People, homes, businesses and infrastructure were severely impacted from the January 20122 Brisbane Floods. Following the floods, staff from Geoscience Australia and other agencies undertook a door to door field survey of flood affected dwellings to help develop a better understanding of how different structures and building materials were impacted by inundation.

In order for the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) to be able to calculate the impact of earthquakes it is necessary for it to be able to assess the building replacement cost at the level of individual buildings. This document outlines the methodology proposed by Geoscience Australia to determine the replacement cost for buildings. The methodology proposes a method for determining the rate (measured in currency per unit floor area) to reconstruct a building with given characteristics. The reconstruction cost is determined by multiplying the rate by the floor area. The methodology discusses the various factors that affect the rate and suggests sources where data on rates may be found.

More than 17,000 dwellings in the Brisbane and Ipswich area were flood affected when the Bremer and Brisbane Rivers exceeded major flood levels in January 2011. Significant damage was caused to property and many households were severely disrupted for extended periods of time. The disaster prompted a large effort and a range of provisions to enable the clean-up of the direct damage and the promotion of recovery. The disaster provided a valuable opportunity to examine the community recovery following the event and to consequently obtain a better understanding of the resilience of Australian households to flood. During April and May 2012 Geoscience Australia, in collaboration with the New Zealand National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research, conducted a postal survey of residents in the flood affected areas of Brisbane and Ipswich. The response to the survey was very encouraging with nearly 1,300 households responding. The survey covered a range of topics including preparation in the days leading up to the flood inundation, evacuation behaviour, economic impacts and subjective well-being. It also included the reconstruction undertaken and associated recovery in the days, weeks, and months following the flood event. The presentation examines the survey data obtained and focuses on vulnerability and reconstruction. It discusses the composition of vulnerable households (for example people with disabilities, no access to a motor vehicle, single parents with young children), household well-being after the flood event (for example physical, emotional and financial stress) and building fabric issues (for example mould or warped timbers) during the reconstruction phase. Also examined are the steps taken to mitigate against future flood events. The presentation compares two different socio-economic areas and looks at any differences in recovery between the two areas. The survey analysis can point to what householders might experience following the January 2013 flooding in Queensland and NSW.

This dataset has been developed by the Australian Government as an authoritative source of indigenous location names across Australia. The dataset is designed to support the accurate positioning, consistent reporting, and effective delivery of Australian Government programs and services to indigenous locations. The dataset contains Preferred and Alternate names for indigenous locations where Australian Government programs and services have been, are being, or may be provided. The Preferred name will always default to a State or Territory jurisdiction's gazetted name so the term 'preferred' does not infer that this is the locally known name for the location. Similarly, locational details are aligned, where possible, with those published in State and Territory registers. This dataset is NOT a complete listing of all locations at which indigenous people reside. Town and city names are not included in the dataset. The dataset contains names that represent indigenous communities, outstations, defined indigenous areas within a town or city, and locations where services have been provided. It is the intent of the custodians of this dataset to give point of truth information from the jurisdictions where possible. If you wish to provide feedback about a name contained in the dataset, an omission or the locational details shown, please contact the data manager through the AGIL mailbox giving the point of truth contact or link as the basis for the feedback. The dataset consists of three excel workbooks:- A) the field definitions B) the Location table which includes latitude, longitude, unique identifier(location code), state, date created, date retired and retired reason. Where possible, links to the jurisdictional points of truth. C) the Name table which includes location code, name code, date created, date retired, retired reason and name flag (preferred or alternate name).