When surfing the internet recently on the words 'community engagement', I came across a phrase that said 'effected people should be invited to participate in community engagement processes first'. I started to ponder what this type of statement could actually mean in relation to community engagement in the RFS? How does it translate into our world?
 |
| Engaging on level of bush fire risk is core business for the RFS |
Is it that we need to focus our engagement on the areas in our community that may be most at risk of a bush fire? Have you looked at the Bush Fire Risk Management Plans (BFRMP) for your area? Has your brigade looked at them? If we were to genuinely seek to make a real difference to the Bush Fire Safety of our communities, then doesn't it make sense to target our community engagement efforts to the areas most at risk of a bush fire?
So if we are working towards making our community engagement activities count then we need to understand what IS community engagement. One definition of community engagement is:
'Community engagement' is a planned process with the specific purpose of working with identified groups of people, whether they are connected by geographic location, special interest, or affiliation or identity to address issues affecting their well-being.
Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment
What appeals to me in this definition are the words planned process (though I am usually not keen on being process driven), working with, identified groups and well being.
 |
| Ensuring communities know what to expect when a bush fire occurs. Photo courtesy Gary Walker |
Is it a planned process that involves working with identified groups?
Are your community engagement activities interactive? Or are they about "telling and directing"?
Are they about the sharing of your goals for a safer community?
Are they about creating a real, honest connection and two way communication?
What is the difference between public relations, recruitment, community education and community engagement? Is there a difference?
Community engagement takes planning and is not as an afterthought. Engaging is hard work, and won’t get the time and attention it needs if the leaders of organisations and teams, do not stress its importance. Just as importantly the community is smart, and people will quickly recognise when engagement is being given lip service, rather than seen as a priority. When we go through the ‘motion’ of engagement in order to tick a box, or so that we can say ‘it has been done’, then we actually build up a community resistance to future community engagement approaches that may in fact be genuine.
So following are some suggestions for you to consider:
Research
Know the ‘connectors’ in the community that you wish to engage on bush fire safety. Where do people gather, go regularly and what brings people together. Know who are the community leaders, both formally and informally. What are the issues in that community? What has happened when other organisations (councils, developers, utilities, health organisations etc.) have tried to engage the community? What type of community is it? Close knit, disparate, geographically isolated, attached to the history, fast growing – all groups or communities have their own personalities.
 |
| Do residents in high risk areas know they live in a high risk area? Photo courtesy Gary Walker. |
Listen.
Engagement is not just promotion- handing out of newsletters and holding a display. If your engagement is all about telling the community what’s important, what you’re doing and what you want them to do then it’s not engaging. We need to actively plan for, and seek, two way communications if we want to increase the level of community action. We need to listen and we need to actively seek to understand their position and attitude.
Join local conversations.
We cannot expect all of the conversation to come to us. People are discussing community news, events in the community, what their neighbour is doing and lots of day to day chatter in physical community locations and with social media tools such as Face Book and community blogs. You need to join those discussions and respect the place of others who are leading the conversations.
Telling and one-way conversations have their place, but real and effective engagement involves more than one voice in the conversation. It involves listening, sharing knowledge, seeking suggestions, encouraging the sharing of stories, asking questions, checking for understanding, sharing learnings and personal experiences. It involves conversations and humility. To engage we need to be thick skinned, tolerant, tactful, resourceful, resilient and approachable. We need to remember how crucial conversations are to learning, changing behaviour and improving the understanding of bush fire risk. Conversations need a friendly voice and often benefit from the ability to have a laugh.
 |
| Conversations are critical to community engagement |
Community engagement has many different shapes and forms. It can zap all your energy or leave you on a high feeling really positive. In the RFS it is about helping people to understand their level of risk to bush fire so that they can take steps to protect themselves and their families. It is about making real connections that could help to save a life.
We connect. We interact. We exchange knowledge. We listen. We build relationships in our communities to help preserve life and property from bush fire.
Cheers and thanks
Tanyia
