Recovery, Renewal, Resilience

In 2018, The Queensland Reconstruction Authority[1] began a transformational initiative to develop “locally led, co-designed regional resilience strategies to support the coordination and prioritisation of future resilience building and mitigation projects across Queensland”[2]. The initiative was recognised by the UN’s Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) Sendai Framework Voluntary Commitments platform[3]. The aim is to ensure that by 2022, “every region across Queensland will be involved in a locally-led and regionally-coordinated blueprint to strengthen disaster resilience”. While the strategy was implemented prior to COVID-19, it has lots to offer those currently planning regional and local Recovery Strategies and Renewal Initiatives post-COVID-19.

The regional resilience strategies incorporate an integrated planning approach[4] involving multiple professional and stakeholder groups. The key elements contained in each strategy include:

• “physical and mental health;
• structural mitigation;
• land-use planning;
• building practices;
• economic continuity;
• disaster response;
• landscape management;
• essential infrastructure;
• community awareness and resilience”.

Each strategy will be supported by local resilience action plans to guide implementation of resilience pathways[5]. The aim for local resilience action plans are to:

• “Address local needs within the context of the regional strategic imperatives;
• Draw regional connections and commonalities;
• Increase local government capacity and capability;
• Support local government with day-to-day activities;
• Identify risk-informed projects;
• Identify integration pathways”.

Although developed at regional level, the strategies aim to be “flexible and scalable, so that they can be adapted to changing contexts and tailored to specific community needs”. The initiative supports capacity building to develop local and regional capabilities as well as to coordinate support from other regions and the state. The initiative has prioritised the development of resilience strategies that closely align to available resources and funding. We provide details on two regional strategies and related case studies below:

Central West Queensland Regional Resilience Strategy[6]

The Central West Queensland Resilience Strategy is centred on “new possibilities” through aligning the objectives of economic development, resilience and climate adaption to mitigate the region’s exposure to the impacts of climate variability and uncertainty.

The strategy offers local case studies in disaster recovery, health and economic resilience. For example:

• The 2019 Monsoon Trough devastated the Winton Shire area. Local government and the community implemented the ‘Winton shire community-led recovery’ plan. The plan put the ‘Neighbourhood Centre’ staff as the central point of contact for community-led recovery, allowing “locals to speak with a local” – so residents got recovery support from other local people who were familiar with the area and the communities values
• The ‘Head Yakka’ programme focused on partnership working between local governments, communities and not-for-profit organisations, for the mental health and wellbeing of outback communities. ‘Head Yakka’ is a “place-based” and “engagement-based” program that capitalizes on existing community networks
• ‘The Lake Dunn Sculpture Trail’, an organically created local tourism project showcasing the innovation and creative spirit of local communities. This project transitioned a local venture into an international tourist attraction

Mary Regional Resilience Strategy[7]

The Mary Regional Resilience Strategy takes a “multi-hazard approach to the varied aspects of disaster resilience, noting that many resilience-building measures and activities are often multi-dimensional”.

The strategy offers case study examples of recovery and resilience building initiatives. For example:

• ‘Get Ready Generation Z’, a workshop run in partnership between local school leaders and regional and local councils, focused on educating young people on the foundations of local resilience. The workshop also gave local young people the opportunity to share their personal stories on being a resilient member of a resilient community. The workshop inspired young people to outline their criteria for community resilience
• Regional community-focused readiness workshops, facilitated by local authorities, enabling community groups to share information and insights on community assets and capabilities available in the event of an emergency
• ‘Remembering our history’, an initiative that documents the history of local natural hazard events. Markers, plaques and public art installations support remembrance and commemoration of past events, their impact on community recovery, and record historical events

[1] https://www.preventionweb.net/organization/queensland-reconstruction-authority

[2] https://sendaicommitments.undrr.org/commitments/20210223_001

[3] https://sendaicommitments.undrr.org/

[4] A multi-hazard approach that involves the integration of “all aspects of the disaster management cycle including preparedness, response, recovery and prevention”. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/14348_14348SheshKafleICBRR2010.pdf

[5] E.g. A climate-resilient pathway can include “strategies, choices and actions” that mitigate climate change and its effects, the design and implementation of effective disaster and risk management practices. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/5_warner.pdf

[6]https://www.qra.qld.gov.au/regional-resilience-strategies/central-west-regional-resilience-strategy

[7]https://www.qra.qld.gov.au/maryregion

Throughout the pandemic, the media has played a critical role in communicating aspects of crisis management, containment and response. A further opportunity may lie in harnessing the current levels of public engagement that have been developed through COVID-19 response to drive a new narrative. Consider the potential for media communications to:

• Support and drive a national recovery and renewal narrative that focuses on the next steps, generates awareness and interest from the public and builds a collective national effort to recover and renew from COVID-19 (as was highly effective for response and the recruitment of volunteers)
• Clearly communicate who is responsible for recovery and renewal priorities, what these priorities are and why, and how citizens should be encouraged to participate in recovery and renewal efforts
• Generate public interest in specific topics/recovery areas to encourage donations/funding for organisations that are working to create societal changes that reduce inequalities
• Local government and voluntary organisations can utilize the media to engage the government and public in societal changes that are crucial, through agenda setting, i.e. influencing public interest and the importance placed on certain topics through the deliberate coverage of certain topics/issues. Agenda setting has been found to influence public agendas, spending/funding generation and policies, with the media prompting policymakers to take action and satisfy the public's interest
• Generate funding by mobilising a local and national community of supporters

Previous issues of TMB have detailed Impact and Needs Assessments (Issue 8,15 and 32) to collect information about effects, impacts and opportunities from the crisis alongside pre-crisis needs. These can be used to create an overall understanding from which recovery and renewal strategies can be developed and actioned. TMB Issue 9discussed the recovery actions that can follow an Impact and Needs Assessment, such as recovering operations and preparedness. In light of the most recent lockdown and the updates that may be made to Impact and Needs Assessments, we revisit the discussion on what the next steps could be. Consider:

• Identify the effects, impacts and opportunities to inform the development of transactional recovery strategies and transformational renewal initiatives. For example, for the opportunity of 'enhancing community resilience; the local resilience capabilities that have been to active and effective during COVID-19';
  • Transactional recovery: Identify community initiatives that will deliver the strategic priorities of the recovery partnership, increase collaboration, assess the need to fund those using existing resources, and measure their impact on the partnership's performance
  • Transformational renewal: Repurpose community liaison officers to work with selected communities and foster connections, secure seed funding for their self-generated activities, and focus on rebalancing inequalities and other partnership aims
• Review each theme identified through the Impact and Needs Assessment in collaboration with relevant partners to assess the feasibility of achieving the desired effects
• Forecast the capacity and capabilities required to delivery on actions - draw on existing/recruit additional resources
• Identify the duration and effort required to establish and deliver actions
• Assess the impacts that may occur from pursuing recovery actions, compared with not pursuing them
• Specify data for monitoring and evaluating, for example:
  • Renewal objective: Increase capacity
  • Outcome indicator: Build community awareness and understanding of potential risks and impacts of emergencies
  • Measure: Proportion of people who understand warnings (tested through risk preparedness exercises with the community)

Strong collaboration between local government and their partners, communities and local businesses is required to anticipate challenges in the aftermath of COVID-19. Further, co-operation in the design of recovery strategies is critical to ensure communities are engaged and empowered in their recovery. Recovery strategies will need to be tailored to address the diversity of impacts and needs of different communities. Consider how to:

• Conduct an impact assessment to identify where COVID-19 has created effects, impacts and opportunities (see TMB 8) - and identify which of these impacts will bring longer-term challenges in recovery
• Refresh impact assessments with updated information as other effects, impacts and opportunities become known
• Identify other challenges that lie ahead as we progress to living with COVID
• Review what planning is required and what partnerships will support recovery:
  • Define recovery goals in partnership with the community and local organisations, and account for the need to measure progress and outcomes in the future
  • Plan for the need to adapt/pivot and establish new local resources, services and programmes to address pre-existing, new and emerging needs of communities, e.g. infrastructure planning to address housing supply challenges/employment programmes for young people
  • Maintain and enhance partnerships that have been developed through the pandemic, by bringing these partners together to co-produce plans and actions to address the new and emerging challenges
• Identify logistical and operational challenges that may occur as continuous management of the virus is required
• Review lessons from previous phases of track and trace/vaccination programmes, recognise the challenges, such as people not responding to track and trace or vaccine hesitancy, and prepare strategies to address these (see TMB 31)
• Manage the expectations of communities, to ensure that they understand that potential future outbreaks may mean restrictions may be re-introduced
• Review communication strategies for previous localised restrictions, consult with local partners on their effectiveness

Vaccination certification for COVID-19, sometimes referred to as immunity/vaccine passports, are being considered by some countries as a strategy to relax the strict measures that have been imposed on society over the last year. The document is designed to certify people as immune to COVID-19 based on vaccination. Consider the ethical issues associated with varying restrictions on individual liberties based on possession of a vaccine certificate. Consider:

• If a vaccination certification programme could cause unequal treatment of individuals by segregating members of society into different tiers of infection risk and contagiousness, for example:
  • Members of groups who live with systemic discrimination and marginalization may face more barriers to accessing particular areas of society or activities if they are not certified as vaccinated
  • Differences in exposure, access to health care and vaccination certification may lead to some groups having higher or lower proportions of vaccine-certified people
• If the application of vaccination certification should only be used with existing precautions and should not prevent non-vaccine certified people from accessing areas or activities, e.g. people who have not received a vaccination certificate should not be prevented from travelling but may be required to take a test/quarantine on arrival as per the existing precautionary measure
• Whether vaccinations certifications should:
  • Impact a person's ability to exercise fundamental rights such as voting, accessing and social care or education
  • Cause an increase in cost or burden for vaccine-certified individuals, e.g. frontline healthcare workers who are vaccination certified should not be expected to manage more work
• If the perceived benefits of vaccine certifications could increase the risk of people increasing their exposure to intentionally become infected and receive a certificate, which poses risks to an increase in community spread and could potentially cause harm to others
• The perceived value of vaccine certificates and counterfeit market activity/certificates
• How to mitigate implementation risks, e.g. certification being managed by certified bodies, results being processed and confirmed by licensed laboratories, and certificates being issued by health authorities
• To protect personal data and minimize breaches of confidentiality, legal and regulatory measures should be put in place to limit the access to data by governmental authorities

The success of the vaccine programme will, in part, depend on how many people accept the vaccine. The prevailing narrative in a country may influence those who are anxious about the vaccine or uncertain about whether they should have it. Often there are vocal groups in support of, and in opposition to, vaccines and those groups are already very active around COVID-19. Governments will be a main facilitator of vaccine programmes so (in collaboration with partners) should consider addressing voices that oppose vaccine programmes. WHO provides guidelines for responding to vaccine deniers, including broad principles for health authority spokespersons on how to behave when confronted. The principles are based on psychological research on persuasion, public health, communication studies, and on WHO risk communication guidelines. The WHO guidelines cover:

• Tactics by vocal vaccine deniers e.g. skew science, shift hypothesis, censor, and attack opposition
• Who is the target for advocating vaccines i.e. the public are your audience, not the vaccine deniers
• The speaker should represent the well-grounded scientific consensus
• Verbal and nonverbal skills, and listening skills
• Do's and don'ts of verbal and nonverbal communication
• Constructing the argument to support vaccination

Interface management considers how to streamline communication, monitor progress and mitigate risks when working with multiple contractors, subcontractors, and clients. This is particularly important during COVID-19 where the government may set out its requirements in contracts, but the actual delivery of a service is done through third parties. One example where effective interface management failed was in the outsourcing of a security firm to supervise quarantined travellers in a hotel in Victoria, Australia. The firm were asked to undertake their 'normal' tasks monitoring movement, alongside biohazard containment which required extensive specialised training they did not have - ultimately leading to widespread transmission of COVID-19. Given the number of outsourced services (e.g. in transportation, security, and health), consideration should be given to the new ways in which service delivery and health merge:

• Evaluate what can reasonably be expected from a contractor given their expertise and resources and provide additional training or resources to ensure COVID-safe services are delivered
• Ensure agreements, resources and expectations for COVID-safe provision are discussed and understood by all parties involved in delivering a service e.g. from government to outsourced supply chains
• Evaluate the impacts of performance-based metrics for services against short and long-term risks to delivery and to health
• Consider who is responsible for 'regular risks' (e.g. costs, lateness and cancellations of services etc.) during COVID-19 and who should manage the public health risks -ensure regular updates are communicated amongst all parties to provide an informed approach of regular and COVID risk and where they converge

The outbreak of COVID-19 has resulted in countries closing their borders at short notice, and the suspension or severe curtailing of transport. These measures have implications for those who are not in their country of residence including those working, temporarily living, or holidaying abroad. At the time of the first outbreak, over 200,000 EU citizens were estimated to be stranded outside of the EU, and faced difficulties returning home[1].

As travel restrictions for work and holidays ease amidst the ongoing pandemic, but as the possibility of overnight changes to such easements, there is an increased need to consider how repatriations may be managed. This includes COVID-safe travel arrangements for returning citizens, the safety of staff, and the effective test and trace of those returning home. Facilitating the swift and safe repatriation of people via evacuation flights or ground transport requires multiple state and non-state actors. Significant attention has been given to the amazing efforts of commercial and chartered flights in repatriating citizens, but less focus has been paid to the important role that emergency services can play in supporting repatriation efforts.

In the US, air ambulance teams were deployed to support 39 flights, repatriating over 2,000 individuals. Air ambulance teams were able to supplement flights and reduced over reliance on commercial flights for repatriations (a critique of the UK response[2]). This required monumental effort from emergency service providers. After medical screening or treatment at specific facilities, emergency services (such as police) helped to escort people to their homes to ensure they had accurate public health information and that they understood they should self-isolate.

Authorities should consider how to work with emergency services to develop plans for COVID-19 travel scenarios, to better understand how to capitalise on and protect the capacity and resources of emergency services. Consider how to:

• Develop emergency plans that include a host of emergency service personnel who have technical expertise, and know their communities. Plans should[3]:
  • Be trained and practiced
  • Regularly incorporate best practices gained from previous lessons learned
• Build capacity in emergency services to support COVID-19 operations through increased staffing and resources
• Anticipate and plan for adequate rest periods for emergency service staff before they go back on call during an emergency period
• Protect emergency service staff. Pay special attention to safe removal and disposal of PPE to avoid contamination, including use of a trained observer[4] / “spotter”[5] who:
  • is vigilant in spotting defects in equipment;
  • is proactive in identifying upcoming risks;
  • follows the provided checklist, but focuses on the big picture;
  • is informative, supportive and well-paced in issuing instructions or advice;
  • always practices hand hygiene immediately after providing assistance

Consideration can also be given to what happens to repatriated citizens when they arrive in their country of origin. In Victoria (Australia), research determined that 99% of COVID-19 cases since the end of May could be traced to two hotels housing returning travellers in quarantine[6]. Lesson learnt from this case suggest the need to:

• Ensure clear and appropriate advice for any personnel involved in repatriation and subsequent quarantine of citizens
• Ensure training modules for personnel specifically relates to issues of repatriation and subsequent quarantine and is not generalised. Ensure training materials are overseen by experts and are up-to-date
• Strategically use law enforcement (and army personnel) to provide assistance to a locale when mandatory quarantine is required
• Be aware that some citizens being asked to quarantine may have competing priorities such as the need to provide financially.
• Consider how to understand these needs and provide localised assistance to ensure quarantine is not broken

References:

[1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/649359/EPRS_BRI(2020)649359_EN.pdf

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53561756

[3] https://ancile.tech/how-to-manage-repatriation-in-a-world-crisis/

[4] https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/hcp/ppe-training/trained-observer/observer_01.html

[5] https://www.airmedicaljournal.com/article/S1067-991X(20)30076-6/fulltext

[6] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/18/hotel-quarantine-linked-to-99-of-victorias-covid-cases-inquiry-told

To read this case study in its original format follow the source link below to TMB Issue 21 (p.20-21)

To prepare for the impact of a natural disaster alongside COVID-19, research should focus on modelling natural hazards beside epidemiological risks. This can inform public health responses to manage, for example, the dual challenges of dealing with the effects of flooding and preventing localised COVID-19 outbreaks). Consider pre-emptive strategies to counter the compounded risks of COVID-19 and natural hazards:

• Identify possible pandemic-natural disaster hybrid scenarios including worst-case scenarios
• Work with multiple organisations to build new hybrid forecast models that combine existing pandemic projection models and natural hazard forecasting
• Consider seasonal weather forecasting models in advance and their impact on transmission and health and response capacity
• Re-design response plans to focus on COVID-19 restrictions e.g. impacts on emergency aid distribution, involvement of volunteers, access to PPE, providing shelter, food distribution
• Exercise the impact of concurrent emergencies to identify key learning and integrate that learning refreshing plans in the light of COVID-19

In Melbourne (Australia), residents of a tower block on hard lockdown put together an information sheet for the predominantly non-English speaking community to explain the government's measures. The information sheet was translated into ten written, and five oral languages within 24 hours. The information sheet was then distributed among residents within the tower via text and WhatsApp and to community networks to help disseminate government messaging to communities more widely. Consider:

• Assessing whether your organisation has information translated sufficiently for the communities it interacts with
• How to effectively disseminate information to marginalised communities, and the networks most adept at doing this
• How to engage with networks that can access marginalised people in their communities, through religious or social networks to assess if needs are being met and if information is being received and understood
• The efficiency of utilising community networks to identify different languages and cultures, and their proficiency in translating key public health messages

Cognitive bias affect how events are remembered and how people behave, so can influence decision-making that can impact recovery. For example, not showing symptoms of COVID-19 may lead people to think that they are immune or won't infect others. Other cognitive bias is related to people's selectivity about what they pay attention to and so what they do in response to public health advice. Cognitive bias may be mitigated by:

• Communicating testimonials and stories to challenge thinking about practices that are safe and unsafe
• Sharing transparent and consistent information across all platforms to reduce misinformation and distrust
• Providing easy to find information through mechanisms such as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) to reduce ambiguity

Providing information that supports collective action so people feel they are part of solving the problem

This lesson was contributed by a Risk Manager in Australia during project data collection.

For example, the CovidSafe App in Australia:

• Alarmed and confused users with a message saying they had coronavirus, despite not being tested
• Suffered from hoaxes and phishing scams to retrieve people's personal information. For example, a text to users claiming to be from the government purported a new coronavirus contact-tracing app

Government may consider an industry-led recovery that draws on close partnerships with industry leaders to re-evaluate local, regional and national legislation on business applications to facilitate recovery. This may include making applications for businesses easier, easing legislation and increased legal support for businesses to expedite business renewal.

This lesson was contributed by a Risk Manager in Australia during project data collection.

By circulating through social media, encrypted messaging services, online discussion boards and face to face interaction. To achieve this, organisations might consider:

• Identifying fake news and actively debunking it on own social media accounts and public display boards
• Closely monitor automated systems for errors. In Australia the CovidSafe App alarmed and confused users with a message telling them that they had contracted coronavirus when trying to upload their information, despite not being tested. Additionally, in Ukraine, residents attacked busses with evacuees from China after a hoax email falsely attributed to the Ministry of Health suggested some carried the virus
• Supporting the public to think critically about, question and fact-check information they receive
• Working with community leaders to circulate useful, accurate information
• Monitoring and evaluating the impact of their own communication strategy, possibly working with partners such as universities to undertake social media analytics

In Australia there is a highly organised and well-tested communications system that utilises standard emergency communications procedures used for other disasters such as forest fires. Australian risk managers highlighted two issues which may be useful for others.

In order to deliver efficient and effective communication during an emergency, an understanding of how the public perceives and receives this information; awareness of cognitive bias , which shapes the way people understand the information provided to them, is needed[1]. Cognitive bias impacts decision-making as a result of how events are remembered by individuals and influences behaviours that can impact recovery. For example, not showing symptoms of COVID-19 and therefore believing you are immune or won’t infect others. Other cognitive bias is related to people’s selectivity about what they pay attention to which has implications for retaining and enacting public health advice. This may be mitigated by:

• Communicating testimonials and stories to challenge peoples thinking about practices that are safe and unsafe
• Sharing transparent and consistent information across all platforms to reduce misinformation and distrust
• Providing easy to find information through mechanisms such as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) to reduce ambiguity
• Providing information that supports collective action towards a solution so people feel they are part of solving the problem and understand that change is required

To addresses some of these biases, health messaging experts in Australia called for:

• Effective use of television streaming services, social media and news services, rather than use of posters that had unclear messages and images
• More effective communications from politicians that answer questions in snappy sentences rather than long answers where people become confused or lose interest, and consistent slogans like Australia’s ‘Help stop the spread and stay healthy’.
• Engaging and emotive video advertising that highlight the impact individual’s actions can have on others such as their loved ones[2]

In addition, trust and transparency were seen as important. This requires:

• Openness about data collection and the source of that data
• Information that is shared in a “fearless and transparent” [3] way to provide open, real-time information. This was also seen in Korea and was attributed to them swiftly and successfully flattening the curve[4].
• Government to consistently share information to media outlets, and for media outlets to responsibly use verified information to reduce public speculation[5].
• Use of known and trusted mechanisms for the public to access information[6], such as those already set up in Australia for disasters
  

References:

[1] Risk Manager 1

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/mar/24/australia-is-crying-out-for-clearer-messaging-on-coronavirus-rambling-politicians-told

[3] Risk Manager 1

[4] Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00740-y

[5] Risk Manager 1

[6] Risk Manager 2

The original format of this case study (including references) can be read in the source link below (p.15).