Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the importance of disaster waste management for remote and very remote regions of the Northern Territory. The project aimed to identify critical disaster waste management issues for a range of natural disasters, current limitations and challenges for disaster waste management in remote regions, and interventions required for effective disaster waste management in the future.
In order to address these aims, there were two key data collection activities: gathering data from existing literature on disaster waste management and conducting a series of stakeholder interviews regarding current policy practices, barriers and challenges and ways forward for improving disaster waste management. The review of literature from Australia and overseas allowed us to contextualise the study findings and inform on both the fieldwork and interpretation of the results. Both academic and grey literature highlighted the importance of early planning and having a disaster waste recovery plan before a disaster. It allowed us to list the types of waste generated in the remote communities during natural disasters, as well suggest ways of calculating volumes of that waste. The grey literature revealed that despite the urgent need to clear waste after an emergency, disaster waste management barely rates a mention in its own right, while essential services, usually referred to as encompassing telecommunications, power, water and sewerage, all receive consideration attention. Interviews with the stakeholders helped us explore the diverse perspectives of the stakeholders who play a role in disasters and disaster waste management.
The results identify the central and urgent need for the creation of a specific disaster waste management (DWM) plan for each community. These plans should be embedded within the 46 local Emergency Management Plans in the Northern Territory’s two emergency management areas. The establishment of these DWM plans will provide an effective and straightforward way to deal with the practical issues communities face, while larger structural and statutory/regulatory issues are developed appropriately. Both the literature review and fieldwork strongly indicated that a “cookie-cutter” approach was not appropriate for the development of DWM plans. Each community has its own unique geographic and socio-economic characteristics, as well as Indigenous languages and cultural practices, that contribute not only to that community’s capability and capacity to manage disaster waste, but also to the local cultural protocols that should be observed.
Data gathered for this study also suggests that the vertical integration of decision making for effective disaster waste management will be critical for risk minimisation when hazards strike. Given that ‘all disasters are local’ it is essential that key stakeholders are identified at the local level. In the three communities used as case studies there is an uneven spread of understanding of the DWM risk and the local capacities and responsibilities for dealing with it.
Investing in a DWM plan as part of a more comprehensive local Emergency Management Plan that recognises and supports development of that local capacity in business-as-usual (BAU) times will reduce vulnerability in times of crisis and contribute to more rapid response and recovery efforts. Including community nodes of competence, such as the Ranger groups that have developed in the last two decades, as well as other identified community members, in planning and practical activities such as pre- and post-cyclone clean ups is a positive step in engaging the local community. The degree to which residents can participate and feel empowered to be involved in a clean-up needs to be further explored.
Structurally, there is a shared recognition of the vagueness of the Local Government role in the EMPs. The 2008 Local Government reforms have not yet translated into a formal role explicitly recognized in the TEP. The inclusion of a clarified (and increased) role of Local Government in DWM plans would facilitate other measures important for response and recovery stages, including more strategic investment in both people (training, education, recruitment) and place (infrastructure and equipment).
In order to address these aims, there were two key data collection activities: gathering data from existing literature on disaster waste management and conducting a series of stakeholder interviews regarding current policy practices, barriers and challenges and ways forward for improving disaster waste management. The review of literature from Australia and overseas allowed us to contextualise the study findings and inform on both the fieldwork and interpretation of the results. Both academic and grey literature highlighted the importance of early planning and having a disaster waste recovery plan before a disaster. It allowed us to list the types of waste generated in the remote communities during natural disasters, as well suggest ways of calculating volumes of that waste. The grey literature revealed that despite the urgent need to clear waste after an emergency, disaster waste management barely rates a mention in its own right, while essential services, usually referred to as encompassing telecommunications, power, water and sewerage, all receive consideration attention. Interviews with the stakeholders helped us explore the diverse perspectives of the stakeholders who play a role in disasters and disaster waste management.
The results identify the central and urgent need for the creation of a specific disaster waste management (DWM) plan for each community. These plans should be embedded within the 46 local Emergency Management Plans in the Northern Territory’s two emergency management areas. The establishment of these DWM plans will provide an effective and straightforward way to deal with the practical issues communities face, while larger structural and statutory/regulatory issues are developed appropriately. Both the literature review and fieldwork strongly indicated that a “cookie-cutter” approach was not appropriate for the development of DWM plans. Each community has its own unique geographic and socio-economic characteristics, as well as Indigenous languages and cultural practices, that contribute not only to that community’s capability and capacity to manage disaster waste, but also to the local cultural protocols that should be observed.
Data gathered for this study also suggests that the vertical integration of decision making for effective disaster waste management will be critical for risk minimisation when hazards strike. Given that ‘all disasters are local’ it is essential that key stakeholders are identified at the local level. In the three communities used as case studies there is an uneven spread of understanding of the DWM risk and the local capacities and responsibilities for dealing with it.
Investing in a DWM plan as part of a more comprehensive local Emergency Management Plan that recognises and supports development of that local capacity in business-as-usual (BAU) times will reduce vulnerability in times of crisis and contribute to more rapid response and recovery efforts. Including community nodes of competence, such as the Ranger groups that have developed in the last two decades, as well as other identified community members, in planning and practical activities such as pre- and post-cyclone clean ups is a positive step in engaging the local community. The degree to which residents can participate and feel empowered to be involved in a clean-up needs to be further explored.
Structurally, there is a shared recognition of the vagueness of the Local Government role in the EMPs. The 2008 Local Government reforms have not yet translated into a formal role explicitly recognized in the TEP. The inclusion of a clarified (and increased) role of Local Government in DWM plans would facilitate other measures important for response and recovery stages, including more strategic investment in both people (training, education, recruitment) and place (infrastructure and equipment).
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Publisher | Charles Darwin University |
| Commissioning body | Northern Territory Department of the Chief Minister and Cabinet |
| Number of pages | 81 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 9789394080546 |
| Publication status | Published - Jan 2024 |
