Climate Change in Rural Australia: Natural Hazard Preparedness and Recovery Needs of a Rural Community

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have read your paper with great interest. I appreciate this opportunity to read your manuscript and offer some suggestions for improvements.

Overall, the paper is very well written and organized and provides and important contribution to the body of knowledge on climate change preparedness in rural communities.

I have one major and one minor concern regarding the design of the study and your interpretation of the results of interviews:

Major concern: 

The study claims providing insights on the natural hazard preparedness in Australian rural communities based on the title and abstract. However, your results are based on only 13 interviews in ONE location. The rest is extrapolated, implying too many assumptions.  The size and diversity of the sample is not sufficient to develop conclusions applicable to all Australian rural communities and their preparedness to various hazards.  

Asa reader, I have many questions: why this community was selected and not others? What could be different if the sample was more diverse? What is the role of traditional and indigenous knowledge in bushfire preparedness? Would answers be different if members of an indigenous village have been interviewed? How your sample could reflect the diversity of Australia rural population, both ethnically and geographically? How these communities are prepared to other hazards, e.g. floods?

To conclude, given the small sample of the study and its many limitations (small area, small number of participants, low diversity, one short time interval, etc.), the results are extrapolated inappropriately to a much broader spatial and temporal scale.   I would recommend reframing the study in one of the two possible directions:

-  either present it as a pilot study, focusing on methodological development and collection of preliminary data for future nationwide or regional/statewide studies. Change the title, abstract, and introduction to clarify that this study is limited to the experience of one village and its preparedness to bushfires, NOT all Australian rural communities to various hazards. OR

- significantly expand your sample through interviews (and possibly surveys) to include a more diverse population of subjects to reflect the diversity of environmental conditions, types of hazards, culture, local traditional and indigenous knowledge, timeframes, seasons, etc.) . It is well known in from the literature that results of the interviews might vary significantly between the communities interviewed immediately after an adverse event and at other times. 

Minor concern: You indicated that all participant data has been deidentified. However, you use first names to identify them, citing the interviews. Clarify if these are fictional names and how they were assigned. Or, code your subjects, e.g. participant 1, 2, etc.

Author Response

Reviewer One

1.1 The study claims providing insights on the natural hazard preparedness in Australian rural communities based on the title and abstract. However, your results are based on only 13 interviews in ONE location. The rest is extrapolated, implying too many assumptions.  The size and diversity of the sample is not sufficient to develop conclusions applicable to all Australian rural communities and their preparedness to various hazards.  

Thank you for your feedback. The title of the paper has been amended to reflect that the study only took place in one rural Australian community. The title now reads “Climate Change in Rural Australia: Natural hazard preparedness and recovery needs of a rural community”. The abstract has been amended to make it clear that the study is focusing on one rural Australian community. The paper has also been revised throughout in line with this comment and the comment below (see 1.3)

1.2 As a reader, I have many questions: why this community was selected and not others? What could be different if the sample was more diverse? What is the role of traditional and indigenous knowledge in bushfire preparedness? Would answers be different if members of an indigenous village have been interviewed? How your sample could reflect the diversity of Australia rural population, both ethnically and geographically? How these communities are prepared to other hazards, e.g. floods?

The community selected was part of a larger research project in line with networks and connection needed to build community engagement and undertake community consultation.  The community is also an example of a small, isolated community with limited resources that was severely impacted by the 2019-2020 fires.

While we acknowledge that differences may have been observed with other communities, especially if the study had focused on Aboriginal Australian communities, or other types of hazards, these questions are beyond the scope of the current study. We have noted these limitations in the discussion and also added further comment around these questions as directions for future research. The strengths and limitations section has been edited to reflect that more research into diversity is needed. “Finally, the sample was from one small rural community in the Northern Tablelands. While this helps add to the understanding of how this rural community prepares and recovers from natural disasters, the findings reflect one community’s experience; more research is needed to ascertain whether these findings are comparable with other rural community experiences. And “However, the sample were predominantly white and the study focused on fire only, thus the extent to which the findings of the current study apply across other contexts, cultures, geographic locations and natural hazards, is less clear and more research is needed in this area. Further research better understanding experiences and preparedness in Aboriginal Australian communities may also be beneficial. The extent to which these results are consistent with other countries with different infrastructure, risks and support services also warrants further research attention.”

1.3 To conclude, given the small sample of the study and its many limitations (small area, small number of participants, low diversity, one short time interval, etc.), the results are extrapolated inappropriately to a much broader spatial and temporal scale.  I would recommend reframing the study in one of the two possible directions:

- either present it as a pilot study, focusing on methodological development and collection of preliminary data for future nationwide or regional/statewide studies. Change the title, abstract, and introduction to clarify that this study is limited to the experience of one village and its preparedness to bushfires, NOT all Australian rural communities to various hazards. OR

-  significantly expand your sample through interviews (and possibly surveys) to include a more diverse population of subjects to reflect the diversity of environmental conditions, types of hazards, culture, local traditional and indigenous knowledge, timeframes, seasons, etc.) . It is well known in from the literature that results of the interviews might vary significantly between the communities interviewed immediately after an adverse event and at other times. 

Thank you for your feedback. The title, abstract and introduction of the paper have been edited to make it clear to the reader that this study is limited to the experience of one rural Australian community and that community’s experiences of and preparedness for the 2019-2020 bushfires. The aims of the study have also been edited for clarity.  The conclusions and discussion section have also been revised to better reflect the study undertaken.

 A goal of qualitative research is examining people’s lives in detail and it is common to have small samples that are rich in knowledge, which is considered a strength of qualitative research (Smith, 2018). Generalisability also differs between qualitative and quantitative research due to the different epistemological and ontological assumptions as well as the difference in aims and goals between quantitative and qualitative research (Smith., 2018). In quantitative research statistical-probabilistic generalisability is commonly applied, however, it is not a meaningful lens for qualitative research (Smith, 2018). The current study does have the potential for naturalistic generalisability. Naturalistic generalisability “happens when the research resonates with the readers personal engagement in life’s affairs or vicarious, often tactic, experiences” (Smith, 2018, p. 140). The current study has supplied contextual details (e.g. interview quotes) to help the research resemble readers experiences of events they have seen or heard about (e.g. their own experiences of natural disasters) to promote naturalistic generalisability (Smith, 2018). Therefore, this study is generalisable just not in the same way quantitative research would be generalisable. A more thorough discussion around the choice of a qualitative approach has been added to the method and further discussion around generalisability has been added to the limitations section of the discussion. We have also added suggestions for future research to consider survey approaches in the directions for future research.

1.4. Minor concern: You indicated that all participant data has been deidentified. However, you use first names to identify them, citing the interviews. Clarify if these are fictional names and how they were assigned. Or, code your subjects, e.g. participant 1, 2, etc.

Thank you for your comment. It has been added to the procedure that participant pseudonyms were randomly assigned. “Participants were randomly assigned pseudonyms and any potentially identifying information was removed from transcripts”.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

One of the biggest problems caused by climate change is the increase in the frequency of forest and bush fires. The problem is particularly significant in Australia’s arid environment. The authors’ choice of topic is therefore up to date, which concerns the practical aspects of preparing for climate change.

The method used to present the topic in the paper was interviewing. In addition, it would have been useful to have used other methods, such as questionnaires among the population concerned, which would have given the opportunity to gather a broader range of opinions.

I miss the international perspective and comparisons in the article, which would have made use of the experiences of areas that have experienced similar natural disasters. In its absence, the article is a case study of the social consequences of a high-risk event.

In the Discussion section, it would be worthwhile to discuss what measures could be taken in the future to help society manage natural disasters more effectively.

Author Response

2.1 One of the biggest problems caused by climate change is the increase in the frequency of forest and bush fires. The problem is particularly significant in Australia’s arid environment. The authors’ choice of topic is therefore up to date, which concerns the practical aspects of preparing for climate change.

Thank you for taking the time to review this paper and for providing feedback. It is very much appreciated.

2.2 The method used to present the topic in the paper was interviewing. In addition, it would have been useful to have used other methods, such as questionnaires among the population concerned, which would have given the opportunity to gather a broader range of opinions.

Thank you for your feedback. In line with the study aims, we selected a qualitative design to gain in depth understanding of the preparedness, response and mental health needs of a small community. A qualitative design allows for a deeper understanding of context and experiences, and is also valuable where topics are less researched. A research design section has been added to the methods to better outline the rationale for selecting a purely qualitative approach. An additional sentence has also been added to the materials and methods section under the subheading interviews to highlight why a qualitative analysis would be beneficial to answer this specific research question. “Interviews were selected as they allowed for detailed examination of the community’s experiences and responses to the bushfires and allow for a rich knowledge base to be collected. “A sentence has also been added to the strengths, limitations and future research section to address this “Future research may also include a quantitative component to their research design to understand the ubiquity of these findings across more and diverse communities.”

2.3 I miss the international perspective and comparisons in the article, which would have made use of the experiences of areas that have experienced similar natural disasters. In its absence, the article is a case study of the social consequences of a high-risk event.

Thank you for your feedback. International research and literature have been cited throughout the paper and the discussion and introduction have been slightly edited to highlight the international research and findings and how they are in line with the Australian research.

2.4 In the Discussion section, it would be worthwhile to discuss what measures could be taken in the future to help society manage natural disasters more effectively.

Thank you for the comment, we have expanded the discussion section to include additional measures for effectively managing future disasters.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for addressing my suggestions. Looking forward to seeing your research being published.

English is good