The document outlines a zone emergency management planning framework designed to foster consistency, clarify responsibilities, and aid in strategic planning. It emphasizes a structured approach for stakeholder collaboration to efficiently identify and manage risks while adhering to established national guidelines. The framework details seven key steps for effective engagement and continuous improvement in risk management practices across various zones.

1. Planning Framework
An outcome focused tool which provides
consistency, articulates responsibilities,
and supports strategic planning.
Structured as a road map for
engagement and collaboration
- to build capability and resilience.
Reality based to support risk
comparisons, the prioritisation of
action, and resource lobbying.

2. Presentation Structure
Zone Emergency Management Planning
1. Why?
Why is a Zone Planning Framework useful?
2. Who?
Who should be on the working group?
3. How?
Seven key steps (enablers)

3. Why is a Zone “Emergency
Management Planning”
Framework useful?
Brainstorm
of Jan 2010
by Delphi
Group in a
planning
workshop

4. Assumption:
Aligned with the International Risk Management Standard
(1) What is the risk?
(detection)
(2) What does the risk mean?
(recognition and interpretation)
(3) Who has an interest ?
(communication to multiple stakeholders)
(4) Who should do what?
(organization of a collaborative system)

6. Planning Framework
An outcome focused tool which provides
consistency, articulates responsibilities,
and supports strategic planning.
Structured as a road map for
engagement and collaboration
- to build capability and resilience.
Reality based to support risk
comparisons, the prioritisation of
action, and resource lobbying.

7. Purpose
Zones will report annually (and as required by the State
Emergency Management Committee) on assurance through
the State Mitigation Advisory Group to the State Emergency
Management Committee.
To do this, Zones will
# engage with stakeholders
responsible for priority risks,
and
# report on the work being
undertaken in terms of how it
both aligns with and contributes
to a State-wide agreed risk
management framework.

8. The framework uses a “Steps” Approach
This recognises:
# Gaps between where
you are, and where you
need to be.
# That planning outcomes
are achieved
incrementally.
# The framework
needs to be built by
stakeholders in and for
their context.

9. Seven key steps - enablers
1. Establish a suitable group to do the work
2. Identify stakeholders
3. With the identified stakeholders, collect and
collate existing available Risk Assessments and
identify key risks to the region
4. Validate the quality of the existing, available Risk
Assessments against agreed criteria
5. Map (cross reference) the quality of the Risk
Assessments against stakeholder responsibility
6. Record a summary of all key risks and their
associated risk treatments
7. Report on a Continual Improvement Plan to the
State Mitigation Advisory Group

10. Step 1. Establish a suitable working group
Each Zone Emergency Management Committee
should identify an appropriate working group to
do the engagement and reporting outlined in the
purpose statement.
– Structuring should keep in mind that the role will
involve skills and attitudes to work with all of the
stakeholders responsible for and/or with an interest in
risks to the community in the Zone.
– For some Zones it may be appropriate for the whole
Zone Emergency Management Committee to
undertake the work as part of its general agenda. For
other Zones, it may be more appropriate to put
together a working group which reports to the full
committee.

11. Step 2. Identify Stakeholders
Stakeholders include several
types of organisations and
people.
First, there are those with
directly attributed
responsibility for the
management of the risk.
Second, there are those who
become involved in the
management of the risk They may have interests
because they are at risk or in hazard(s), in vulnerabilities
have an interest in the well or in exposures – in the
being of those things or technicalities or in the social
people that are at risk. aspects.

12. Recognise risk is a concept - used to give meaning
• to things, forces or circumstances
• that pose danger
• to people or to what they value.

13. Record / Register : State Hazard Leaders and Control Agencies are key stakeholders
of the first type. Councils while having some responsibilities, particularly related to
risks associated with flood hazard, represent a more general position concerned about
community vulnerability. Other agencies and organisations will emerge as the Zone
works through its list of key risk assessments and their associated risk treatments.
Engagement should be recorded and reported reflecting responsibilities e.g.:
e.g. ZONE A Assurance Element 1: Assurance Element 2: Assurance Element 3:
Stakeholder Established Context Assessed Risks Treated Risks
Register
Hazard 1 Stakeholder 1.1 Stakeholder 1.1 Stakeholder 1.1
Country Fire Service
(e.g. Bushfire) Stakeholder 1.2 Stakeholder 1.2
Stakeholder 1.2
Stakeholder 1.3 etc Stakeholder 1.3 etc
Stakeholder 1.3 etc
Hazard 2 Stakeholder 2.1 Stakeholder 2.1 Stakeholder 2.1
Department of Water
(e.g. Flood) Stakeholder 2.2 Stakeholder 2.2
Land and Biodiversity
Stakeholder 2.3 etc Stakeholder 2.3 etc
Stakeholder 2.2
Stakeholder 2.3 etc

14. Step 3 – Collect and Collate existing, available Risk
Assessments and identify key risks to the region.
# It is important to recognise that this does not require the
undertaking of Risk Assessments.
# It does require:
• working with the stakeholders listed in the Register
being developed in Step 2, and
• the systematic and thorough collection of existing,
available risk assessments
• understanding these may go under different names
o hazard analyses,
o impact assessments,
o threat assessments etc.

15. Step 3 – Collect and Collate existing, available Risk
Assessments and identify key risks to the region.
# A reasonable starting point is the list of hazards, reflected by
the list of hazard leaders, in the arrangements at State level.
# The focus of the risk identification is a general appreciation
of things which if they were to occur, would have a
significant impact on the Zone.
This requires an appreciation of both hazard and
vulnerability in the local context and can be readily
brainstormed with key players and validated with secondary
research (emails and phone calls to responsible parties).

16. A policy consideration - Available Zone Level Data
As State Government Regional Governance constructs, Zones are
recognised by State Agencies and the State Mitigation Advisory
Group.
The State Government’s Data and Information Availability Policy
describes a consistent whole-of-Government approach to data in all
forms.
Subject to prudent privacy and security measures, Government data
must be made available to the maximum extent that is legally and
economically possible.
The Office of the Chief Information Officer will facilitate timely and
accurate data provision to those responsible for risks and their
management and to Zone Emergency Management Committees,
through the office of the State Emergency Service, (at no cost) on:
a. hazards;
b. local/regionally relevant information related to the agreed “risk
assessment criteria” fields - viz. critical infrastructure / essential
services, environment, property, people, and economy
(“economy” should reference the fields of the Australian Bureau of
Statistics for Industry Sectors as proposed by the National
Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines.)

17. Step 4 – Validate the quality of Risk Assessments
This steps requires judgments to be made about the risk
assessments using “tests” of the following key aspects of the
National Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines (NERAG).
1. To what extent does the assessment use a self-
assessment of “confidence level”?
2. To what extent has a stakeholder agreed set of risk
assessment criteria based on, or developed with
reference to, NERAG been applied?
3. To what extent has the risk assessment included an
“adequacy assessment” to include the effectiveness of
current risk treatments?
4. To what extent has assessment used scenario analysis to
premise the interaction of hazard(s) with vulnerability?
5. To what extent does the assessment demonstrate a focus
on vulnerability?

18. Step 4, Element 1: Confidence Level
A statement of assumptions and confidence levels, using
the table below, should be included in risk assessments
to provide advice on uncertainty.
Where it is not included, it should be derived by enquiry
where possible and attributed using the table below.

19. Step 4, Element 2: Risk Assessment Criteria

20. Risk Assessment Criteria should reference the Nationally
agreed Emergency Risk Assessment Guidelines.

21. Zone Profiles should
INDUSTRY SECTORS
Elements at Risk
A Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing reference the agreed
B Mining
National Emergency
C Manufacturing
D Electricity, Gas, Water and Waste Services Risk Assessment
E Construction
F Wholesale Trade
Guidelines’
G Retail Trade Economy Metrics
H Accommodation and Food Services
I Transport, Postal and Warehousing Vulnerability /
J Information Media and Telecommunications
K Financial and Insurance Services
Resilience Profiles of
L Rental, Hiring and Real Estate Services
“Industry Sectors”
M Professional, Scientific and Technical Services
N Administrative and Support Services
O Public Administration and Safety
P Education and Training
Q Health Care and Social Assistance
R Arts and Recreation Services
S Other Services

22. Critical Infrastructure – has been defined as physical facilities,
supply chains, information technologies and communication
networks whose destruction, degradation or unavailability for an
extended period would significantly impact on the region’s social
or economic well being.
Metrics include:
1. Energy
2. Water
3. Communications
4. Food supply
5. Health
6. Transport
7. Banking
8. Industry
9. Key government services
10. Icons (of cultural significance)

23. Step 4, Element 3: Adequacy Assessment
Expand the pathways arrangements using
Part 1. Identify and note the current
the prompt list of “before” and “after” controls below.
Prevention and Preparedness Controls
Prevention/ Mitigation activities, which seek to eliminate or reduce the impact of hazards themselves and/or to
reduce the susceptibility and increase the resilience of the community subject to the impact of those hazards; Typical
Prevention/mitigation program activities may include:
• Building codes
• Building-use regulations
• Legislation
• Public education
• Public information
• Tax incentives/disincentives
• Insurance
• Incentives/disincentives
• Zoning/land-use management
• Infrastructure (development)
Preparedness activities, which establish arrangements and plans and provide education and information to prepare
the community to deal effectively with such emergencies and disasters as may eventuate; Typical Preparedness
program activities may include:
• Emergency response plans
• Warning systems
• Evacuation plans
• Emergency communications
• Mutual aid agreements
• Public education
• Public information
• Resource inventories
• Training programs
• Test exercises

24. “AFTER” CONTROLS - Response and Recovery
Expand the pathways
Response activities, which activate preparedness arrangements and plans to put in place effective measures to deal with
emergencies and disasters if and when they do occur; Typical Response program activities may include:
• Plan implementation
• Emergency declarations
• Warning messages
• Public information
• Registration and tracing
• Refuge shelters
• Inform higher authorities
• Activate coordination centres
• Evacuation
• Mobilize resources
• Damage assessment
• Search and rescue
• Provide medical support
• Institute public health measures
• Provide immediate relief
Recovery activities, which assist a community affected by an emergency or disaster in reconstruction of the physical
infrastructure and restoration of emotional, social, economic and physical well-being. Typical Recovery program activities
may include:
• Restore essential services
• Counselling programs
• Temporary housing
• Financial support/assistance
• Distribute recovery stores
• Public information
• Long-term medical support
• Manage public appeals
• Restore public assets
• Economic impact studies
• Review development plans
• Initiate reconstruction tasks

25. Step 4, Element 3: Adequacy Assessment
Part 2. For each existing treatment, attribute levels of control (1, 2, or 3)
across each of the three areas (Behavioural, Procedural, and Physical)
using the table below (Ref NERAG).

26. Step 4, Element 3: Adequacy Assessment
Confidence Assessment of levels ofagainst the
Part 3. For each existing treatment, attribute
adequacy improvement based on the level control
required
- consequence level of the risk assessment scenario.
Attribute adequacy
Consequence Level
Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Catastrophic
1
Level of 2
Control
3
KEY Adequacy likely to require improvement
Adequacy may require improvement
Adequacy likely to be appropriate

27. Step 4, Element 4: Scenario Analysis
Scenario Analysis Rider: The exploration of PPRR capability should be based on
scenarios using agreed planning levels which are based on the advice of appropriate
Hazard Leaders, but adjusted to reflect regional experience – especially where that
experience indicates a history of significant effects on critical infrastructure / essential
services, or the environment, or property, or people, or the economy at lower thresholds
than that level advised by the Hazard Leader.

28. Step 4, Element 5: Focus on
Hazard  Vulnerability Interface

29. Seven key steps - enablers
1. Establish a suitable group to do the work
2. Identify stakeholders
3. With the identified stakeholders, collect and
collate existing available Risk Assessments and
identify key risks to the region
4. Validate the quality of the existing, available Risk
Assessments against agreed criteria
5. Map (cross reference) the quality of the Risk
Assessments against stakeholder
responsibility
6. Record a summary of all key risks and their
associated risk treatments
7. Report on Continual Improvement Plan

30. Step 5 – Map (cross reference)
quality against responsibility
The five elements of Step 4 should be checked against the
responsible stakeholders identified in Step 2.
Example:
In this example,
the Hazard
Leader
(Bushfire) is the
key stakeholder
cross
referenced.

31. Seven key steps - enablers
1. Establish a suitable group to do the work
2. Identify stakeholders
3. With the identified stakeholders, collect and collate
existing available Risk Assessments and identify key
risks to the region
4. Validate the quality of the existing, available Risk
Assessments against agreed criteria
5. Map (cross reference) the quality of the Risk
Assessments against stakeholder responsibility
6. Record a summary of all key risks and their
associated risk treatments
(Use a standard risk register format – e.g. ISO 31000)
7. Report on a Continual Improvement Plan to the State
Mitigation Advisory Group

32. AGENDA
Zone Emergency Management Planning
1. Why?
Why is a Zone Planning Framework useful?
2. Who?
Who should be on the working group?
3. How?
Seven key steps (enablers)