Build back better principles for economic recovery: Case study of the Victorian bushfires.

Journal of business continuity & emergency planning 01/2012; 6(2):164-73.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This paper looks at developing build back better (BBB) principles for economic recovery using the 2009 Victorian bushfires in Australia as a case study. The concept behind BBB-based economic recovery is to rejuvenate the economy in disaster-affected communities along with rebuilding to create resilient sustainable communities. A review of the literature identified several principles that can be applied to economic recovery to build back better. Data were collected in 2010 and 2011 by conducting semi- structured interviews with stakeholders who were directly involved in the Victorian bushfires recovery efforts, along with reports and other documentation. The recovery in Victoria displayed the use of BBB-based initiatives for economic recovery. The successes and shortcomings contributed to the creation of a modified list of BBB principles for economic recovery, including: creating an economic strategy based on thorough data collection; providing effective funding through grants and flexible low-interest loans; establishing business advice and mentoring services; providing incentives for businesses; assisting speedy rebuilding of business buildings; providing subsidised employee training and up-skilling programmes; and promoting local businesses through advertising.

  • Source
    Environment Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 09/2008; 50(5):36-47. DOI:10.3200/ENVT.50.5.36-47 · 1.35 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The provision of humanitarian aid at times of disaster in multi-ethnic community settings may lead to conflict, tension and even the widening of the distance between various ethnic groups. That aid agencies distribute humanitarian aid directly to affected communities, to speed up recovery, may often lead to chaos and the intensification of ethnic sentiments. The new distribution mechanisms introduced for the delivery of tsunami aid in Ampara District, Sri Lanka, did not recognise local networks and the culture of the ethnically mixed community setting. This paper analyses post-tsunami aid distribution in Ampara and shows how such an extemporised effort in an ethnically cognisant context increased ethnic division, inequality and disorder, while marginalising the poor segments of the affected population. It recommends the inclusion of local networks in aid dissemination as a measure for improving ethnic neutrality and social harmony in disaster-hit multi-ethnic communities.
    Disasters 09/2008; 33(2):253-73. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01073.x · 0.69 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The 26 December 2004 tsunami disaster around the Indian Ocean provided an opportunity to see if decades of knowledge and experience on post-disaster settlement and shelter could be applied to match the tagline which many groups gave to the post-tsunami reconstruction: ‘build back better’ (or ‘building back better’). This paper uses evidence from field work completed on implementing settlement and shelter in post-tsunami Aceh and Sri Lanka to examine whether or not the theory and practice of ‘build back better’ were witnessed. Focusing on settlement and shelter, four areas are examined: (i) safety, security, and livelihoods; (ii) how post-disaster settlement and shelter could have an improved connection with permanent housing and communities (the ‘transition to what?’ question); (iii) fairness and equity; and (iv) connecting relief and development by tackling root causes of vulnerability. Based on the field work, addressing these four areas is suggested as how ‘build back better’ could be implemented. Recommendations are1Community involvement is essential, but that does not necessarily mean community control.2Organizations involved in implementing transitional settlement and shelter need to consider their capacity and links to other sectors.3Thinking ahead is necessary by integrating relief and development through long-term planning and disaster risk reduction.Overall, ‘building back safer’ might be a preferable tagline to ‘building back better’ because ‘better’ has multiple interpretations, many of which caused further problems, whereas ‘safer’ provides a clearer goal on which to focus for post-disaster settlement and shelter.
    Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 02/2008; 16(1):24 - 36. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-5973.2008.00529.x


Available from
Nov 13, 2014