The 2003 Canberra bushfires are an example in which levels of both specified and general resilience were demonstrated to be high. Specified resilience came from investment in resources such as fire trucks, firefighters, fire plans, fire breaks and escape routes. General resilience came partly from voluntary community support and networks that helped support many of the people directly affected by the fires. These networks were an indication of strong social capital in the ACT (see Winkworth138).
Institutions such as the media and government were viewed by many of those affected by the fires as supportive after the fires, an indicator of resilient systems able to support those affected during change.139 However, the same institutions were also criticised by some who felt they did not provide adequate support or, in the case of the media, presented stories on the fires in a way that was harmful to survivors.139
The ability to have this sort of exchange of different viewpoints and to learn and improve how we respond to this type of event is another aspect of general resilience (ie a resilient system is one in which failures or shortcomings are recognised, learnt from and avoided in the future). Actions such as the inquiry into the operational response to the 2003 fires140 are critical to building the ACT’s resilience, by identifying how future responses can be improved.
B04 is for an Alpine Ash site on Blundells Hill on the road up to Piccadilly Circus. Left: 2007, right: current.Photo: Rick McRae, ACT Emergency Services Agency