Natural hazard resilient communities and land use planning: the limitations of planning governance in tropical Australia

S. Harwood, D. Carson, Ed Wensing, L. Jackson
{"title":"Natural hazard resilient communities and land use planning: the limitations of planning governance in tropical Australia","authors":"S. Harwood, D. Carson, Ed Wensing, L. Jackson","doi":"10.4172/2167-0587.1000130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines how two Australian land use planning systems address the creation of hazard resilient communities in tropical areas. The application of substantive hazard knowledge and how this influences the associated procedures within the planning system is examined. The case studies of Darwin the capital of the Northern Territory, and the beachside suburb of Machans Beach within the Cairns Regional Council in far north Queensland are investigated. Both case study locations have experienced tropical cyclones since settlement and despite their hazard prone locations, both have intensified over their 120 year existence. Moreover, it is predicted that cyclones in tropical Australia will decrease in number, but increase in intensity. It would be rational to assume that industry, community and government would actively pursue planning strategies to negate the risks of natural hazards and the corresponding level of vulnerability to a hazard event. However, neither communities nor planning are driven by rational technical decision making processes. The paper concludes that the rhetoric for creating hazard resilient communities dominates national and state government policy, however this has minimal influence upon the legal framework that protects development rights. It would appear that the safe development paradox is present in the Australian land use planning system, and that the focus of planning is on creating certainty of development rights and achieving efficiencies through urban settlement patterns, as opposed to creating hazard resilient communities.","PeriodicalId":233291,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geography & Natural Disasters","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geography & Natural Disasters","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0587.1000130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This paper examines how two Australian land use planning systems address the creation of hazard resilient communities in tropical areas. The application of substantive hazard knowledge and how this influences the associated procedures within the planning system is examined. The case studies of Darwin the capital of the Northern Territory, and the beachside suburb of Machans Beach within the Cairns Regional Council in far north Queensland are investigated. Both case study locations have experienced tropical cyclones since settlement and despite their hazard prone locations, both have intensified over their 120 year existence. Moreover, it is predicted that cyclones in tropical Australia will decrease in number, but increase in intensity. It would be rational to assume that industry, community and government would actively pursue planning strategies to negate the risks of natural hazards and the corresponding level of vulnerability to a hazard event. However, neither communities nor planning are driven by rational technical decision making processes. The paper concludes that the rhetoric for creating hazard resilient communities dominates national and state government policy, however this has minimal influence upon the legal framework that protects development rights. It would appear that the safe development paradox is present in the Australian land use planning system, and that the focus of planning is on creating certainty of development rights and achieving efficiencies through urban settlement patterns, as opposed to creating hazard resilient communities.
自然灾害复原社区和土地利用规划:澳大利亚热带地区规划治理的局限性
本文考察了澳大利亚的两个土地利用规划系统如何解决热带地区建立抗灾社区的问题。实质性危害知识的应用及其如何影响规划系统内的相关程序进行了审查。对北领地首府达尔文的案例研究,以及昆士兰北部凯恩斯地区委员会的Machans海滩郊区进行了调查。自定居以来,这两个案例研究地点都经历了热带气旋,尽管它们处于危险易发的位置,但在它们存在的120年里,这两个地点都加剧了。此外,预计热带澳大利亚的气旋数量将减少,但强度将增加。合理的假设是,工业、社区和政府将积极推行规划战略,以消除自然灾害的风险和对灾害事件的相应程度的脆弱性。然而,社区和规划都不是由理性的技术决策过程驱动的。这篇论文的结论是,建立抗灾社区的言论主导了国家和州政府的政策,然而,这对保护发展权的法律框架的影响微乎其微。澳大利亚土地使用规划系统中似乎存在安全发展悖论,规划的重点是通过城市定居模式创造开发权利的确定性和实现效率,而不是创建具有灾害抵御能力的社区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信