Full Table - Steps 1-5

Step 1 - Know your hazard Risk analysis tasks Risk Communication tasks

The purpose of this step is firstly to determine the scope of the issue to be addressed, to identify the team of professionals and experts whose input will be needed, and to cover the important base elements of a public engagement strategy.

The second stage of this step is to assemble hazard information for analysis and review, and to prepare materials for engagement with affected parties and/or discussion by expert panels or representative groups.

Scoping –

1. Establish problem/decision parameters (e.g. what is the information (e.g. plan change, growth strategy?) How will the information inform policy? What scale is the information required at? What is the time frame for the decision? What are the risk outcomes sought (e.g. risk reduction, not increasing existing risk levels)?

2. Identify team and resource needs (e.g. what expert information is required and who is available to provide it? Who is able to provide useful local context information e.g., CDEM

1. Prepare engagement approach (including stakeholder analysis, context analysis, assessment of existing perceptions, [Building an engagement strategy]

2. Begin internal communication (within local government agency including public representatives, and other departments)

3. Begin external communication (e.g., early notification of upcoming decisions)


Preliminary assessment and information preparation

3. Identify hazard information gaps and uncertainty, gather further information where existing information is lacking or does not meet requirements

4. Gather background information for consequences analysis (e.g., inundation maps, fragility curves, regional GDP figures, land use plans)

5. Agree an information management system to store, retrieve, and access hazard information
Identify hazard information gaps and uncertainty

4. Identify useful information for sharing with stakeholders; clarify areas of uncertainty, note gaps, and likely areas of contention. Also consider hazard complexity [Building an engagement strategy]

5. Update engagement approach – following hazard information review (new stakeholders may become apparent)

Step 2 Determine severity of consequences Risk analysis tasks Risk Communication tasks

The purpose of this stage is to build a picture of the possible consequences & impact of a natural hazard event. Natural hazard information, coupled with information about the proposed development and existing land use is used to undertake an assessment of consequences.

Information about the natural hazard impact and the development is ground-truthed through engagement with specialists, those with local knowledge, and stakeholders.

1. Determine consequences for a) individual and b) cascading hazards and assess against Consequence Table.

2. Determine severity of consequences for the hazard event with the highest severity of impact will set the consequence level.

1. Validate hazard information:

Use engagement approach identified earlier to share, review and update information about natural hazards and potential consequences [Validating local hazards].

2. Update stakeholder analysis (following consequences analysis new stakeholders may become apparent)

3. Assess engagement approach – is it still right for the situation?

4. Record decisions and assumptions for transparency.

Step 3 Evaluate likelihood of an event Risk analysis tasks Risk Communication tasks

The purpose of this stage is to assess the likelihood of any event that will result in the consequences outlined in Step 2

1. Assess the likelihood of individual and cumulative hazard events (cascading hazards are addressed against the trigger hazard).

2. Cumulative hazards may result in an increase in likelihood e.g. three cumulative hazards which are 'possible' may increase overall likelihood to 'likely'.

3. In some instances the likelihood will be required for modelling and assessing the hazard (Step 1).
1. Record decisions and assumptions about likelihood and occurrence for transparency and use in communication at Step 4.
Step 4. Take a risk based approach Risk analysis tasks Risk Communication tasks

This is the stage where stakeholder acceptance of the calculated levels of risk and associated consent categories (and the implications of these) are assessed.

It is also when ideas about risk mitigation may emerge – particularly in relation to areas of greatest contention. Discussions with stakeholders and affected parties will include whether the risk categories and/or consent levels are appropriate, and what trade-offs might be made between extra margins of safety, possible benefits, and costs of mitigation.

1. Determine levels of risk for policy;

2. Determine resource consent activity status based on levels of risk;

3. Assess against assessment criteria and anticipated environmental outcomes;

4. Assess resource consent applications based on levels of risk

5. Identify and consider risk mitigation options

1. Validate levels of risk for policy and consent categories with stakeholders - i.e., ground truth and check for perverse outcomes.

2. Engage stakeholders in identifying and reviewing risk mitigation options

3. Update stakeholder analysis and engagement approach (after mitigation options new stakeholders may appear)

Hold forums/meetings/public events in accordance with engagement strategy –e.g., with representative groups, expert panels or communities. (See ‘key points for public forums on local hazards and their impacts’).

Step 5 Monitor & Evaluate Risk analysis tasks Risk Communication tasks

While evaluation & monitoring has taken place throughout at this final stage the outcomes of the process and the process itself are assessed to determine any further necessary actions

1. Evaluate risk –reduction effectiveness i.e. risks are not increased.

2. Plan change/revisit strategy if required to ensure risk outcomes are being achieved. meet risk.

1. Evaluate acceptance of mitigation options

2. Evaluate acceptance of residual risks

3. Evaluate communication & engagement strategy

4. Communicate risk outcomes with stakeholders and community and review policy if required.