Defining success in bushfire management: Critical moments in the 2012-13 ACT bushfire season

Adam J. Leavesley; Neil Cooper; Dylan Kendall; Tony Corrigan; Malcolm Gale; Brett McNamara; Jennie Ann Mallela

Defining success in bushfire management: Critical moments in the 2012-13 ACT bushfire season

Adam J. Leavesley, Neil Cooper, Dylan Kendall, Tony Corrigan, Malcolm Gale, Brett McNamara, Jennie Ann Mallela

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The 2012-13 Australian Capital Territory fire season saw no loss of life, no major property loss and minimal environmental damage. It was therefore successful according to the main aims of bushfire management. This outcome hinged on a few critical moments when, due to a combination of strategy and good fortune, things went right. This case study demonstrates how influential chance can be in determining the outcome of bushfires and this in turn begs the question: should agencies be held responsible for factors that are beyond human control? It is proposed that holding agencies responsible for outcomes that are not entirely within their control, acts to reduce community resilience because it implicitly removes the onus on individuals to take personal responsibility; a vital component for good outcomes.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	52-57
Number of pages	6
Journal	Australian Journal of Emergency Management
Volume	32
Issue number	3
Publication status	Published - 2017

Cite this

@article{e7e3cb4a85684349987a67943c008fbb,

title = "Defining success in bushfire management: Critical moments in the 2012-13 ACT bushfire season",

abstract = "The 2012-13 Australian Capital Territory fire season saw no loss of life, no major property loss and minimal environmental damage. It was therefore successful according to the main aims of bushfire management. This outcome hinged on a few critical moments when, due to a combination of strategy and good fortune, things went right. This case study demonstrates how influential chance can be in determining the outcome of bushfires and this in turn begs the question: should agencies be held responsible for factors that are beyond human control? It is proposed that holding agencies responsible for outcomes that are not entirely within their control, acts to reduce community resilience because it implicitly removes the onus on individuals to take personal responsibility; a vital component for good outcomes.",

author = "Leavesley, {Adam J.} and Neil Cooper and Dylan Kendall and Tony Corrigan and Malcolm Gale and Brett McNamara and Mallela, {Jennie Ann}",

year = "2017",

language = "English",

volume = "32",

pages = "52--57",

journal = "Australian Journal of Emergency Management",

issn = "1324-1540",

publisher = "Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining success in bushfire management

T2 - Critical moments in the 2012-13 ACT bushfire season

AU - Leavesley, Adam J.

AU - Cooper, Neil

AU - Kendall, Dylan

AU - Corrigan, Tony

AU - Gale, Malcolm

AU - McNamara, Brett

AU - Mallela, Jennie Ann

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - The 2012-13 Australian Capital Territory fire season saw no loss of life, no major property loss and minimal environmental damage. It was therefore successful according to the main aims of bushfire management. This outcome hinged on a few critical moments when, due to a combination of strategy and good fortune, things went right. This case study demonstrates how influential chance can be in determining the outcome of bushfires and this in turn begs the question: should agencies be held responsible for factors that are beyond human control? It is proposed that holding agencies responsible for outcomes that are not entirely within their control, acts to reduce community resilience because it implicitly removes the onus on individuals to take personal responsibility; a vital component for good outcomes.

AB - The 2012-13 Australian Capital Territory fire season saw no loss of life, no major property loss and minimal environmental damage. It was therefore successful according to the main aims of bushfire management. This outcome hinged on a few critical moments when, due to a combination of strategy and good fortune, things went right. This case study demonstrates how influential chance can be in determining the outcome of bushfires and this in turn begs the question: should agencies be held responsible for factors that are beyond human control? It is proposed that holding agencies responsible for outcomes that are not entirely within their control, acts to reduce community resilience because it implicitly removes the onus on individuals to take personal responsibility; a vital component for good outcomes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026512793&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

SN - 1324-1540

VL - 32

SP - 52

EP - 57

JO - Australian Journal of Emergency Management

JF - Australian Journal of Emergency Management

IS - 3

ER -

Defining success in bushfire management: Critical moments in the 2012-13 ACT bushfire season

Abstract

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this