Untangling insurance, rebuilding, and wellbeing in bushfire recovery

Abstract

Home and contents insurance is framed as key to Australia's national strategy for disaster resilience. Despite the perceived importance of financial indemnity, ambiguity characterises the ways in which it facilitates both short‐ and long‐term everyday household recovery when disaster strikes. Addressing such ambiguity, this article explores how insurance impacts upon households' capacities to rebuild and recover after disastrous bushfire. In‐depth interviews conducted with residents in the Blue Mountains of New South Wales four years after they were affected by the October 2013 bushfires show that insurance was fundamental to recovery. Swift claims handling and payouts allowed participants to access rental accommodation, material necessities, and sufficient finances to repair, rebuild, and refurnish their houses—essentials in restoring everyday routines and a sense of normalcy. Yet, many people were underinsured and used alternative strategies to stretch “adequate” insurance coverage, which had practical and emotional implications. Importantly, while insurance reduced post‐disaster stress and trauma, the length and depth of recovery were more closely determined by the impacts of personal and situational circumstances than by insurance. On that basis, analysis points to the conclusion that while insurance is a crucial tool for disaster resilience, greater levels of psychosocial support are needed to improve households' short‐ and longer‐term recovery.

The arduous work of making claims in the wake of disaster: Perspectives from policyholders

“…There is also a gap between the "logics" employed by insurers to assess claims and the logics through which policyholders assign value to their belongings (Booth & Harwood, 2016), rendering true "like for like" replacement of lost property impossible (McFall, 2011). Building on research on disaster recovery (Eriksen & de Vet, 2021;Gearing, 2018;He et al, 2021), our participants' experiences show that extended and onerous claims processes fail to deliver on policyholders' expectations of protection and peace of mind and exacerbate the trauma arising from disasters. For some survivors, being subject to a "prolonged" and "adversarial" claims process can be "the most distressing element of their recovery," on par with the disaster event itself (He et al, 2021, p. 10).…”

Dilemmas, decision‐making, and disasters: Emotions of parenting, safety, and rebuilding in bushfire recovery

“…Parents' obligations and capacities to provide a sense of normalcy were compromised by longer term stability objectives. Rebuilding required seemingly endless interdependent processes and decisions at a time of "bushfire brain" (Eriksen & de Vet, 2020). Managing competing requirements became one of parents' "biggest" struggles, handled "day by day" (Heather), "one foot in front of the other" (Robert).…”

“…While insurance systems are imperfect, they are pivotal to the National Strategy for Disaster Resilience (Council of Australian Governments (COAG), 2011;de Vet et al, 2019). After the 2013 Blue Mountains bushfires in New South Wales, insurance was found to alleviate household stress by providing certainty in house replacement and repair (de Vet & Eriksen, 2020). Yet, narrative interviews revealed that personal and situational factors provide a clearer determinant of the length and depth of recovery than insurance did (Eriksen & de Vet, 2020).…”

“…After the 2013 Blue Mountains bushfires in New South Wales, insurance was found to alleviate household stress by providing certainty in house replacement and repair (de Vet & Eriksen, 2020). Yet, narrative interviews revealed that personal and situational factors provide a clearer determinant of the length and depth of recovery than insurance did (Eriksen & de Vet, 2020). Among these factors, a common recovery incumbrance was caring for children.…”

“…Quantifying these issues is important for policy development, but it overlooks underlying intricacies that, if better targeted, could provide preventative and stronger support. A growing body of literature is addressing this lacuna, drawing attention to the realities of disaster recovery (Eriksen & de Vet, 2020;Peek & Fothergill, 2008;Pujadas Botey & Kulig, 2014). Among these, emotions, which construct and frame the human world (Anderson & Smith, 2001), are providing "a more nuanced understanding of what recovery actually means and … a better understanding of the longer timescales involved in the process" (Whittle et al, 2012, p. 68).…”