GEOG30021 – TAKE HOME EXAM INSTRUCTIONS, 2025
Due Date: 5th November 2025, 23.59pm
Submit to: canvas
Length: 2000 words (+/- 10%) – excluding reference list, but including in-text citations
Weight: 60% of subject assessment
• Choose ONE of the following disaster events as your case study:
1. 2011, Bangkok floods, Thailand
2. 2017, Hurricane Maria, Puerto Rico
3. 2021, 10-11 December Tornado Outbreak, United States
4. 2019-20, Black Summer Bushfires, Australia
5. 2010-11, Christchurch Earthquakes, New Zealand

• Choose ONE of the four questions below and answer in relation to your chosen case
study. Any of the four questions can be addressed in relation to any of the first four
case studies,
• Please ensure your work is 1.5 or double spaced.
• Reference all data and sources correctly, using APA referencing style (including
both in-text citations and reference list)
• You may include images (e.g. maps, photos, graphs) but must caption each image,
and explicitly cite and discuss it in the text.
• In your response, refer to at least eight refereed journal articles on your case study
or about disasters more generally. These can include readings from the tutorial
readings list, readings cited in the lectures, and references provided in the
assignment instructions.
• In your response, you are required to directly engage and refer to at least two
relevant lectures this semester. You can cite the specific lecture simply by week, for
example “(Week 4 lecture)”.
• Academic integrity: you can use a small number of direct quotes in your report and
cite them appropriately (including quotation marks for the quote, and page number in
the in-text citation). All other ideas taken from other sources must be paraphrased
and appropriately cited in the text.
• If you use AI generated material in the preparation of your submission, you must
appropriately declare how you have used AI as part of your submission. See further
details here.
• As part of the preparation of this assignment, you are required to keep at least two
early drafts of your work. You do not need to submit these drafts with your
assignment, but may be asked to present these drafts in case your work is flagged
by Turnitin as potentially written by AI. Keeping these drafts will help you
demonstrate that the work you submitted is your own work.
• We will apply a penalty of 4% (2.5 points out of the total 60) for each day late in
submitting your assessment. For extensions less than 10 days, please contact Nida
Mollison (n.mollison@unimelb.edu.au). For extensions greater than 10 days, please
apply for special consideration.
• Extensions: for extension requests of up to 10 work days, please email Nida
Mollison at n.mollison@unimelb.edu.au . Please include in your request the following
information:
o Subject code: GEOG30021
o Number of days of extension requested.
o Reason for extension request.
o Attach AAP if applicable
• For extension requests of over 10 working days, or after the due date has
passed, please apply for Special Considerations through SEDS:
https://students.unimelb.edu.au/your-course/manage-your-course/exams-assessments-
and-results/special-consideration

Questions (choose one of four options)


1. Apply the UNDRR (2022) principles for resilient infrastructure to critically
analyse the causes and effects of the disaster.

You may choose to focus on some, but not all, principles of the framework.
UNDRR (2022). Principles of Resilient Infrastructure. https://www.undrr.org/publication/principles-
resilient-infrastructure

2. Apply Cretney’s (2014) ‘critical geographies of socioecological resilience’
to critically analyse the causes and effects of the disaster.

Specifically, engage with the three themes of resilience as a neoliberal tool, resilience as
securitization, and resilience as radical transformation. You may choose to focus on one, two or all
three of these themes.

Cretney, R. (2014). Resilience for whom? Emerging critical geographies of socio‐ecological
resilience. Geography compass, 8(9), 627-640.

3. Apply Gould et al.’s (2016) concepts of the ‘managerial state’, ‘state of
catastrophe’, and ‘state of reconstruction’ to critically analyse the causes and
effects of the disaster.

In responding to this question, you will need to engage with all three concepts mentioned in the
prompt.
Gould, K. A., Garcia, M. M., & Remes, J. A. (2016). Beyond" natural-disasters-are-not-natural": the
work of state and nature after the 2010 earthquake in Chile. Journal of Political Ecology, 23(1), 93-
114.

4. Drawing on your case study, critically discuss both the potential and the
limitations of scientific knowledge about hazards in disaster risk reduction
(DRR) strategies.

Examine whether and how the scientific understanding of the hazard informed disaster risk reduction
(DRR) strategies, preparations and responses before, during and after the disaster event you have
chosen. Consider what was known about the hazard, what was applied in DRR strategies, and what
gaps existed. Identify what changes, if any, were made to scientific knowledge and to its use in DRR
strategies afterwards. Reflect on how scientific knowledge and its use in the case study were shaped,
constrained, or contested by wider political, economic, and social contexts




Marking criteria
CRITERIA 1 (15 points) – writing quality: Quality of writing, including structure,
grammar, clarity of expression, and referencing. Clearly structured; ideas explained
clearly in student’s own words and voice; minimal use of quotes, which are carefully
selected and appropriately referenced;

CRITERIA 2 (15 points) – quality and depth of conceptual engagement: The report
reflects in-depth understanding of key concepts (such as risk, resilience and
vulnerability); it applies the concepts effectively; there is in-depth engagement with
subject materials (lectures and tutorial readings);

CRITERIA 3 (30 points) – quality of argument and supporting evidence: Quality
and coherence of argument in response to the assignment
question; Evidence/examples from the case study support the argument - the selection
of examples and their interpretation is compelling; the sources used to support evidence
are high quality;

学霸联盟