Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Article Summary: “Taking a Punch: Building a more resilient Australia.”

Australia is at far greater risk from natural disaster than terrorism. Under slightly different circumstances Cyclone Larry could have been Australia’s equivalent to Hurricane Katrina. Similar planning is involved in anticipating and dealing with all ‘extreme events.’ Even though $10B has been invested on counter-terrorism since 9/11, the Australian community in general is underprepared in the face of such high consequence (natural and terrorism) disasters. Leaders are required to develop a ‘national resilience program’ to secure Australia.
s
Resilience is dealing adequately with change. It is ‘capacity to withstand’ the disaster, quickly returning to the pre-disaster state, and learning from the experience. Australians typically bounce back quickly. But, the community at large has an overly optimistic attitude of our “000,” Defense Force, and SES volunteer response capability. As a case study, a disaster like the 2002 Bali Bombings has done much to leave this false impression.
s
Australia has been very lucky not have faced the “Big One” yet. Cyclone Tracy and the Granville train smash are our largest scale catastrophic events -- small by world standards. Our hospital systems would quickly be overwhelmed in a large-scale disaster; much quicker than some other Western countries. There are many choosing ‘sea-change’ and ‘tree-change’ lifestyles which face inevitable disaster risks. The ageing population is confounding our ability to effectively maintain our volunteer resources. By 2050 we’ll have four-times the number of over 50’s.
s
Australia’s penchant for cutting down (recent criticism and litigation) the tall poppy is seeing the best people reluctant to take up critical counter-disaster posts. Privatisation of community assets and infrastructure means they’re not as readily accessible and a high percentage of Councils are economically stressed. Residentially, Australia is not responding to climate change risks and the general risks attributed to climate change are compounding. National infrastructure is under stress and inadequately prepared to prevent devastating damage or changes to quality of life from a disaster. Physical infrastructure (e.g. bridges) is typically aged and in dire need of better maintenance.
s
Decentralised Australia is overly reliant on transport, and susceptible to congestion and urban encroachment. Power services are not very adaptable to renewable resources. Storm water infrastructure is outdated. Australia is in a relatively poor position (20th/25 OECD) regarding infrastructure preparedness for disaster.
s
National security leaders have yet to be frank with the community about these issues due to fear of panic. The UK has used a transparent (opposite) approach. A fundamental shift is required for Australia to move from a ‘need-to-know’ to a ‘need-to-share’ paradigm.
s
Page 7ff of this report outlines nine (9) initial steps government, industry and the community can adopt to build national, state and local resilience.
s
Reference:
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] D. Templeman & A. Bergin, “Taking a Punch: Building a more resilient Australia,” in Strategic Insights, Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Issue 39, May 2008, ISSN 1449-3993

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.