Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Research Problem & Background - Coggle Diagram

- - - - U.N. Environmental Programme (UNEP) report Spreading like Wildfire: The Rising Threat of Extraordinary Landscape Fires (February, 2022) urged governments to rethink their response to wildfires, and spend more on prevention and preparedness than firefighting.
- - - - Sousa's global-scale review of wildfire literature notes a common research problem: "There is still no clear strategy for integrating the complexity arising from the multiple dimensions of wildfires"
      - A similar problem noted by other authors & scholars (eg. see McCaffrey, Petryna) who both note that a more "realistic" approach to this problem is to develop solutions that are responsive to/reflective of complexity of contemporary socio-ecological systems.
  - - - There is a real opportunity to demonstrate the benefits of cultural land management, and ways in which cultural practices can be partnered with modern practices to get the best outcomes for the natural landscape,
  - - - The objectives and rationale are aligned with the project I would like to conduct. However, not interested in decision-support tools. Could adapt this rationale to be prefaced with "Knowledge-integration or intercultural collaboration tools/protocols are needed to..."
- - - - Future research (5-10yrs) likely be concerned with analyzing enabling or constraining factors/processes for collaborative fire management initiatives. However, currently, with many novel initiatives emerging but without established networks, processes, objectives... research could contribute important foundational work to understanding knowledge, values and interest of people who will likely be key actors or contributors to working together to improve landscape/fire management across multiple small landholdings/private land.
    - - Who is likely to be thinking in this area? Who holds social capital? Who are the knowledge-brokers?
    - - Eg. DECA or volunteer organisation (CFA, Landcare, Trust for Nature). CFA could be an interesting case, or source for participants. CFA operate under state-coordinated hegemonic approach to bushfire management, part of Safer Together policy. CFA work with landholders, on private land, is volunteer-based so most of its’ members own private land in rural/regional areas. CFA also has a number of reconciliation & Indigenous inclusion policies… intention to learn about cultural burning and Indigenous knowledges is set out in policy FW, but how is it recieved or ‘trickle down’ to views of members.
        
        What do members think about cultural burning? Are they thinking about how Indigenous knowledge and traditional, cultural practices could be integrated on their own properties/in regions where they live/work to reduce bushfire risk & increase landscape resilience?
  - - - Opportunities for advancing access to Country through cooperative fire management? Indigenous self-determination?
    - - Collaborations between state gov and TOs on public lands (Neale 2021; Hemming ...?), however, how collaborations could work on other land tenures remains an open question. Current investment and interest in revival of CB could see novel initiatives for cross-tenure collavorative land management.
        
        How do practitioners & land management work with TOs on land and fire management? Where is knowledge-sharing occurring? What are the perceived opportunities/barriers for integrating traditional knowledge into landscape fire management across public and private land?
        
        What are the perspectives of settler landholders? Where could change in thinking occur? Where has it already occurred?
        
        Given this likely development, there is an important role for social research to play in developing our understanding of the different communities' perspectives and knowledge of current and future needs for landscape-wide fire management and potential Indigenous-led or collaborative fire management arrangements. Research could explore existing knowledge-cultures and community relationships/network dynamics in select community groups, key areas. This knowledge may have practical implications for planning and developing future collaboraive initiatives.
  - - - On the issue of trust and knowledge sources - R had a survey that included a qu. about trust. Some of the results indicated there was high level of trust (among some social groups) for TOs. Enough in this survey to build on… what kinds of social groups are more likely to trust TOs, what groups do not? What are attitudes or knowledge of Cultural land management practices across different settler communities?
        
        Follow-up with in-depth interviews with identified key actors to gain insights into .... ___ HERE
        
        Use survey methods - scoping regions, communities, social groups where there is support, interest or knowledge relating to CLM. Survey could identify key actors or organisations that could provide insights into issues, knowledge or interests of a particular social group.
      - East Gippsland eg. participants involved with management on private land (incl. farmers, small landowners, CFA vollies or professionals), mixed-tenure (BHA, Landcare), and public land (land managers, potentially TOs who have title rights to Country - check this, what legal arrangements exist across Vic for joint-management)
    - - Who are key social actors that influence dominant discourses/knowledge base? Where are the points across settler communities where intervention or knowledge-sharing could have a broad impact on shifting the conventional wisdom or hegemonic approach to bushfire management?
        
        Social Network Analysis (Bodin and Pell)
        
        Using survey as a method to scope who are the groups or people that are interested in cultural burning. Eg. people who respond to surveys likely to be people who are more outspoken/have stronger social networks - therefore are not only convenient respondents, but useful participants to work with closely.