@book {bnh-4405, title = {Disaster Management in Australia: Government Coordination in a Time of Crisis}, year = {2018}, pages = {180}, publisher = {Routledge}, organization = {Routledge}, address = {Oxon}, issn = {978-1-138-04912-3}, author = {George Carayannopoulos} } @mastersthesis {bnh-5278, title = {Rhetoric or reality: coordination in a time of crisis}, year = {2017}, month = {02/2017}, pages = {219}, school = {University of Sydney}, address = {Sydney}, abstract = {

In recent years Australia has experienced a number of significant natural disasters which have placed a clear focus on how governments at different levels respond to these events. Within this context there has been a clear emphasis on understanding the role of government in mitigating and responding to crises. Large scale natural disasters represent a significant test of the public sector{\textquoteright}s ability to respond in a coordinated and efficient way in the face of adversity. This comes against a backdrop in Australia where trust in government from its citizens continues to decline and where the public retain high expectations of government{\textquoteright}s ability to plan, prepare and respond to disasters. Crises are also occurring not in a vacuum but where changes in the public sector mean that whole of government or connected forms of working are a highly pervasive mantra. Crisis responses oblige the different layers of government: political, bureaucratic and operational response agencies to work together to confront these events and require collective action. There is a strong recognition that the response to disasters is beyond the capacity of any single person, agency or department. To date, there has been little work undertaken on how whole of government structures impact on the management and response to crises and how these may shape the overall perception of a {\textquoteleft}successful{\textquoteright} or {\textquoteleft}failed{\textquoteright} response. As a result of this context, this thesis seeks to review and explore the responses to the 2009 Victorian bushfires and the 2011 Queensland floods by understanding how each state confronted these events and how they can be seen to epitomise the challenges of crisis management in Australia. Drawing on document analysis and elite interviews from each state, the thesis seeks to understand whether public commitments to whole of government in crises are rhetoric or reality? It will address this question through a lens which seeks to understand the impact of key themes such as: whole of government, crisis management, leadership, coordination, organisational culture, social capital and institutions in meditating the responses and outcomes of these events.

}, url = {https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/2123/16311/2/2016_George_Carayannopoulos_Thesis.pdf}, author = {George Carayannopoulos} } @article {bnh-4409, title = {Rhetoric or reality: Coordination in a time of crisis}, year = {2017}, month = {07/2017}, abstract = {

This document summarises the outcomes of doctoral research conducted by Geroge Carayannopoulos.

}, author = {George Carayannopoulos} } @conference {bnh-3887, title = {When policy, politics and emergency management collide: managing coordination in crises}, booktitle = {AFAC17}, year = {2017}, month = {09/2017}, publisher = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, organization = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Sydney}, abstract = {

Crises place a clear focus on how governments at different levels respond and highlight the important intersection between policy, politics and emergency responses in highly charged circumstances. Large scale natural disasters represent a significant test of the public sector{\textquoteright}s ability to respond in an efficient and coordinated way in the face of uncertainty and adversity. The intersection between policy, politics and operational response can be seen as a perfect storm where competing priorities and objectives may arise and require resolution. The pressures of managing crisis situations come against a backdrop in Australia where trust in government and public services from its citizens continues to decline. The public retain high expectations of government{\textquoteright}s ability to plan, prepare and respond to disasters in a timely manner. The level of scrutiny and accountability to which politicians, bureaucrats and responders are held to means that collective and collaborative action is a necessity. Crises are also occurring not in a vacuum but where changes in the public sector mean that whole of government, or connected forms of working are a highly pervasive mantra. It is within this context that political, bureaucratic and operational agencies work in the response to crises.

This presentation provides the finalised outcomes from a doctoral project which examined the abovementioned issues within the framework of Australia{\textquoteright}s two most significant events of the past decade: the 2009 Victorian bushfires and the 2011 Queensland floods (this work is currently being published as: Disaster Management in Australia: Government Coordination in a Time of Crisis. Routledge).

The research was premised on understanding how the states confronted each disaster and how they can be seen to epitomise the challenges of crisis management in Australia. The research was underpinned through a model which examined: whole of government arrangements, the nature of crisis management, executive leadership, inter-organisational coordination, organisational culture, social capital and institutions of state. It examined these thematic areas from the: policy, politics and emergency response perspectives. In doing so, it has established that these three streams of activity and the actors who work in each domain represent a symbiotic network. Within this network, the interfaces between these streams represents a critical part of preparation, response and recovery from major crisis events, as important as any of the individual components.

}, author = {George Carayannopoulos} } @article {bnh-3796, title = {Whole of Government: the Solution to Managing Crises?}, journal = {Australian Journal of Public Administration}, volume = {76}, year = {2016}, month = {11/2016}, pages = {251-262}, chapter = {251}, abstract = {

The frequency and severity of natural disasters has placed a clear emphasis on the role of governments in responding to these crises. During the past decade, disaster events have had a significant impact on the relevant communities as well as raising questions regarding the role of government and the bureaucratic coordination of planning and response processes. These events have placed a renewed focus on the ability of governments to plan, prepare, and respond in an effective way to crises. They have also tended to indicate that there remain serious challenges to government coordination and that crises create a unique series of challenges for the public sector. At the heart of understanding how governments respond to crises are notions of bureaucratic coordination. It has been suggested that joined-up or whole of government arrangements may provide an appropriate means in which to approach crisis management. As a result a number of key themes emerge including the nature of crisis management, role of leadership, understanding coordination, impact of organisational culture, and the interactions between individuals and institutions. This paper will consider these issues and provide a review of the relevant literature, to understand the synergies that exist in connected responses to crises.

}, doi = {10.1111/1467-8500.12227}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8500.12227/abstract}, author = {George Carayannopoulos} }