Case Study 2019 North and Far North Queensland Monsoon Trough - By GHD Pty Ltd December 2020
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
2019 North and Far North Queensland Monsoon Trough – Case Study By GHD Pty Ltd December 2020
02 © 2021 AgriFutures Australia All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-76053-153-9 ISSN 1440-6845 Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural Disaster Management in Australian Agriculture – Case Study Publication No. 20-006 Project No. PRJ-012469 The information contained in this publication is intended for general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to help improve the development of sustainable regions. You must not rely on any information contained in this publication without taking specialist advice relevant to your particular circumstances. While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this publication to ensure that information is true and correct, the Commonwealth of Australia gives no assurance as to the accuracy of any information in this publication. The Commonwealth of Australia, AgriFutures Australia, the authors or contributors expressly disclaim, to the maximum extent permitted by law, all responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any act or omission, or for any consequences of any such act or omission, made in reliance on the contents of this publication, whether or not caused by any negligence on the part of the Commonwealth of Australia, AgriFutures Australia, the authors or contributors. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the views in this publication. This publication is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. However, wide dissemination is encouraged. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to AgriFutures Australia Communications Team on 02 6923 6900. Researcher Contact Details Michael White GHD Pty Ltd Level 15, 133 Castlereagh Street Sydney NSW 2000 Phone: 02 9239 7184 Email: michael.white@ghd.com In submitting this report, the researcher has agreed to AgriFutures Australia publishing this material in its edited form. AgriFutures Australia Contact Details Building 007, Tooma Way Charles Sturt University Locked Bag 588 Wagga Wagga NSW 2650 02 6923 6900 info@agrifutures.com.au www.agrifutures.com.au Electronically published by AgriFutures Australia at www.agrifutures.com.au in January 2021 AgriFutures Australia is the trading name for Rural Industries Research & Development Corporation (RIRDC), a statutory authority of the Federal Government established by the Primary Industries Research and Development Act 1989.
2019 North and Far North Queensland Monsoon Trough – Case Study
4
04 Section 1
Contents
Acknowledgments 05
Executive summary 06
Introduction 07
Natural disasters in Queensland 07
The monsoonal trough 07
Key analysis and discussion 07
Conclusions 08
Section 1 Introduction 10
Case study purpose 10
Natural disaster management in Queensland 10
Section 2 2019 Queensland Monsoonal Floods 12
Overview 12
Event impact 13
Event preparation 14
Event response 15
Regional and remote 15
Government engagement 15
Loss assessments 15
Event recovery 16
Federal & State Government 16
Resilience 16
Flood warning infrastructure network project 16
Townsville recalibrated flood modelling and mapping project 16
Burdekin and Haughton catchment resilience strategy project 16
Monsoonal trough recovery plan 2019-2021 16
Potential benefits of early warning systems 16
Section 3 Finding 18
Digital connectivity in remote and regional areas 18
The Australian Defence Force (ADF) 18
Advanced weather forecasting 18
Program funding 19
Data analytics 19
Localised responses 19
Jurisdictional collaboration 20
Practical innovation 20
Section 4 Conclusion 22
Section 5 Scope and Limitations 25
Section 6 References 26
Appendix A Verification of survey data completed by Qld DAF 28
Appendix B North & Far North Queensland monsoonal trough State
Recovery Plan 2019-2021 29
Appendix C Queensland Rural Industry and Industry Development Authority 30
05
Tables
Figure 1 Direct and indirect costs to agriculture 13
Figure 2 Preparation and planning 14
Figure 3 Potential impact of additional early warning 17
Figure 4 Direct and indirect costs to agriculture ($ million) 17
Figures
Figure 1 Producers erected this sign to mark the high-water mark of the infamous 12
1974 flood. No flood waters had come close until it was exceeded during the
2019 monsoon event (source: National Drought and North Queensland Flood
Response and Recovery Agency, 2020a)
Figure 2 Queensland rainfall deciles February 2019 13
Figure 3 Queensland minimum temperature deciles February 2019 13
Acknowledgments
This project is supported by funding from AgriFutures
Australia as part of the AgriFutures National Rural
Issues Program.
6 06 Executive Summary This case study is about disaster management and the 2019 North and Far North Queensland Monsoon Trough (monsoonal trough). It is a companion to, and should be read together with, the main Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural Disaster Management report.
07
Introduction Some 39 local government areas (LGAs) became eligible for
Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements (DRFA), (Deloitte
That report is the result of a comprehensive desktop Access Economics, 2019).
review of available literature, and targeted engagement
with industry and government stakeholders. This included Coastal locations including Herbert, Ross, Black,
an online survey, and an appraisal of various innovations Haughton, Burdekin, Daintree Rivers and Bluewater Creek
and technologies. The aim of both reports is to help rural were some of the hardest hit, experiencing major flooding
industries and government understand how innovations resulting from extreme rainfall totalling more than 400
and technologies could improve resilience and viability, mm. In some regions, such as Townsville and Mount Isa,
in all phases of natural disaster management including total rainfall during the monsoonal trough exceeded the
preparedness, response, and recovery. annual rainfall average.
This study supplements the main report’s analysis, offering This case study explores the background to the event,
an examination of the monsoonal trough, its effects, including the scale and economic impact on rural industries
and potential future disaster management amelioration along with the responses and activities to better prepare
measures. It explores the monsoonal trough’s economic for events like this in the future. It also draws on key
impact, and the possible benefits to rural industries of survey responses from the main report to assess potential
deploying new technologies and innovations relating to economic benefits from advanced early warning systems.
natural disaster management. For example, how advanced
early warning systems could help rural industries minimise
Key analysis and discussion
losses by improving risk-based decisions, such as moving
stock, plant and equipment. The scale and speed of the monsoonal trough tested the
capability and resilience of the Queensland government
Findings here, centred on data, analytics and early warning
at all levels, along with regional and remote communities.
systems, amplify, and contextualise, those in the main report.
Findings arising from this case study reinforce the
Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural Disaster
The monsoonal trough Management report findings. Namely, that data collection
capability, analytics and communication are all key focal
Between 23 January and 9 February 2019, the heavy areas for development of enhanced natural disaster
rainfalls and major flooding of the slow-moving monsoonal management capacity. This is especially relevant around
trough, wrought extensive disruption and damage on the early warning systems which have the potential to minimise
state, especially in regional and remote communities. The losses arising from natural disasters through provision of
extreme weather affected 56% of the state through extreme information for rural industries to make timely, risk-based
rainfall, flooding and lower than average temperatures. decisions at a local level.
Natural disasters in Queensland
Natural disasters impose a heavy annual toll on Queensland
(Deloitte Access Economics, 2017) with headline statistics noted as follows:
10
years
60% $11b 3.3%
Queensland has been the The total economic cost to Flood events accounted By 2050, the estimated total
most disaster-prone state the state, over this period, for 66% of this $11 billion, economic cost of natural
in Australia over the last has averaged $11 billion cyclones 25%, hail 6%, disasters in Queensland will
10 years. per year - about 60% of the and other events 4%. reach $18 billion a year - a
national cost. growth rate of 3.3% per year.
8
08 Section
When considering the monsoonal trough, the following A key consideration from this research is that there is
key points are reinforced in this case study: opportunity for further in-depth economic analysis of the
benefits of improved early warning weather systems, data
Collaboration is key: Cross-government cooperation, analytics and communications relating to natural disasters,
shared responsibility and timely communication are the especially in Queensland.
foundation of successful natural disaster management.
Effective collaboration relies on well-developed and Clearly, catastrophic natural disaster events can defy
maintained interagency relationships. immediate control efforts, so even the best-deployed
technologies may have limited effect. However, more
Early warning and preparation: Predicting weather sophisticated and advance warning may have minimised
events, such as the monsoonal trough event, beyond two impacts and corresponding costs in the case of the
weeks is outside current capabilities of existing weather Queensland monsoonal trough. Key investment priorities
forecasting systems (Cowan et al., 2019). The Innovation are early warning systems, mobile ground stations and
and Technology to Improve Natural Disaster Management communications to accelerate loss assessments and
report survey highlights the criticality of the preparation insurance claims and to trigger government support.
phase of natural disaster management as an area requiring
the focus of rural industries. Satellite reliance: Digital accessibility and connectivity
in regional and remote areas remains a key issue with
Stakeholders surveyed or consulted in this work also noted connectivity centred on major roads and homestead
that for rural industries to be prepared it is critical that infrastructure. Emerging technology solutions which
they have more detailed information on the probability provide smartphone alerts will be increasingly reliant on
of natural disasters through early warning systems and new generation satellites. Private companies are investing
communications. Multi-week forecasts can give potentially in this space but may still require government assistance in
earlier warning of natural disaster events and enhance terms of supporting investment and regulation.
ability to make risk-based decisions.
Securing sufficient data analyst skills: The need for skilled
Conclusion
individuals with advanced data analytical capabilities is
critical in preparing for potential natural disasters. Ensuring Natural disasters in Queensland are a perennial threat,
adequate resourcing of the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) is the scale and intensity of which can be extreme. The 2019
a priority. The flow of timely, relevant information from BOM monsoonal trough had extensive effects across the state,
with active support from various channel partners such as with extreme weather taking a substantial toll on rural
farmer organisations, producer groups or rural merchandise industries and regional communities, most particularly, on
suppliers and then to local areas is vital for optimal risk- livestock industries.
based decision-making.
The key findings of the case study are centred around data,
Enhanced predictive capability: Better predictive data analytics and early warning systems. Specifically, more
and modelling will allow government and emergency sophisticated data gathering, analysis and communication
response agencies to bolster natural disaster is critical to better natural disaster management, and to
management policies and planning. The ability to predict enhance organisational and individual decision-making,
the magnitude of the monsoonal trough event at the time preparedness and response. Government, emergency
was limited, given the scale, speed of onset and warning services and rural industries will benefit from more timely,
systems in place. Limitations in the capability of real-time localised information to tailor more effective natural
flood modelling at the time of the event meant there was disaster management.
minimal early warning to landholders, to allow time to
protect stock and crops. This case study explores the potential significant cost
savings to rural industries, in reduced damages and losses,
Ongoing commitment to research funding: Continued of early warning systems. Ideally, the ability to provide
funding for long-term, evolving research programs is critical further advance warning of a natural disaster event,
to preparedness and management of natural disaster would allow invaluable time for rural industries, to prepare
events. This is to ensure rural industries, communities and more effectively and potentially minimise losses to stock,
emergency agencies have the best possible access to timely equipment and infrastructure. In turn, this would enhance
information relating to weather events. the management and recovery phases via ability for rural
industries and the communities surrounding them to
rebuild from a stronger base.
9 Drivers for growth
10
Section 1 Introduction
This case study on the 2019 North and Far North Queensland
monsoonal trough aims to illustrate how innovation and
improved technology could be beneficial in the management
of natural disasters. The case study is an adjunct to the
main report: Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural
Disaster Management.
Case study purpose Natural disaster management
in Queensland
The case study does not seek to describe in detail current
disaster management practices in Queensland, nor to Natural disasters are a perennial threat in Queensland. They vary
undertake a full analysis of the events of 2019. Rather this in extent, intensity and speed of onset. This case study examines
case study draws on aspects of the event relevant to the areas the application of the three phases of disaster management,
of focus of the Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural being preparedness, response and recovery, to the 2019
Disaster Management report which are early weather warning monsoonal event.
systems, data analytics and communications.
Queensland has vast experience in dealing with natural disaster
events across all levels of government, emergency services
and rural industries. The Queensland Disaster Management
Committee and State Disaster Coordination Centre1 serves
as the disaster management policy and decision-making
committee for Queensland. This arm of the Queensland
State Government is to develop strategic policy frameworks
that provide a prompt response mechanism for disaster
management and coordination of resources needed in all
management phases of disaster.
Its role is to ensure effective state disaster management, and
to establish and maintain effective disaster management
arrangements between the Queensland Government, the
Commonwealth Government, Local Government and non-
governmental organisations (NGOs). This includes coordinating
all levels of government assistance.
1
https://www.disaster.qld.gov.au/dmg/Pages/DM-Guideline.aspx11
12
Section 2 2019 Queensland Monsoonal Floods
Overview The Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural Disaster
Management report details the three phases of natural disaster
management being preparedness, response and recovery. With
the monsoonal trough, this case study highlights that recovery
The North and Far North Queensland monsoonal trough, which
actions have been the dominant management phase and
occurred between 23 January and 9 February 2019, was an
have required significant allocation of capital and resources.
intense, slow-moving event characterised by heavy rainfall and
However, it is also noted that this recovery effort includes
major flooding. It caused extensive disruption and damages
initiatives aimed at being better prepared in the future.
to communities (Queensland Government, 2019a), affecting
about 56% of the state’s land with 39 Local Government Areas
Existing forecasting and early warning systems were in place
(LGAs) being impacted to the extent that they were eligible
in advance of the event. However, the ability of these to provide
for Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements (DRFA) (Deloitte
long-term predictions of extreme weather is limited. BOM
Access Economics, 2019).
has a multi-week seasonal prediction system, the Australian
Community Climate Earth-System Simulator – Seasonal
Coastal locations, including Herbert, Ross, Black, Haughton,
version 1 (ACCESS-S1). Cowan et al. (2019) analysed multi-
Burdekin, Daintree Rivers and Bluewater Creek, experienced
week real-time weather forecasts using ACCESS-S1. The
major flooding from extreme rainfall of more than 400 mm.
report demonstrated predicting weather events, such as
Rainfall recorded in Townsville and Mount Isa was the highest
the monsoonal trough, beyond two weeks is outside existing
on record during the disaster event (see Figure 2), exceeding
capabilities. ACCESS-S1 depicted the large-scale convection
the annual rainfall average (Department of Agriculture, Water
predictions around North-East Australia and a strong westerly
and the Environment, 2019) (Bureau of Meteorology, 2019).
over northern Australia, but greatly underestimated the
Exacerbating this rainfall and associated flooding was the
easterlies and therefore the magnitude and spatial extent of the
subsequent drop in temperatures and associated wind chill
monsoon rainfall.
factors that impacted livestock areas (see Figure 3).
Figure 1
Producers erected this sign to mark the high-water mark of the infamous 1974 flood.
No flood waters had come close until it was exceeded during the 2019 monsoon event
Source: National Drought and North Queensland Flood Response and Recovery Agency, 2020a13
Figure 2 Figure 3
Queensland rainfall deciles February 2019 Queensland minimum temperature
deciles February 2019
Event impact Table 1
Direct and indirect costs to agriculture
The intense, slow-moving pressure system and tropical low
Event costs to agriculture $ million
exposed 40% of North-West Queensland’s grazing land to major
flooding, strong winds and cooler than average temperatures.
Direct cost
The disaster affected more than 600 primary producers covering
an estimated 11.4 million hectares. Livestock losses $376
Impacts included livestock and crop losses, infrastructure Estimated crop and aquaculture losses $8
damage, environmental impacts, erosion, and social and
economic disruption. Deloitte Access Economics (2019) Farm infrastructure $100
estimated the direct and indirect costs of the natural disaster
Indirect costs
at $532 million (see breakdown, Table 1).
Additional fodder $2
About 457,000 head of cattle, 43,000 sheep, 710 horses and
more than 3,000 goats perished during the disaster event
Carcass disposal $46
(Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 2019). North-West
Queensland’s beef cattle and sheep farmers were amongst Total $532
the worst impacted. Estimates put the cost of livestock
replacement at $376 million. Source: Deloitte Access Economics, 201914 Section 2
The indirect cost to agriculture of fodder drops to stranded and Event preparation
stressed livestock in inaccessible properties totalled about $2
million, while estimates put carcass disposal at $45.5 million for
cattle, and $364,000 for sheep (Deloitte Access Economics, 2019).
Preparation for a monsoonal trough of this scale and intensity
Media focused on the event’s inland impact but primary is difficult, irrespective of the size of the rural operation. The
producers in coastal regions, such as Townsville, Burdekin, and 2019 event affected both corporate entities and smaller pastoral
Hinchinbrook, also suffered major losses from the heavy rain and operations. The difference in impact lay in the development
flooding, including to sugarcane, broad acre cropping, horticulture and deployment of contingency plans and ability to draw on
(fruit and vegetables) aquaculture and nurseries. The estimated resources such as equipment or labour in the recovery phase.
loss to those in coastal regions, quantified by the Gross Value of The Queensland State Government response details immediate
Agricultural Production (GVAP), was $8 million (Deloitte Access actions to rectify gaps for potential future events (Queensland
Economics, 2019). Government, 2019a).
Damage to farm infrastructure approximated $100 million. Rural industries across Australia rely on weather forecasts. Table
The monsoonal trough damaged or destroyed some 22,000 2 summarises the infrastructure tools available, at the time of
kilometres of fencing, 29,000 kilometres of farm roads and tracks, the 2019 monsoonal trough event, to prepare and plan for major
2,320 kilometres of poly pipe, 1,350 tanks and troughs, and farm flooding and disaster events.
machinery (Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 2019).
The event response did, however, feature examples of effective
Whilst this case study focuses on economic impacts to rural
technological interventions from historical experience and
industries, it is worth noting the significant impacts beyond the
investments. In Townsville, the ability to operate automatic
economic. The event resulted in loss of life and gave rise to other
spillway gates manually helped control rising floodwaters,
ongoing and lasting community and social effects, especially in
thereby limiting the level of destruction.
remote and regional areas. (Deloitte Access Economics, 2019).
Table 2
Preparation and planning
Information Infrastructure Impact
Weather radar services Some areas lacked weather radar services, presenting a known challenge to planning for the
monsoonal trough event. The lack of facilities limited the ability to predict rainfall and plan
appropriate responses. After the event, the government committed to improving weather
monitoring facilities, including installing new radars at Maxwelton and Charters Towers.
Flood warning infrastructure
LGAs had raised issues relating to flood warning infrastructure. For example, Daintree Village, a
rural town in the Douglas Shire Council, had experienced its highest level of flooding on record
during the monsoonal trough. There was a lack of information on the upstream river height of
Daintree River, which made it difficult for the local government to provide timely warning to
the community. Some difficulties experienced with flood warning infrastructure during the
monsoonal trough event included:
• Flood-damaged river gauges
• Lack of radar infrastructure to provide adequate flood warning
• Loss of communications, or inaccurate readings
• Reliance on manual river height gauges.
Source: Queensland Government, 2019a15 2019 Queensland Monsoonal Floods
Event response In this instance, the BOM is working with local communities to
identify the highest priority areas for additional flood warning
infrastructure capability across three key areas being:
Regional and remote • Far North Queensland
• North West Queensland
The Australian Natural Disaster Resilience Index (ANDRI) index
noted in the Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural • Townsville and surrounds
Disaster Management report highlights the resilience to natural
disasters in the areas impacted by the monsoonal trough were The Queensland Rural and Industry Development Authority’s
generally low. Immediate response mechanisms relied on (QRIDA) Special Disaster Assistance Recovery Grant (SDARG) was
deployment of aerial reconnaissance and on ground assessments also activated to help primary producers in a defined disaster
where there was ability to get there (other than by helicopters). area pay for clean-up costs, up to a maximum of $75,000 (QRIDA,
The focus was to identify impact and verify status of individuals 2020) as detailed in Appendix C.
and communities. Damage to road and communication
infrastructure made this access even more difficult highlighting
Loss assessments
the gaps in natural disaster management in regional and remote
areas as compared to major metropolitan areas.
The scale of the monsoonal trough event made access to remote
and regional areas difficult, impeding authorities’ efforts to
Government engagement assess the impacts. Intense and prolonged media coverage
promulgated widely varying estimated losses. Social media
Given the scale of the event there was immediate engagement coverage fuelled these estimates. While helpful to inform an
from all levels of government leveraging the federal, state and approximate understanding of the scale of the disaster, it made
local frameworks with an immediate pivot towards recovery initial real-time loss assessments challenging, with incorrect
as detailed below. An example of this is the 2019 Queensland estimates obscuring the reality.
Monsoon Trough. After the flood: A strategy for long-term
recovery, Commonwealth of Australia 2020 report that noted Accurate loss assessments rely on surveys from the Queensland
the establishment of the North Queensland Livestock Industry Department of Agriculture and Fisheries (Qld DAF). It collaborates
Recovery Agency in March 2019. This report also highlighted with various agencies to quantify the extent of stock and
three areas of recovery focus that are geared towards future infrastructure damage, which in turn informs recovery options
preparedness being: and priorities. Some 24% of 778 property and station owners
across North-West Queensland responded to the Qld DAF survey.
• Facilitation of investment in flood affected communities
Together, these owners oversee about 5.3 million hectares of
to de-risk future investments
grazing land (Qld DAF, 2019a).
• Improve information collection and data sharing
Developing an accurate picture of the extent of damage took
• Facilitate opportunities for cross jurisdictional time. This was in part due to the need to cross check survey
collaboration. responses with known data in LGAs, based on the steps
highlighted in Appendix A. A lack of digital connectivity in some
The Queensland Reconstruction Authority (QRA September 2020) areas contributed to the delays. Moreover, the emotional toll on
highlights that in Queensland more than 3,200 rainfall and river producers dealing with livestock loss, infrastructure damage and
gauges inform state-wide flood warnings and forecasts that are massive economic loss, meant surveys were unlikely to have been
owned and operated by state and local government, the private their priority, further slowing progress.
sector and BOM. After the event, $8 million was allocated by the
Federal and Queensland Government to upgrade existing flood
warning infrastructure.16 Section 2
Event recovery Townsville recalibrated flood modelling and
mapping project
This $500,000 project aims to support the Townsville City Council
Federal Government
in updating and recalibrating flood modelling and mapping across
The Australian Government set up the North Queensland the council area, including the Ross River. The project includes
Livestock Industry Recovery Agency (NQLIRA) to guide a updating publicly available online content and any additional
coordinated Commonwealth Government response to help supporting information to align with updated modelling. The
people recover and deliver a longer-term plan for the region. The Townsville Floodplain Management Strategy will also be part of
Government committed more than $3.3 billion to assist farmers, this project that will help guide future infrastructure, land use
businesses and communities in rebuilding and recovering planning and emergency management. The focus will be on older
(National Drought and North Queensland Flood Response and areas of Townsville built before current planning and engineering
Recovery Agency, 2020b). standards.
State Government Burdekin and Haughton catchment resilience
strategy project
The Queensland Reconstruction Authority (QRA) led recovery
from the monsoonal trough. It provided support to affected This $1 million project aims to develop a flood resilience strategy
communities, aided by the Australian Defence Force (ADF), 15 for the Burdekin and Haughton catchment. The strategy will guide
state government departments and agencies, regional bodies and increasing resilience and flood risk reduction throughout the
more than 10 NGOs. catchments. This includes the catchment that affected the town
of Giru, one of the areas that experienced the heaviest rainfall
The Queensland Government also secured a disaster recovery during the event.
package through the DRFA, jointly funded by the state and
commonwealth government. The package included $22 million Monsoonal trough recovery plan 2019-2021
for a North West Queensland Beef Recovery Package, and $2
million for fodder supply. Some $19.75 million went to developing Appendix B summarises economic and environmental recovery
resilience to natural disasters, including $3.5 million towards a activities from monsoonal trough State Recovery Plan such as:
flood mapping and warning program. From an additional $100 access to concessional loans to maintain financial stability and
million recovery support package, 1,070 primary producers replace stock, reducing the impacts of week spread, replacement
shared $62 million in grants (Queensland Government, 2019b). of infrastructure and remediation to land impacted by the floods.
This plan specifically targets rural industries and regional
Resilience communities, underlining the long-term nature of recovery from
catastrophic events like this.
Post event, consideration at a Queensland State Government
level turned towards what could be done to improve resilience
Potential benefits of early warning systems
for future events of such scale. The Queensland Reconstruction
Authority (QRA) has resilience building as a key priority to ensure
the state is not only better prepared for disaster, but also better
An analysis was undertaken of how more advanced warning
equipped to recover. The QRA also administers several programs,
time in the case of the monsoonal trough event might have
(details below), aimed at improving flood recovery, including
reduced economic damages to affected rural industries.
upgrading the flood warning gauge network. These programs
were possible through the activation of the DRFA. The main report, Innovation and Technology to Assist in Natural
Disaster Management, detailed a report by Fakhruddin et al.
Flood warning infrastructure network project (2019) that modelled the costs and benefits from implementing
a cyclone early warning system (EWS) in Samoa, drawing on the
This $2 million project aims to analyse existing flood warning
experiences of Tropical Cyclone Evan in 2012. The study revealed
infrastructures. With the support of BOM, and local communities,
enhanced early warning weather systems could allow rural
the project will also identify high priority locations that require
producers to make timely risk-based decisions, which reduce
additional flood warning infrastructure capability. This will cover
damages and cost impacts.
17 LGAs directly impacted by the event.17 2019 Queensland Monsoonal Floods
The analysis includes benefit cost ratios and improvements to is that there appears to be opportunity for further in-depth
gross margins with a summary in Table 3 . The scale of Australia’s economic analysis of the benefits of improved early warning
rural industries and operations is clearly different to that of weather systems, data analytics and communications.
Samoa. Supposing early warning systems reduced damages by
10% (as detailed in the main report Innovation and Technology This potential research is especially relevant for Queensland.
to Improve Natural Disaster Management) for the monsoonal When considering the recent investments by the State
trough event, then the potential cost savings may have been of Governments of Western Australia and New South Wales
the order of $53.2 million as detailed in Table 4. into doppler radars in regional and remote areas, this may be
a consideration for Queensland. It is reinforced in this case
When considering the quantum of government event responses
study that this analysis does not take into consideration the
highlighted above, the potential benefit from an assumed
potential for reduced non-agricultural losses from these events,
loss reduction of $53.2 million is significant. As noted in
including positive impacts on human life. This also needs to be
the Innovation and Technology to Improve Natural Disaster
considered in any analysis for early warning systems for greater
Management report, a key consideration from this research
public benefit.
Table 3
Potential impact of additional early warning
Additional early warning provided Livestock Cropping/horticulture Fisheries Open sea fishing
Reduced damages from baseline
24 hours -10% -10% -30% -10%
48 hours -40% -30% -40% -15%
Up to 7 days -45% -70% -70% -15%
Source: Fakhruddin et al., 2019
Table 4
Direct and indirect costs to agriculture ($ million)
Costs $ million Assuming 10% reduction as per main report
Direct cost
Livestock losses $376 $338.4
Crop losses $8 $7.2
Farm infrastructure $100 $90
Indirect costs
Additional fodder $2 $1.8
Carcass disposal $46 $41.4
Total $532 $478.8
Benefit $53.2 million
Source: Deloitte Access Economics, 2019 and GHD assumption of loss reduction.18 Section 3
Section 3 Findings
The Innovation and Technology to improve Natural Disaster
Management report details considerations across rural
industries in Australia. Central to this is data collection,
analytics and communication. When considering this case
study, the role of data and communication in natural disaster
management across all phases cannot be underestimated.
Providing timely and meaningful information to rural In natural disaster events of this scale, immediate mobile
industries, to allow risk-based decision-making, will be service capability to provide power, communications and
intrinsic to more robust natural disaster management and other support is a priority. Often this requires government
recovery, and fewer losses. Specific considerations relevant to intervention, or private support from commercial entities
the case study are detailed below: to provide the best possible support to impacted regions
and communities.
Digital connectivity in remote and
regional areas The Australian Defence Force (ADF)
The demand for ADF assistance in natural disaster
Anecdotal discussions during the consultation process
management and recovery is only likely to grow with the
suggested a key issue encountered during the monsoonal trough
increasing frequency, scale, and intensity of events. Domestic
event was the inability for the Queensland Government to meet
natural disaster assistance may need to evolve into a core
people face to face during and immediately after the event,
military activity with appropriate budget and specialist support
understand the issues and give support. The State Government
services ready to deploy. This formalised function would
dispatched public servants progressively from Brisbane to
require resourcing and optimal specialist location in natural
disaster-affected areas to help local people complete paper
disaster-prone areas, such as Queensland. This may include
forms and receive grant funds.
supplementing emergency services with ADF reservists.
The frustrations associated with the requirement for paper-
based forms, and the ultimate need for surveys to assess losses,
underscores the digital connectivity issues faced in these Advanced weather forecasting
communities before, during and after the event. Future
considerations for communities prone to natural disasters might be:
Predicting weather events, such as the monsoonal trough
• Availability of vehicles with remote connectivity event, beyond two weeks is outside current capabilities of
capability that can be deployed to effected areas for existing weather forecasting systems (Cowan et al., 2019).
temporary digital connectivity and or support from mobile Multi-week forecasts could aid preparations for natural
infrastructure from the Australian Defence Force disaster events and provide an early warning system that
permits more forward risk-based decisions than monthly
• Mechanisms in place for disaster prone areas to allow outlooks allow.
pre-population of forms (provided privacy considerations
are maintained) to be available to speed up processing of
relief payments or assist with loss assessments.19
The scale and speed of the monsoonal trough onset means it Data analytics
is difficult to say if multi-week forecasts would have mitigated
rural industries’ losses in North and Far North Queensland, but
it may have amounted to a few days’ extra warning. The need for highly skilled individuals with advanced data
analytical capabilities is critical in preparing for potential
In Cowan et al. (2019)’s study, a grazier from Julia Creek
disaster management. The ability to provide meaningful
suggested that ‘what is required in the future is a three to five-
information, at both a macro and localised level, in a timely
day lead time with high confidence’. The GHD survey results
fashion, is increasingly important, especially in a state with the
reinforce this point: 78% of respondents agreed understanding
broad geography of Queensland. It is also essential to share
the probability of an event, at any given time, is a high priority to
information widely and quickly.
prepare for, and manage risk.
Consideration of further Doppler radar infrastructure in Adequate, prioritised resourcing for BOM can ensure reliable,
regional and remote areas of Queensland may assist in the timely information flows via various channel partners, such
future and provide rural industries in Queensland advance as input suppliers to rural industries or local farmer groups,
warning of potential events. to localised areas to inform risk-based decision-making that
mitigates natural disaster effects.
Program funding
Localised responses
Prioritising ongoing funding for key research and development
programs, that bolster natural disaster preparedness, As noted above, the BOM is working with local communities
management and resilience, is critical. These include: to identify the highest priority areas for warning infrastructure
capability. More broadly consideration of natural disaster
• BOM’s climate forecast modelling system, ACCESS-S management is being tailored into sub geographic regions
in Queensland with a specific commodity focus (e.g. areas
• The Forewarned is Forearmed (FWFA) project - a Rural
exposed to cyclones). This is highlighted in AgriFutures’ (2018)
R&D for Profit project that is currently supported by
study exploring mitigation strategies to cyclonic winds that
the Managing Climate Variability (MCV) program and by
focuses on various rural industries in Far North Queensland,
funding from the Australian Government Department of
exploring practical and emerging considerations such as:
Agriculture, Water and Environment.
• Appropriate wind break designs for tree and
• The Seasonal Forecasting project of the Managing Climate
horticulture crops
Variability (MCV) program (supported by Rural Research
and Development Corporations). • Boundary fence clearing within legal parameters
• The Improved Use of Seasonal Forecasting to Increase • Back-up generators for producers to counter loss of power,
Farmer Profitability project – a Rural R&D for Profit especially in dairy and aquaculture
project (led by AgriFutures Australia) which focussed
on seasonal climate forecasting capabilities and farm • Virtual fencing for intensive livestock operations
business decisions. This project reinforces the key point
• Electronic stock identification technologies.
relating to funding of the BOM, and associated programs,
underpinning long-term resilience for rural industries to
natural disasters through better data analytics and timely
communications.20 Section 3
Jurisdictional collaboration Practical innovation
The scale of the monsoonal trough event demonstrated the The list of emerging technology solutions is long,
need for active, prompt collaboration across all levels of interconnected and increasingly reliant on reliable power,
government, in all phases of natural disaster management. digital connectivity and satellites. This requires government
Management and recovery of natural disaster events are often investment and oversight.
multi-jurisdictional and with the scale of this event required
assistance at a variety of levels. On-farm technologies need to be tailored by individual
producers for their specific needs and budgets; there is
The ongoing development and promotion of local government no one-size-fits-all solution. For example, virtual fencing,
disaster dashboards, for community information sharing which allows the remote fencing, mustering and monitoring
before, during and after natural disaster events, is a of livestock through a smart collar is evolving, especially in
stakeholder-supported recommendation. (Queensland intensive grazing systems.
Government, 2019a). These web platforms would provide
a single source of information for the public. This includes This, however, may not be cost effective or practical for
weather warnings, road closures, emergency news, map stations in the areas on which this case study focused. This is
layering, and social media feeds. The broad benefits for rural due to landscape scale and cattle herd size along with costs
industries and local communities include: of potentially “retro fitting” existing fencing infrastructure. In
broad scale livestock operations, potential construction of
• Wide information sharing raised feed pads for selected use in extreme events may be an
option to explore.
• Public empowerment to make better decisions
This was not modelled as part of this case study but could possibly
• Single point of truth accuracy provide effective risk management subject to appropriate cost
benefit analysis of the capital cost of construction.
• Mobile ready
• Quickly scalable.
The ability to provide meaningful information, at
both a macro and localised level, in a timely fashion,
is increasingly important, especially in a state with
the broad geography of Queensland. It is also
essential to share information widely and quickly.21 Findings
22 Section 4 Section 4 Conclusion The 2019 monsoonal trough event was an unprecedented disaster in scale and extent, exacting a heavy toll on people, rural industries, and the Australian economy. Technology, at the time, centred on weather forecasting, modelling and communication, but had limited capacity to predict the magnitude of the impending weather event. Flood forecasting gave little warning to landholders that would allow them time to protect their stock and/or crops. The catastrophic nature of this event needs to be taken into consideration when considering new or horizon technologies that could improve disaster management. Upgraded flood warning infrastructure and accurate weather predictions with advance warning beyond current capabilities would allow improved planning and preparation from a risk management viewpoint at all levels and phases of the natural disaster. While there was little that individual producers and communities could do in the face of the 2019 event, an advance warning of even two days of another similar event would allow time to devise specific responses and mitigation strategies such as moving livestock and machinery. From a strategic standpoint, government and emergency response agencies will be able to improve disaster management policies and planning for all elements of disaster management with better predictive data and modelling. Mobile ground stations and communications to accelerate loss assessments, insurance claims and government support are key priorities.
23 Ongoing support for BOM, and related programs such as Managing Climate Variability and Forewarned is Forearmed, is also crucial. Supporting development of more capable early weather warning systems, such as ACCESS-S2, using more Doppler radars and via enhanced digital connectivity, will boost predictive capability. This, in turn, will provide rural industries more time to prepare for and manage natural disasters. The ongoing growth and environmental sustainability of the agriculture, fisheries and forestry sector depends on the implementation of new technologies and innovations to enhance rural industries’ preparedness for, response to and recovery from natural disasters. Technology and innovation can allow for timely, informed, risk-based decisions and covers all phases of natural disaster management. This case study amplifies the Innovation and Technology to improve Natural Disaster Management report findings. Whilst there are a range of practical innovations that have been deployed since the monsoonal trough, such as flood warning infrastructure, there is opportunity to continue to do more. Innovation and technology can assist natural disaster management at a variety of levels and central to this is data collection, analytics and communication.
24
25
Section 5 Scope and limitations
This report: has been prepared by GHD has prepared this report
for AgriFutures Australia and may only be used and relied on by
AgriFutures Australia for the purpose agreed between GHD and
AgriFutures Australia as set out in the main report Innovation and
Technology to Improve Natural Disaster Management.
GHD otherwise disclaims responsibility to any person other than information to GHD (including Government authorities),
AgriFutures Australia arising in connection with this report. GHD which GHD has not independently verified or checked beyond
also excludes implied warranties and conditions, to the extent the agreed scope of work. GHD does not accept liability in
legally permissible. connection with such unverified information, including errors
and omissions in the report which were caused by errors or
The services undertaken by GHD in connection with preparing omissions in that information.
this report were limited to those specifically detailed in the report
and are subject to the scope limitations set out in the report. GHD excludes and disclaims all liability for all claims,
expenses, losses, damages and costs, including indirect,
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this incidental or consequential loss, legal costs, special or
report are based on conditions encountered and information exemplary damages and loss of profits, savings or economic
reviewed at the date of preparation of the report. GHD has no benefit, AgriFutures Australia may incur as a direct or
responsibility or obligation to update this report to account for indirect result of the detail in the main report Innovation and
events or changes occurring subsequent to the date that the Technology to Improve Natural Disaster Management, for any
report was prepared. reason being inaccurate, incomplete or incapable of being
processed on equipment or systems or failing to achieve
The opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this
any particular purpose. To the extent permitted by law, GHD
report are based on assumptions made by GHD described in
excludes any warranty, condition, undertaking or term, whether
this report (refer to the main report Innovation and Technology to
express or implied, statutory or otherwise, as to the condition,
Improve Natural Disaster Management). GHD disclaims liability
quality, performance, merchantability or fitness for purpose of
arising from any of the assumptions being incorrect.
the detail in the main report.
GHD has prepared this report on the basis of information
provided by AgriFutures Australia and others who provided26 Section 6 Section 6 References AgriFutures Australia. (2019). Rural R&D for profit program final report: Improved use of seasonal forecasting to increase farmer profitability. Retrieved December 22, 2020, from https://www.agrifutures.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/19-055.pdf AgriFutures Australia. (2018). Improving the capacity of primary industries to withstand cyclonic winds. Retrieved December 22, 2020, from https://www.agrifutures.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/18-031.pdf Arklay, T.M. (2012). Queensland’s state disaster management group: an all agency response to an unprecedented natural disaster [online]. The Australia Journal of Emergency Management. 27(3), 9-19. Retrieved August 19, 2020, from https://search-informit-com- au.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/documentSummary;dn=735749744840634;res=IELHSS Bergin, A & Temmpleman, D. (2019). Defence forces can play a broader role in disaster management. Australian Strategic Policy Institute. Retrieved September 22, 2020, from https://www.aspi.org.au/opinion/defence-forces-can-play-broader-role-disaster- management Bureau of Meteorology. (2019). Special climate statement 69 – an extended period of heavy rainfall and flooding in tropical Queensland. Retrieved April 24, 2020, from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/statements/scs69.pdf Bureau of Meteorology. (n.d.). ACCESS-S: forecasts for weeks to seasons ahead. Retrieved March 19, 2020, from http://www.bom.gov. au/research/projects/ACCESS-S/ Climate Kelpie. (n.d.a). Forewarned is forearmed. Retrieved July 21, 2020, from http://www.climatekelpie.com.au/index.php/ forewarned-forearmed/ Climate Kelpie. (n.d.b). Rural R&D for profit-seasonal forecasting. Retrieved July 21, 2020, from http://www.climatekelpie.com.au/index. php/rural-rd/ Cowan, T., Wheeler, M. C., Alves, O., Narsey, S., de Burgh-Day, C., Griffiths, M., Jarvis, C., Cobon, D.H. & Hawcroft, M. K. (2019). Forecasting the extreme rainfall, low temperatures, and strong winds associated with the northern Queensland floods of February 2019. Weather and Climate Extremes. 26, 100232. Deloitte Access Economics. (2017). Building resilience to natural disasters in our states and territories. Commissioned by Australian Business Roundtable for Disaster Resilience and Safer Communities. Deloitte Access Economics. (2019). The social and economic cost of the North and Far North Queensland monsoon trough (2019). Commissioned by Queensland Reconstruction Authority. Sydney, Australia. Department of Agriculture and Fisheries. (2019). The North-West Queensland monsoon event of 26 January – 9 February 2019: report of a landholder survey into impact and recovery. DAF, Queensland Government. Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. (2019). Seasonal conditions: March quarter 2019. Retrieved April 24, 2020, from https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/agricultural-commodities/mar-2019/seasonal-conditions Fakhruddin, B.S.H.M. & Schick, L. (2019). Benefits of economic assessment of cyclone early warning systems- A case study on Cyclone Evan in Samoa. Progress in Disaster Science. 2, 100121. doi: 10.1016/j.pdisas.2019.100034 National Drought and North Queensland Flood Response and Recovery Agency. (2020a). 2019 Queensland monsoon trough after the
27 flood: a strategy for long-term recovery. Retrieved December 2, 2020, from https://www.droughtandflood.gov.au/sites/default/files/ attachments/2019%20Queensland%20Monsoon%20Trough%20-%20Report_1.pdf National Drought and North Queensland Flood Response and Recovery Agency. (2020b). About the flood. Retrieved October 19, 2020, from https://www.droughtandflood.gov.au/about-flood NCCARF. (2016). Cyclone Yasi – communities building disaster resilience. Snapshot for Coast Adapt, National Climate Change Adaption Research Facility. Retrieved June 22, 2020, from, https://coastadapt.com.au/sites/default/files/case_studies/SS3_Cyclone_Yasi_ community_resilience.pdf Productivity Commission. (2014). Natural Disaster Funding – productivity commission inquiry report. Retrieved September 22, 2020, from https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/disaster-funding/report Queensland Government. (2019a). 2019 Monsoon trough rainfall and flood review report 3: 2018-19. Prepared by Inspector-General Emergency Management, Queensland. Queensland Government. (2019b). Queensland budget 2019-20: disaster recovery. Queensland Australia. Queensland Reconstruction Authority. (2020). Flood Mapping and Flood Warning Programs. Retrieved March 28, 2020, from https:// www.qra.qld.gov.au/funding-monsoon -trough-242-million-drfa-package/flood-mapping-and-flood-warning-programs Queensland Rural and Industry Development Authority. (2020). Special disaster assistance recovery grants- primary producer. Retrieved March 28, 2020, from http://www.qrida.qld.gov.au/current-programs/Disaster-recovery/special-disaster-assistance/ special-disaster-assistance-primary-producer
28
Verification of survey data completed
Appendix A
by Qld DAF
Survey data were extrapolated to the Local Government Area (LGA) and regional level based on the following
steps (Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, 2019):
• LGA grazing area (ha) was estimated from digital cadastral maps
• Flood extent area (ha) was estimated based on AgForce digital mapping
• Pre-flood Stocking Rate (ha/head; SR) and livestock losses (%) were estimated by
a) Averaging individual property responses within each LGA
b) Validating these data using a spatial surface derived from all surveys, averaged within each LGA
• otal pre-flood livestock numbers were calculated based on SR and the area of grazing land within each LGA
• Sheep, horse and goat numbers were adjusted using an estimate of the proportion of holdings running
these livestock within each LGA
• Minor livestock losses e.g. camels and poultry were not included in the totals
• LGA pre-flood livestock numbers were cross-checked with publicly available Australian Bureau of
Statistics, Queensland Government Statisticians Office and Meat and Livestock Australia information
• The ranking of impacted LGAs was cross-checked with the proportion of properties receiving SDARG grants
provided by QRIDA
• Average pro-rata infrastructure impact (km/ha or number/ha) was estimated for properties within the flood
extent area, and extrapolated to the LGA level based on the flood extent area within each LGA i.e. responses
outside the flood extent were excluded from the LGA average
• Fence losses were cross-checked with the fence length within the AgForce flood extent intersected with
the 2006 Geoscience Australia Topographic 250K dataset
• Road damage was cross-checked with road length within the AgForce flood extent intersected with the
Queensland Baseline Roads and Tracks – QDNRME March 2019 dataset
• Survey respondents were provided several opportunities to enter comments. These free-form answers
were collated as examples of industry’s observations29
North & Far North Queensland monsoon-
Appendix B
al trough State Recovery Plan 2019-2021
Impact consequence Recovery activity Project outcome Timing
Economic Primary producers are Enhanced concessional loans- Primary producers can Due for
not able to extend their funded under DRFA apply for loans of up to $1 completion
financial position to million, providing financial Jun ‘21
recover. certainty and stability.
Primary producers are not Enhanced freight subsidies scheme - Primary producers can Underway
able to carry the cost of funded under DRFA afford to restock depleted
restocking and agistment herds
Primary producers want Industry Recovery Officers and Primary producers are Underway
to diversify, to reduce the Financial Counsellors- funded under provided the support they
impact of natural disasters. DRFA need to boost resilience
and sustainability
Loss of agricultural land Provide assistance measures to Environment recovery Underway
will affect revenue of mitigate river erosion impacts- will complement recovery
primary producers funded under the DRFA and resilience of primary
producers
Environment Spread of pests and weeds Weeds and pest management Minimise the impact Apr ‘19 – Jun ‘21
across impacted primary programs via approved DRFA of pest and weed seed
producers and the wider funding. Part A: parthenium control spread.
agricultural sector, as a program for Flinders is an urgent
direct result of the floods recovery activity to ensure weeds
and subsequent actions to are addressed before seeding
save livestock. occurs. Part B: package of works
implemented through relevant
regional NRM organisations for
ongoing integrated control of pests
and weeds.
Infrastructure that Rebuild and/or repair of remote Critical state water Feb ‘19 – Jun ‘21
supports flood warning damaged automated stream management
and monitoring, and water gauging and water quality stations infrastructure restored.
quality and resource and associated infrastructure via
management may be DRFA funding.
damaged.
Erosion and fencing Landscape remediation actions Damage to grazing land May ‘19 – Jun ‘21
damage on agricultural included as part of the Category D remediated.
land Exceptional Circumstances Package:
NW Qld Beef Recovery Package.
Source: Queensland Reconstruction Authority, 2019You can also read
