1

The intention of this event was to facilitate strengthening community resilience

and lowering or managing the risks they face in bushfire. The project is a collab-

orative partnership between a team of design researchers from RMIT University

and local community organisations including: Southern Otways Landcare Net-

work (SOLN); Otway Health and a CFA Community Fire Guard (CFG) facilitator

from the Barwon-Corangamite area. Our team facilitated activities in revealing

‘invisible’ knowledge of local people, environment and infrastructures among

residents of the Southern Otways. This activity was used to highlight awareness,

identify potential risks and prompt participants to scrutinise and discuss their

bushfire plans with one another, and particularly with their neighbours.

Background

Bushfires are a continuing threat in Australia, intensified by global warming and

extreme climatic changes. On Saturday February 7th 2009, regional townships in

Victoria experienced Australia’s worst natural disaster. The bushfires on ‘Black

Saturday’ wreaked tragedy, death and destruction mainly in areas to the north

and east of Melbourne. 2,133 homes were destroyed and 173 people were killed

(Teague et al. 2010). More than 1.1 million acres were burnt (Teague et al. 2009).

The cost of the fires is now calculated to be at least 4.4 billion AUD including an

insurance bill of 1.2 billion AUD (Gray 2010).

Fire authorities have identified the Southern Otways as an area at high risk to

bushfires. There are significant challenges facing this community. Firstly, there

is cultural memory loss on the last catastrophic fire in 1939, due to the ageing

population. Secondly, the Southern Otways contains unique coastal landscapes

and national parks, attracting a large number of tourists from Australia and

abroad. The peak holiday period coincides with the summer bushfire season.

The majority of the residents are non-permanent residents consisting of sea/

tree-changers and holiday-home owners/renters. They are highly vulnerable be-

cause they are not fully aware of the potential danger they might face in bush-

fires, increasing the risk for other permanent residents. Furthermore, proximity

to several national parks and houses nestled among trees is a cause of concern

for residents due to large fuel build up, driving tension between residents, the

local council and the Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) who

carry out fuel-reduction planned burns. The area is poor in communication

infrastructure including radio, TV, internet and mobile phone coverage, making

communities even more vulnerable and dependent upon their own resources

and networks in the face of a bushfire.

Dr Yoko Akama and Tania Ivanka

Communication Design

School of Media and Communication

College of Design and Social Context

RMIT University

For more information please contact:

yoko.akama@rmit.edu.au

Tel. 03 9925 2805

Mob. 0422 643 742

Please do not circulate or make copies

without prior consent from the authors.

Updated in October 2011 for AEMI

workshop

This research is published in:

Akama , Y & Ivanka, T, 2010, ‘What

community? Facilitating awareness of

‘community’ through Playful Triggers’,

Participatory Design Conference, Sydney,

Australia, Nov 29 – Dec 3, 2010. Proceed-

ing published in ACM.

Bush Fire Awareness Day report

The issue is not only related to infrastructure and communication technology,

though these impact heavily on managing bushfires. The Country Fire Authority

(CFA) is the main organisation providing fire-fighting and emergency services

covering rural areas and regional townships in the state of Victoria in Australia.

Our discussions with local CFA fire chiefs have indicated that their priorities

lie in town protection in a bushfire emergency. Resources are thinly stretched

and they are not able to protect all households. Some roads to houses located

outside of the township, pose a danger for CFA trucks to go through due to the

proximity of trees, narrowness of the road, lack of alternative exits and access

routes etc (Fig 1). However, among many of these households, there is a false

sense of security due to the belief that the CFA will come to the rescue.

In an attempt to engage and educate the community on bushfire risk mitiga-

tion and awareness, the CFA have been conducting several ‘Fire Ready’ commu-

nity talks and meetings. The CFA also have a community education arm of the

organisation, called Community Fire Guard (CFG). The CFG has been widely ac-

knowledged in playing a critical and effective role in the community on bushfire

preparation. Studies of CFG workshops around Australia report that empowering

participants with information has encouraged them to develop plans appropri-

ate to their circumstances (Gilbert 2005; Gilbert & Marsh 2009; Goodman, Ste-

vens & Rowe 2009). These case studies also report the importance of collective

action among neighbourhood networks.

Several interviews with local residents, CFA fire chiefs and community engage-

ment officers were conducted, as well as field-visits, household visits, observa-

tion of and participation in CFG workshops and meetings. Methods that were

used to understand the ‘fragmentation’ of community networks and highlight

those who were more vulnerable than others, is also discussed in this report.

These activities culminated in a Bushfire Awareness Day event in Apollo Bay,

Southern Otways, Victoria in January 2010.

The Bushfire Awareness Day event

The Awareness Day was held on Friday 15th and another repeated session on

Saturday 16th January 2010 for two and a half hours each. It was important to

distinguish this event from other CFA community meetings to emphasise that

we were not there to give advice on household preparations or tell them wheth-

er to leave early or stay and defend.

As a general introduction to the day, participants were shown videos of ember

attack and interviews with survivors from previous bushfire disasters (see page

3). These videos were selected to illustrate the realities of bushfire and the dan-

gers of being unprepared to trigger initial discussion with participants. This also

helped to reinforce the key messages of the day on the importance of bushfire

preparation among neighbours.

The role of Community Fire Guard (CFG) was explained to workshop partici-

pants as being critical to bushfire preparation. The CFG is a CFA funded initiative

that facilitates household preparation through active participation among peo-

ple living in the same geographical area. Similar workshops (for example, Street

FireWise in the Blue Mountains, Bushfire Ready Action Group in Western Australia

and Community Fire Safe in South Australia) report the importance of collective

action among neighbourhood networks. At the time when our research was

being conducted, the CFA had only just begun initiating CFGs in the Southern

Otways area. Our team’s partnership with the Southern Otways CFG facilitator

was critical to the event in raising awareness of the CFG as well as recruit more

members to it.

Fig. 1: Wild Dog Road, Southern Otways: narrow, winding roads that are overgrown with vegetation becomes a risk in bushfires.

3

The collaboration with the Community Fire Guard facilitator, Aurel Dessewffy,

in this event was invaluable (Fig. 2). Our partnership with him enabled com-

plementary knowledge to be brought to this event. He was able to respond

to a variety of questions and concerns specific to bushfire preparation that

emerged through the scenario discussions. His in-depth knowledge, practical

experience of being a fire-fighter, professional insight and the confident, warm

and charismatic mode of engagement were effective in easing the anxiety and

confusion that some participants experienced surrounding this emotional and

challenging issue. A high-degree of skill and experience is required to deliver

participant-relevant information whilst keeping it informative, informal and

interactive (Gilbert 2005). His presence and role as a CFG facilitator was critical

in establishing trust between the participants and our team, and reinforced the

event’s message on initiating bushfire planning among neighbours.

3

Fig. 2: CFG facilitator Aurel Dessewffy (on the left, holding a poster) and Yoko (Project leader, RMIT, on the right) introducing the day’s activities

“Our biggest worry was [the neighbours]

down the end of the road … because they

didn’t know what they were doing

they were going at one stage and then

… they just changed their mind [and

turned back]. It got to the stage where

we couldn’t worry about them because

we were too busy having to worry about

what we were doing …

…[other] neighbours spent a lot of time

trying to help them out and … wasted a

lot of neighbours’ time.”

Interview with a resident in Mt Bold, South Australia after January 2007 fires

“I didn’t make any preparations because

I wasn’t thinking it would happen,

despite the warnings. … In the end I left

on foot. The only thing I had on me was

a face washer to keep me cool. I started

walking down Falls Rd not knowing

where I was going when a neighbour

happened to be driving past. He asked

if I wanted a ride. I said ‘yes please’

which was very fortunate because

I didn’t know where I was walking

and we ended up in Alexander which

was designated as a refuge.”

Elaine Postlethwaite talking on ABC Melbourne 774, 10th February 2009

Preparatory methods used to tap into community networks

In order to understand the ‘fragmentation’ of the ‘community of place’, we ini-

tially attempted to map the social networks (Fig. 3) using a visualisation method

called Social Network Analysis (Magsino 2009). Social Network Analysis is a study

of complex, human systems through the visualisation and characterisation of re-

lationships between people, groups and organisations. It has been used to inform

policy in areas such as terrorism prevention and public health improvement. The

one shown here is a work-in-progress, as these social networks have a-symmetry

of activity that makes it challenging to understand, predict or model. Gladwell

(2000) identified a pattern whereby a small number of people, who he terms

‘connectors’ or ‘brokers’, in every social network can spread an idea to a large

network of people quickly and with credibility. We undertook this visualisation

to understand what the ‘community of place’ looked like and find ways to create

new connections within the fragmented network.

We began this process by mapping ‘communities of interest’ groups in the region

to identify potential ‘connectors’ and ‘brokers’ as agents within the networks who

can spread messages on bushfire awareness effectively to others. Our team iden-

tified that there were 161 community-network groups in the local area. These in-

clude surf life-savers’ club, country women’s association, the football and cricket

club, etc. Among them, we contacted several groups that held potential member-

ships who were elderly, families with children, recently re-located residents and

those who lived outside of the town (ie, in the ‘bush’). As mentioned previously,

we identified these residents as being more vulnerable to bushfire risks. Contact

was established via phone-calls or through peer-to-peer conversations within lo-

cal community organisations such as SOLN, the Pony Club or Otway Health. 4

Fig. 3: This diagram shows the community networks we initiated contact with. It reveals the variety of engagement methods that were used, and evaluates ones that were more effective than others.

5

One key communication method used to recruit participants to the workshop

was the design and distribution of posters and postcards (Fig. 4 & 5). These

artefacts played different roles in initiating engagement. The poster was in-

tended to gain visibility in public places, either to catch the eye of a passer-by

and/or to reinforce the messages read elsewhere regarding the event. Posters

were placed in highly trafficked public locations, for example, on notice boards

in shopping centres, the Post Office, the Surf Life Saver’s club, the Apollo Bay

Lawn Bowles Club, Visitor’s Information centre, the pharmacy on the high

street, SOLN reception, Otway Health office reception and the Shire offices.

On the other hand, the intention behind the postcards (Fig. 5 & 6) was to be

passed through people’s hands. The postcard presents two different scenarios

between neighbours who hadn’t talked about their bushfire plans, and how

this affected one another when the fire came unexpectedly. These scenarios

were generated from collating various interviews and case studies of bush-

fire survivors. The aim behind the two scenarios was to trigger conversation

between neighbours. One half of the postcard could be torn off and left under

the neighbour’s door with a message. In a fragmented community network,

initiating conversation between neighbours who know little of each other was

another challenge our team wanted to investigate.

Fig. 4 Above: Poster of the Bushfire Awareness Day on the post office door.

Fig. 5. Left: Postcards were distributed among the community network. Some were placed in the newsagents next to the local news sheet.

As the cards were being developed, they were trialed with residents engaged

in a CFG workshop (Fig. 6). The trial intended to gauge the cards’ role and ef-

fectiveness in triggering conversation between neighbours. Responses varied

between residents who regarded this method being useful, to others who

thought it was ineffective. Those who found it ineffective indicated barriers

between themselves and the non-permanent residents (or short-term holiday

rental residents) to have conversations around bushfire preparation. In the

section ‘critical reflections’ (see p. 10), the effectiveness of this method will be

discussed further.

6

Fig. 6: Postcards with scenario and a trial of it in a CFG meeting (below)

7

Design methods used in the workshops

The event used two key design methods, Playful Triggers and Scenario cards,

that combined various design-led approaches from co-design, participatory de-

sign, service design and human-centred design. These design ‘scaffolds’ (Sand-

ers 2002) intended to initiate engagement, prompt thinking and discussion,

facilitate awareness and reveal tacit knowledge among the community related

to bushfire planning. Liz Sanders’ work in co-design describes ‘scaffolds’ as a

way to promote ‘collective generativity’ among ordinary people and designers.

Our purpose was to trial, monitor and evaluate these ‘scaffolds’ for facilitating

engagement, highlighting the risks among neighbours and community groups.

An evaluation of these methods is discussed in the latter section of this report.

One of the methods we trialed facilitated visualisation and mapping, using

artefacts called Playful Triggers (Akama et al, 2007; Loi 2005) where commonly

found objects are used to access, interpret, visualise, articulate and communi-

cate implicit knowledge through facilitated conversations. This methodology

utilises playful, tactile, everyday qualities of objects. When placed in a specific

context, the artefacts take on the meanings placed on them by the partici-

pants. Fig 7 & 8 shows participants using Playful Triggers to visualise collective

knowledge of their local area. Each household and individual’s situation is

different and they have the expert knowledge of the people, land, topography,

vegetation and likely direction of the fire, access routes etc. Through facili-

tated discussion and interaction, the participants visualised the location and

number of permanents and non-permanent households; those they thought

were vulnerable; potential hazards; any media coverage and likely direction of

the fire.

7

Fig. 7 Top: Residents of Skenes Creek undertake the visualisation of their local area. In this image, permanent house-holds are indicated with black beads, and the orange beads indicate where they believe to be vulnerable residents. The rest of the township is mainly non-permanent residents.

Above: A close up of the various Playful Triggers used

Many participants took to the visualisation method easily and intuitively,

remarking that it was an informal, effective way in revealing and capturing

collective knowledge (Fig. 8). Through sharing, discussing and pooling their

collective knowledge, it revealed insights that they were not aware of before.

Some participants quickly realised that they knew little about their neighbours

or their plans for bushfires. For example, Ian thought he knew his neighbours

well and he recalled that they had discussed their bushfire plans. Upon being

questioned by his wife, he was unable to tell what their plans were. This lack of

knowledge and awareness was more acute for non-permanent residents who

only knew a small number of people living nearby. However, through knowl-

edge shared by others living in their area, they were able to increase their

awareness of other households and the environment. The process of visualis-

ing ‘tacit’ or ‘informal’ knowledge enabled it to become tangible and concrete.

Conversation with others enabled assumptions to be questioned. Casual, col-

lective knowledge of others in a bushfire context, became substantial, valuable

and significant for mitigation and planning.

Identification of those who are vulnerable heightened a general awareness of

ensuring that contact was made with them. For example, Shirley, Pat, Judy (Fig.

9) are elderly ladies living in Apollo Bay who found out that they all lived near

each other. Shirley in particular felt incredibly vulnerable and anxious due to

her frail physical strength and living alone. During the visualisation exercise,

they discovered that Nereda and Seer’s elderly mothers also lived nearby. We

later found out from Aurel that they had formed a CFG group so they can be

better prepared and provide support to one another.

8

Fig 8: This is a visualisation of Burrum River Valley area. It shows permanent and non-permanent residents, likely direction of fire, those who are staying and defend-ing and vulnerable people.

household with a scanner

possible direction of fire

a woman living alone, who is staying and defending

elderly lady

household with young children

narrow unsealed road

households that are stay and defendingpermanent household

non-permanent household

Fig 9: Shirley is 82 years old and Pat has a mentally disabled son

9

Assisting people to use their imagination, to stimulate and heighten their emotive-

cognition skills was another method used in the workshop (Fig. 10 & 11). Scenarios

were an effective method to stimulate the imagination and reduce the temptation for

insular thinking, ‘…it can’t happen to me’. Insular thinking has been recognised as one of

the key obstacles to bushfire preparation and instead, triggering people’s imagination

is viewed as a critical mechanism for anticipating the threat of fire (Goodman, Stevens

& Rowe 2009). Participants were asked to discuss the risks of bushfire in their particu-

lar locale through what if…scenarios. Trigger cards with unforeseen occurrences, such

as a fallen tree blocking access or poor visibility, were randomly selected from a stack

of cards. They prompted people to strategise alternative plans to circumnavigate such

occurrences. Their ideas were then written on another card and shared to lead a group

discussion (Fig. 10).

The scenario cards emphasised the importance of having alternative

plans in case there were unforeseen circumstances that hindered

them from leaving. It also highlighted that some plans were ill con-

sidered, for example, many town residents had planned to evacuating

to the beach. Using this scenario, the CFG facilitator talked through

the details of its possible risks and what to evaluate and prepare for,

for example, access to the beach and likelihood of wading in water

for a long period of time. Some participants were baffled by some of

the unexpected scenarios. For example, Seer was confronted with

the situation, you can’t get in touch with your friend. She doesn’t drive

and relies on public transport. This scenario prompted her to think

through how to avoid or get around this situation if she couldn’t get

hold of her husband. They found this exercise really useful and effec-

tive in prompting to think about situations that they never thought

about. After the event, they asked if they could take away the set of

scenario cards that were used in the workshop to help them reinforce

their bushfire plans.

Fig. 10: A scenario responding to the unforeseen event of not hearing any fire warnings.

Fig. 11. A participant thinking through one of the scenarios.

Critical reflection

As a design-led action research, this event was successful on various levels for

both participants and our research objective. Over the two days, 20 participants

attended, which was our target. From the 18 evaluation sheets that were re-

turned, all indicated that the event and the activities were effective in raising

awareness on bushfire preparation. As a result of attending the Awareness Day,

the majority of the participants signed up to the Community Fire Guard. Fur-

thermore, the activities were critical in raising awareness of the risks that the

participants were unaware of before. Some of these include identifying those

who live in their local area and those who are vulnerable. This knowledge then

led to their motivation in initiating contact with those they know little of.

There was immediate knowledge transfer among participants, facilitated

through discussions during the event. The interaction and conversation among

neighbours led to greater awareness and knowledge of others residing in their

local area. Since the emphasis of the event was to discuss bushfire plans among

neighbours, we observed some who swapped contact numbers so they can con-

tinue their conversations (Fig. 12).

The data that emerged from this research is critical in highlighting and ad-

dressing the different layers of obstacles facing the community in the Southern

Otway region. This investigation has only begun scratching the surface in under-

standing the complex fragmentation of this community. We have identified that

this fragmentation is exacerbated by lack of formal, strong community networks

that penetrates throughout the area. The Southern Otways Landcare Network

(SOLN) is the only exception, however, most of SOLN members are permanent

residents. Many of the other networks are small in numbers, clustered around

specific groups of permanent residents. We have not been able to identify any

significant non-permanent resident networks and the visualisation data reveals

that non-permanent households comprise majority of the numbers in this area

(Fig. 14). We have yet to identify any other ‘informal’ social networks or social

events that can be leveraged effectively, and this identification will take time

and some element of ‘serendipity’ to reveal them.

We have identified that there are bigger challenges in tapping into non-per-

manent resident and holidaymaker networks. Often they disassociate with the

local community network (through frequent absence or deliberate desire to dis-

connect socially and technologically) and their lack of knowledge of people and

environment makes them more vulnerable to bushfire risks than the permanent

residents. Locally relevant knowledge is vital in mitigating Bushfire risks (Gilbert

2005), which non-permanent residents and holidaymakers do not have. Lack of

social network and knowledge of their local environment often results in last-

minute decisions and hazardous action (Rhodes & Goodman, 2005). Preliminary

conversations with staff at the Visitor’s Information centre, the Youth Hostel

manager and local real-estate agents in Apollo Bay indicate that there are no

strategies in place to advise tourists or holiday homeowners of what to do. Many

suggested plans of evacuating or relocating to the beach – however, the work-

shop scenario exercise revealed that this plan requires thorough consideration

to ensure that it is managed with as little risk as possible.

Our exploration of methods of tapping into the community network has re-

vealed that there is more research needed to trial how to leverage the connec-

tors and brokers, or identify ‘community champions’ and facilitate their role in

bushfire awareness. We have experienced various challenges in harnessing the

community network dynamics. We have learnt that time is needed to establish

trust, build personal relationships and develop a rapport, even between mem-

bers of the community. Often, household members have priorities that take

precedence over concerns about bushfires (Balcombe, Cottrell & Newton 2008).

This presents a significant challenge in raising bushfire awareness at the com-

munity level, which the team observed while talking with some members of the

community. For example, some workshop participants expressed concern over

10

Fig. 12: Nereda and Judy swapping phone numbers after the event on Friday

11

neighbours who refused to consider that the bushfire could threaten the Apollo

Bay township. The participants voiced their anxiety with such neighbours who

are in denial. Lack of preparation can increase risk for themselves. Authentic

trust building cannot be rushed or scripted, and it is vital before communication

can progress deeper into the network. More examination into effective leverage

of community social networks is required to determine what the best methods

are to engage desired target groups. For example, we may need to re-look at the

ways in which connectors and brokers of community networks were enabled in

spreading the word-of-mouth. This consideration includes the kinds of ‘tools’

they were provided with to spread the word and the way they were briefed ini-

tially (Fig. 13).

Several issues surfaced during the event. One resident came especially to air his

concern about the local government and the CFA’s lack of response in installing

a siren at Apollo Bay. This resident mistook this event to be a CFA run event. His

anger and frustration revealed the strong emotions held by some members of

the community caused by ‘meeting fatigue’ and mistrust that the CFA present-

ers were simply ‘towing the company line’ and not seen as empowering the

community. Non-local representatives with little in-depth knowledge are unable

to build the necessary trust with the community or provide information that

is relevant to their specific contexts. Studies done in other states indicate that

credibility of local brigades in facilitating community meetings is significant

in establishing trust and connection with the community (Gilbert 2005). This

observation is echoed in a Bushfire CRC report which found that some members

of the community perceived that the Community Fire Service in South Australia

was no longer a ‘community agency but had become a “government agency”

due to threat of litigation and their requirements to respond to state-wide emer-

gencies’ (Goodman, Stevens & Rowe 2009, p. 24). Again, these issues point to the

importance of establishing or building trust as a critical component to any com-

munity engagement initiative.

The visualisation activity relied on participants having some knowledge of their

local area and sharing this with others. It is questionable whether this activity

would work with a group of non-permanent residents or holidaymakers who

have little knowledge to share. Further investigation is required in order to en-

sure that the activities are effective in its engagement and outcome for this par-

ticular group. One potential alternative is to provide this group with the relevant

information and knowledge collected via the visualisation activities (Fig. 14).

Such locally-specific information presented as a ‘map’ could complement their

lack of knowledge and highlight awareness of potential risks. Such informative

artefacts may also aid the advice given by the CFA. However, this poses privacy

and security risks for non-permanent residents (for example, sharing informa-

tion on non-permanent dwellings may increase likeliness of break-ins), which

needs to be considered carefully.

Fig. 13: Diagram of person-to-person talking, facilitated by design artefacts and scaffolding.

12

Due to the dynamic, interactive and participatory activities, the visualisation

and scenario exercises were allocated a time-frame of 45 minutes each. How-

ever, feedback from the participants and our general observation indicates that

the exercise could have been more effective if it was given a longer time-span.

This would mean a longer event (the one we ran took two and a half hours in

total), which then begins to impact on participants’ level of fatigue and time-

commitment. The elderly ladies had already found the time-duration too long

for their comfort. Balancing the activities and considering alternative strategies

to help people stay fresh, active and engaged will need to be explored further.

Evidence now shows that, despite the effectiveness of distributing information

to a wide audience, this method alone is not enough to increase people’s pre-

paredness for bushfire (Robinson 2003). This is also reported in the hazards field

that provision of information is not directly related to the adoption of hazards

adjustment (Brenkert-Smith 2010). Irrespective of clear, accessible information

displayed on websites or receiving brochures on household preparation, many

residents we have spoken with have voiced that these have not led them to

be more proactive towards bushfire preparation. Similarly, designed artefacts,

due to its authority, tangibility and durability, can provide a false perception

that they can become the primary engagement device between people. There

is a danger when this false perception and security leads to such devices and

processes replacing human-to-human engagement. We observed that designed

artefacts such as the posters or postcards we trialed, are not effective methods

when solely relied upon to prompt or facilitate engagement between people.

Without people’s commitment and desire to being ambassadors on bushfire

preparation, the postcards merely become ‘promotional’ items to be passed on,

without much personal value, among the networks and potentially ignored. In

hindsight, the postcards would have been far more effective in its role, had they

been distributed by participants who came to the bushfire awareness workshop.

Through their attendance and knowledge sharing, they would’ve understood

the criticality of neighbour-to-neighbour conversations in mitigating bushfire

risk. Intangible, informal and ephemeral conversations between people needs

to take centre-place in any design strategy and engagement activity (Fig. 11).

Our research demonstrates that designed artefacts, whether they are posters,

postcards, Playful Triggers or scenario cards are ‘scaffolds’ for engagement.

Their role is to support, enable and accelerate the primary interaction, which is

person-to-person.

With any dynamic, participatory, grass-roots initiative, frequent repetition of

such events are time and human resource-intensive, which raises the question

of how it can be funded, resourced and sustained. These are issues that need to

be discussed and negotiated among relevant stakeholders, such as the Bushfire

CRC, RMIT University, CFA and community organisations.

13

Conclusion - potential ways forward

The process of raising awareness to lead to effective bushfire preparedness

depends on various factors that can encounter significant obstacles, requiring a

dynamic and multi-layered approach to community awareness and engagement.

Our exploration of fostering knowledge sharing in a social context through a va-

riety of design methods could be developed further, in parallel with more formal

methods initiated by the CFA. Our team are continuing discussions with the CFA

and, in particular with the DSE on their program on ‘strategic conversations’ that

have fruitful synergies with our approach.

From our research perspective, a trial of this event reveals potential benefit for a

hands-on, participatory engagement that is initiated and promoted by a com-

munity organisation, such as SOLN and Otway Health. Importance of leadership

at the community level has been reported in Bushfire CRC (see Goodman, Stevens

& Rowe 2009). The role of community networks has been critical in gaining trust

and engaging them in bushfire awareness. A community initiative of this kind

could be a complementary avenue that could be explored as long as a collabora-

tive approach with the CFA /CFG could be maintained. We recommend that the

connection between formal and informal organisations be strengthened.

There is untapped potential at the community level for households to learn from

and assist one another. We observed that some participants were more engaged,

actively talked to others and therefore were more willing to share their knowl-

edge of people and landscape. Such residents could be likely candidates to be-

come ‘community champions’, providing leadership and partnership with com-

munity organisations and the CFA volunteers. With more formal knowledge input

and facilitation training, these well-prepared, social residents of the community

could encourage knowledge exchange with their less prepared neighbours and

other community members. For example, one such ‘champion’ is Rob who knew

everyone’s fire plan on his street, and he was generally known in the community

as a proactive volunteer on numerous issues and events. Rob planned to relocate

an elderly couple to a caravan in his backyard during Code Red days. Such ‘com-

munity champions’ could provide leverage to tap into and influence community

network groups. Their passion, optimism and general effervescent characteristic

could help break through some of the obstacles regarding mistrust and apathy.

Informal social processes are important mechanisms for spreading information,

yet its critical role lacks recognition in bushfire communication. Brenkert-Smith’s

(2010) research on communities in Colorado on bushfire mitigation indicate that

Fig 14: Synthesis of data of Skenes Creek from the visualisation activities. This map can be used to strengthen bushfire plans among neighbours.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank and acknowledge the invaluable input by the following

people: Aurel Dessewffy, Simon Pockley, Susan Pockley, Anna O’Brien, Katherine

Cust, Michelle Gilmore, John Fien, Gerald Elsworth, Kaye Stevens, Denise Hooke,

Alan Huggins and Tony Coyle. This research has been funded by the School of

Media and Communication, Design Research Institute, RMIT University and the

Bushfire CRC.

References:

Akama , Y, Cooper, R, Vaughan, L, Viller, S, Simpson, M & Yuille, J. (2007). ‘Show and tell: Accessing and communication implicit knowl-edge through artefacts, Artifact Journal, vol. 1, no. 3, pp.172-181.

Balcombe, L., Cottrell, A., & Newton, J. (2008). ‘Awareness of bushfire risk - Tamborine mountain case study’, Fire Note, Bushfire CRC, Issue 20.

Brenkert-Smith, H. (2010) Building bridges to fight fire: the role of informal social interactions in six Colorado wildland-urban interface communities, International Journal of Wildland Fire, 19, pp. 689-697.

Gilbert, J. (2005). An evaluation of the Street FireWise Community Education Program in the Blue Mountains, New South Wales, Bushfire CRC, pp. 1-3

Gilbert, J., & Marsh, G. (2009). Final report: BRAG (Bushfire Ready Action Group) in Western Australia: Three evaluative case studies: Bushfire CRC / RMIT University.

Gladwell, M. (2000). The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Little, Brown and Company, Boston.

Goodman, H., Stevens, K., & Rowe, C. (2009). Mt Bold Case Study: Bushfire CRC / RMIT University.

Gray, D. Black Saturday cost $4.4 billion. The Age (1st August 2010). Accessed on 24 September 2010 from http://www.theage.com.au/ victoria/black-saturday-cost-44-billion-20100801-11116.html

Loi, D. (2005). The Book of Probes. Lavoretti Per Bimbi: Playful Triggers as key to foster collaborative practices and workspaces where people learn, wonder and play. RMIT University, Melbourne.

Magsino, S. L. (2009). Applications of Social Network Analysis for Building Community Disaster Resilience: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academic Press.

Rhodes, A., & Goodman, H. (2005). Where there’s smoke there’s fire - isn’t there? Understanding community response to the threat of the Eyre Peninsula bushfire, Bushfire CRC.

Robinson, L. (2003). Education for resilience: Community safety com-munication for natural hazards. Accessed on 8th August 2009 from http://www.enablingchange.com.au/Resilience_and_risk.pdf

Sanders, E. B. (2002). ‘Scaffolds for Experiencing in the New Design Space’. Information Design. Graphic-sha Publishing, Institute for Information Design Japan.

Teague, B., McLeod, R., & Pascoe, S. (2009), Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission Interim Report (Chapter 1). Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne.

Teague, B., McLeod, R., & Pascoe, S. (2010) Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission Final Report Summary. Parliament of Victoria, Melbourne.

knowledgeable neighbours, who share the same risk, can often be more trusted,

relied upon and become sources of vital information, than the experts. Her study

reveals that many of these permanent residents become interpreters and con-

solidators of information, tailoring and detailing the information to enable it to

become immediately applicable to the neighbouring property and local environ-

ment. However, Brenkert-Smith also explains that such knowledgeable permanent

residents may not be fully aware of the critical role they play in disseminating in-

formation. We see that the informal, one-to-one interactions between non-experts,

which often happens serendipitously across the fence-line or when collecting the

post, can be potential opportunities for further research. For example, the postcard

method could be extended to facilitate conversations on bushfire preparation, by

equipping knowledgeable permanent residents and supporting their self-aware-

ness of the critical role they play in the community.

Mapping of residents (Fig. 14), obstacles and environment of specific local areas is

a collective form of data that cannot be accessed in any other way. It is generally

acknowledged that many of the houses in the Southern Otways were built without

‘council approval’, and are not registered on their database. As such, information

regarding their occupation is also unrecorded. This research has now obtained first-

hand, locally-specific knowledge that can be used and shared by the community.

With our partner organisations, we have discussed how the data captured from

the workshops can be built upon and extended through more input. Our initial

discussion identified several potential avenues. Maps of this kind could be devel-

oped further by a community of place by aggregating and updating information

regarding people, households, topography and any other relevant details. It can be

used to complement CFG activities, visualise phone trees, denote households who

plan to relocate or defend, or designate ‘safe-houses’ for collective evacuation. In

short, these maps can become place-holders and catalyst to plan collective bush-

fire strategies among neighbourhoods. Furthermore, with consent from the partici-

pants, this data could potentially be shared with telecommunication and network

organisations that could look into addressing technological and communication

obstacles facing the topography of the area.

14