstone Park, VIC 3043 Telephone: (03) 8336 1995 Facsimile: (03) 8336 1179 Email: [email protected]

SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES ROYAL COMMISSION May 14th 2010

Based on the hearings in the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission up until the release of the interim report in August 2009, ongoing community participation towards shared responsibility with emergency services, needs to be addressed.

In the first SIA submission there are 18 recommendations on safety systems that can be used to support a “Living Safety Culture”. This submission is intended to alert the commission of a social science based process towards self-directed communities that is now in progress and is known as “Community Fire Safety Culture” (CFSC).

The CFSC recommendations in this Submission may provide a method for far more effective community wide engagement in Victoria’s bush fire prone areas.

mailto:[email protected]�


1. INTRODUCTION In this 2nd Submission we wish to bring to the attention of the Royal Commission the following pilot Community Fire Safety Culture (CFSC) program as it may provide a method for more effective community wide engagement in Victoria’s bush fire prone areas. In the SIA SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRE-ROYAL COMMISSION (BF-RC) on May 18th 2009 it made 18 recommendations towards ‘Living Safely Culture’.

SIA Recommendation No 15. “The Royal Commission investigate the effectiveness and possible adoption of the Community Fire Unit (CFU) program used in NSW.”

Following the SIA’s interest in the NSW CFU program, this submission sets out the basis of a pilot Community Fire Safety Culture (CFSC) program that was applied to a street community at Ponds Drive in Lara, Victoria. The CFSC program goal was to significantly raise the level of involvement of residents, and this was achieved. This is clearly vital to ensure that all residents in at-risk bushfire areas are actually knowledgeable and engaged in effective risk prevention measures. This contrasts with the current generally low levels of community engagement, and hence providing only the appearance of preparedness, and not the reality. This pilot program, also draws on a process known as Values-Driven Safety, and was applied to the CFSC program with the Ponds Drive residents in Lara. It enabled the residents to become not only self-reliant but self-directed.

2. THE COMMUNITY FIRE SAFETY CULTURE (CFSC) PROCESS The four step Community Fire Safety Culture program is set out in Figure 1. This “Values Driven” Community Fire Safety Culture (CFSC) Process was undertaken soon after the SIA lodged their submission on 18th May 2009 with the realization that where the concepts of values-driven safety may work well in industry, it would have to be customised for community diversity (Gilbert, Ellsworth. Rhodes, Goodman, 2009). A four step CFSC implementation process was established (Figure 1) to be managed by a resident CFSC Leader. Coaching on the Ponds Drive experience had been provided to other potential Leaders in nearby streets. The concepts of CFSC in Lara is still being extended to adjoining streets (Jan Court, Lime Crescent, Neville Street) and other streets located directly in line to the N/W bushfire exposure (Forest Road Nth and Osterlund Court) where it is planned to be developed to the Ponds Drive level for the 2010-11 summer season, again through CFSC Leaders.

SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES ROYAL COMMISSION May 2010 Some of the Leaders had shared bushfire experience and others had affiliations with local service organizations (Lions Club).

1.1 Step 1: Assess Community Preparedness Using Community Fire Safety Culture Scorecard

In Step 1 the Community Fire Safety Culture Scorecard [Appendix 1] is handed out and processed before the summer period begins and perhaps as early as September. It provides the opportunity for a preliminary face-to-face survey, and helps measure culture, based on the community beliefs and values. A Fireguard telephone tree is also developed. The five listed FireReady values are specific to the attributes of a self-reliant community, closely aligned with the Bush Fire Royal Commission Interim Report Recommendation 7.1. At this stage the community has identified what their collective level of preparedness is, what is missing and where their survival weaknesses as a community could lead to unfavourable outcomes in the event of a bushfire.

1.2 Step 2: Provide Feedback To The Community Via CFSC Survey Results And Set Out Their Bushfire Survival Plans

In step 2, the CFSC Scorecards are collected and analyzed, with feedback given in the CFSC Survey Results sheet [Appendix 2]. Residents are provided with a FireReady Kit and requested to fill out a bushfire survival plan.


[email protected] Ph 5282 1831 Mob 0417 507 027

Step 1.

Step 2.

Step 3.

Step 4.

Explain the process to capture what the bushfire prone community believes is it’s “Fire Ready’ level.

Give the resident the Community Fire Safety Culture

(CFSC) Scorecard (left) with its five “FireReady” values and make an arrangement to pick it up when completed. At the same time obtain contact details for listing as Fireguard telephone tree (right).

After returned CFSC Scorecards have been analysed, circulate CFSC Survey Results (left) with their CFSC Survey Comments (right in dot points).

Provide the participants with a FireReady Kit and ask them to fill in the bushfire survival plan with the expectation they will probably add to the plan in the weeks to come.

Circulate weekly (Sept-Feb) group specific bulletins (20) providing information on: • Previous bushfire experiences with shared lessons • Home defendability improvements – shared group information. • Fine fuel reduction options on what has been done and can be done. • Planning for CFA Community Fireguard Group meetings. • Where fire fighting equipment can be accessed and operated. • CFA Online Household Bushfire Self Assessment Tool calculation. • Progress on CFSC efforts within nearby groups (streets). • Recognised and shared new home defendability improvements made.

Arrange CFSC Maturity Grid (left) review meeting with 3 to 4 residents at a time and determine what needs to happen before moving on from an existing maturity levels as decided by the group and shown in the green rated grid fields. Circulate CFSC Maturity Grid Effort (right)

Figure 1 The 4-Step Community Fire Safety Culture [CFSC] program


1.3 Step 3: Develop Regular Community Group Information Bulletins and Preparation Meetings

Circulate weekly (Sept-Feb) group specific bulletins (20) providing information on:

• Previous bushfire experiences with shared lessons • Home defendability improvements – shared group information. • Fine fuel reduction options on what has been done and can be done. • Planning for CFA Community Fireguard Group meetings. • Where firefighting equipment can be accessed and operated. • CFA Online Household Bushfire Self Assessment Tool calculation. • Progress on CFSC efforts within nearby groups (streets). • Recognised and shared new home defendability improvements made.

The CFA Community Fireguard meetings and Bushfire Survival workshops are essential to keep abreast of the increasing concerns of bushfires arising from lightening strikes, arsonists and potential pyro-terrorism (Baird 2006). It is known that such communities have contributed to the apprehension of arsonists in Victoria. As their participation levels grows so too does their awareness of how fuel reduction can be achieved in balance with native fauna and flora. New initiatives and innovations from one area are quickly shared by the Community Fireguard Facilitators with participants in other areas. In step 3 of the process the CFSC Leader checks the availability of residents and venue before calling in the Fireguard Facilitator, then circulates an agenda and verifies attendances with the Facilitator before the day of the meeting.

1.4 Step 4 Assess Community Preparedness Level And Action Needed; Use Community Fire Safety Culture Maturity Matrix

This involves filling out the CFSC Maturity Grid [Appendix 3], by conducting review meetings with 3 to 4 residents at a time to determine what needs to happen before moving on from an existing preparedness levels. This then enable compilation of the effort required to reach a higher level of preparedness, and summarized in the ‘CFSC Maturity Grid Effort’ table [Appendix 4]. In step 4, the matrix is like a community specific template that enables their beliefs and values to be implemented and reviewed. Without this level of direction and transparency of the matrix, community participation is likely to wane after the bushfire season, like it is known to happen even with the membership of the popular CFU’s in NSW (Lowe, Haynes, Byrne, 2008). The matrix is reviewed during Neighbours CFSC Meetings [Appendix 7].

SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES ROYAL COMMISSION May 2010 This is where the community determines with a bottoms-up ownership focus of when and where they call in the CFA Community Fireguard Facilitators or initiate burn-offs [without a backlash against councils and fire brigade authorities (SYR, CFA)]. This is also where communities become self-directed within their capacity to utilize fuel reduction methods and home defendability techniques regardless of whether they stay and defend or leave early. The inevitable cost effective innovations that arise are acknowledged and widely circulated locally and through the SIA online forums based on what gets measured and rewarded, gets done (Hansen 2001).

2 CFSC PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOMES The community engagement pilot program involved:

• Ponds Drive has 25 residential homes within 65 meters of open grassland to the N/W, and in a bushfire prone area.

• There were 57 residents, comprising 42 adults (one elderly), 7 school age children, 6 pre-school and 2 babies.

• The CFSC process was implemented by one of the residents being a safety practitioner, assisted by a second resident at the other end of the street.

• Implementation included culture measurement based on their beliefs and values.

• Planning was based on five values to establish where they are at with FireReady and where they want to be.

• Developments were conveyed by fire bulletins weekly through email and direct handout.

• The process was broken down to four steps (Figure 1) to directly engage all the residents in the street.

What was achieved to introduce the CFSC process:

• 100% response with a community telephone tree so that community group leaders (2) could communicate at any time with the rest of the community.

• 80% response to the scorecard • Methods for securing wire mesh over brick home under floor vents. • Redesign of hose connection pipe to fill gutters • Maximized neighbourhood utilisation of green wheelie bins to reduce fine fuels

(vegetation). • Liaisons with CGG Council and CFA to establish 100m fire break through fuel reduction

by vegetation removal, mowing and burning off with community planning and participation.

• Standardization of recognizable water drums and mop for use by anyone available during an ember attack, particularly if there is no one home at the time.


• Review of Ponds Drive exposures by a Maiden Gully Road, Bendigo resident who’d successfully defended his home during the Black Saturday fires.

• Planning to engage communities using the CFSC process in nearby streets and the Traralgon area has been initiated for the 2010-11 summer period.

• Community awareness of bushfire research work presentations by Dr. Kevin Tolhurst (2009) and Dr Danielle Clode (2010).

3 VALUE DRIVEN SAFETY: THE BRIDGE METAPHOR (below) AS AN OVERVIEW OF THE CFSC PROCESS

Value Driven Safety draws on the ‘bridge metaphor’ to illustrate a Value Driven Safety approach. In this illustration of a bridge structure (Hansen 1999), with the foundations of both columns serving a critical function of supporting the two processes. The right column represents what is happening in Victoria and involves government initiatives and emergency services. The left column is what is needed by way of strategies to ensure maximum self-directed community participation in the long term.

Community Living Safely Culture

Values-Driven Safety © CFSC

Maturity Grid

ScoreCard

Survival Plan

Self-reliant Bushfire Exposed Community

Customized Exercises Fireguard Activities

Understanding risks

Community Participation Community InteractionsBased on their Beliefs & Values Towards Self-Reliance


4 RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 That the Royal Commission investigates and reviews the Community Fire Safety Culture process intended to encourage empowerment, ownership, self- reliance and self-directed bushfire prone communities and determine its capacity to:

• Encourage community participation of all residents at street level and convert motivation into action (Paton et al. 2006).

• Elevate community social responsibility for their defendability and survival through discussions to embed being FireReady into the fabric of ‘Living Safely Culture’(SIA 2009)

• Sustain community interest in fuel reduction all year round and enable other protective measures to be fully effective (Paton & Burgelt 2006).

• Ensure that risk information made available to communities is consistent with the values and expectations of that community (Lion et al. 2002)

• Enable coordinated localized action within communities in association with statutory agencies and the voluntary services (Squires 1977).

4.2 That the Royal Commission investigates and reviews the Community Fire Safety Culture process and determine if there are opportunities to reinforce the implementation of Community Fire Units without the issues of:

• Uncertainties about an expectation to stay and defend given that equipment (hoses, pumps, PPE) has been provided along with operational training.

• Potential conflict between CFU groups and uncommitted neighbours when prioritizing properties to be defended during a fire incident (Putnam 2000).

4.3 That the Victorian Government, based on the Royal Commissions findings on recommendations 1 and 2, establish a ‘Parliamentary Committee’ responsible for the implementation a comprehensive process to engage and develop self-reliant and self-directed bushfire prone communities. Such a committee should operate as the Parliament of Victoria Road Safety Committee.


5 REFERENCES: 1. (Rechnitzer G, Lawson-Smith G, Dell G 2009) Safety Institute of Australia [SIA] Submission to

the 2009 Victorian Bushfire Royal Commission. May. 2009. http://www.sia.org.au/news/updates/rc_siasubmission.html

2. Hansen, Larry. L & Zahlis, Dan. Z. et al, The Universal Model for Safety Excellence, Profits Publishing of Sarasota, Florida, USA. 2006

3. Eckenfelder, Don. J. Getting the Safety Culture Right, Occupational Hazards, October 2003.

4. Reason, James. Human Error. Cambridge University Press.1990

5. Lowe, Haynes, Byrne, Bushfire CRC. Community Bushfire Safety, CSIRO Publishing. 2008

6. Victorian Bushfire-Royal Commission. INTERIM REPORT August 2009

7. Gilbert G. Elsworth G. Rhodes A. Goodman H. Community safety programs for bushfire: What do they do achieve, and how? The Australian Journal of Emergency management. Vol. 24 N0. 2. May 2009.

8. CFA, PREPARE. ACT. SURVIVE. Your Bushfire Survival Kit. 2009

9. Ross Smith, Key Issues Identified from Operational Reviews of Major Fires in Victoria 2006/07. July 2007.

10. Paton D (in press) Risk communication and natural hazards mitigation: how trust influences its effectiveness. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues

11. Paton, Burgelt 2006. Social-ecological vulnerability: factors facilitating co-existence with bushfire hazards. IGU2006 Conference 2-7 July Brisbane.

12. Shire of Yarra Ranges-CFA. Property bushfire preparation and native vegetation management. Case Study 1.

13. Baird RA (2006) Pyro-terrorism: threat of arson-induced forest fires as a future weapon of mass destruction. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 29: 415-428.

14. Squires P (1997) Criminology and the ‘community safety’ paradigm: safety, power and success and the limits of the local. British Criminology Conference, Queens University, Belfast.

15. Putnam R (2000) Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. Simon& Schuster: New York.

16. Standards Australia, HB 330-2009 Living in Bushfire-Prone Areas.

17. Clode, Danielle 2010, A Future in Flames. Melbourne University Press.

http://www.sia.org.au/news/updates/rc_siasubmission.html�


Appendix 1 Community Fire Safety Culture ScoreCard


Appendix 2 Community Fire Safety Culture ScoreCard Survey Result


Appendix 3 Community Fire Safety Culture Maturity Grid


Appendix 4 Community Fire Safety Culture Maturity Grid- EFFORT


Appendix 5 CFSC Preparedness Matrix

CFSC Where We Want To Be. 2010

Maturity Level VALUE & Fire

Ready percent.

Level 2. (Novice) Value No 1 ESTABLISH PREVENTION IN BUSHFIRE PRONE AREAS 45%

Prepare

Planned fuel reduction by removal and/or burning is conducted in consultation within the community that it is intended to protect.

Value No 2 WE PREPARE FOR BUSHFIRES 37% BSP Workbook p 11-27

Prepare

Walk around looking for and removing all ember attack entry point exposures is completed.

Value No 3 WE DRAW ON COMMUNITY SUPPORT 38% Community Fireguard

Act

Everyone participates in fire authority supported community bushfire safety meetings.

Value No 4 WE DEVELOP AND SHARE OUR RESOURCES 33%

Act

Access to and use of neighbour’s water delivery equipment has been shown if the owner becomes unavailable any time.

Value No 5 WE KNOW WHEN TO STAY AND DEFEND OR LEAVE EARLY. 52% BSP Workbook P 8-10

Survive

Local open spaces free of fuel and vegetation as safer locations has been factored into leave early and safe returning plans.


Appendix 6 CFSC FIRE BULLETINS CFSC Fire Bulletins and process documents are available on http://www.sia.org.au/sigs/emergency_mgt

Appendix 7 NEIGHBOURS CFSC MEETINGS

Neighbours CFSC Meeting “Where We Want To Be”

AAttendeess TTime and Placee

No 13. Rick Brook Thursday 21.1.2010 No.15 Tim & Emma MacLean 8:00pm (allow 1 hour) No.17 Jon & Katie King (Meeting Hosts) No 17 Ponds Drive, Lara.

Agendaa

1. Formation of Community Fire Safety Culture (CFSC)

2. Utilization of Community Telephone Tree

3. Verification of FireReady” Jan 2010

4. Determine efforts for next level

Attachment docss

The Bridge Metaphor CFSC Implementation Process

CFSC One Page Bulletins CFSC Maturity Grid 2009

CFSC Maturity Grid EFFORT CFSC Where We Want To Be 2010

http://www.sia.org.au/sigs/emergency_mgt�

Documents

SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES … · SIA 2nd SUBMISSION TO THE 2009 VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES ROYAL COMMISSION May 2010 1. INTRODUCTION In this 2nd Submission we wish