Between absence and presence 107
pleasantly surprised to discover that his lost belongings were insured to a
higher level than he had expected. Although the loss of his cabin and its contents, as well as the devastating impacts on the surrounding bushland, had
been painful experiences for Ben, the unexpectedly large financial payout,
and the ease of the process of filling in his claim, had provided him with
valuable time with which to recover. Rather than replacing lost items, Ben
instead used his insurance payout to finance time off work, during which
he cleared the fire-damaged parts of his property, and worked on finishing his home. These acts of post-fire homemaking and engagement with the
transformed property were important to Ben’s recovery process, and were
of more significant value to him than replacing lost belongings.
Attending to these bushfire survivor accounts suggests the need to understand time and labour, particularly as they relate to processes of homemaking, as intangible objects of enormous value that nonetheless remain
uninsurable. A significant impact of bushfire is lost time, both in terms of the
lost time that went into making the home pre-fire, and the time it will take to
make a post-fire life. In some cases, insurance reduced this impact, including
through payouts that funded the purchase of labour and time from builders.
In others, insurance took up more time, and required more effort in navigating complex policies and negotiating disputes with assessors. Again, the
bushfire survivors calculated the value of insurance to their recovery via factors that were either non-monetary or that circumvented financial hurdles.
Conclusion
As argued by Whittle et al. (2012, p. 68), ‘recovery is more than just a ‘bricks
and mortar’ exercise to be measured through statistics of displacement and
return or economic damage.’ Equally, a home is more than simply a set of
material (and insurable) structures. It is also a spatial and temporal process
of creation and maintenance, enfolded with emotional, mnemonic, and affective meanings. The material destruction of a home by fire is a devastating
loss, and witnessing or engaging with the ruins is often a confronting yet
important moment for survivors (Schlunke 2016; Eriksen & Ballard 2020).
For insured householders, insurance offers at least some confidence in their
financial capacity to rebuild. Lost material structures and belongings can be
imagined into presence in a rebuilt and restored future. Yet, impacts on emotional wellbeing, intangible currencies, and irreplaceable objects must equally
be negotiated through the recovery process. In this chapter, we have explored
how survivors negotiate the disjuncture between their understanding of home
and loss, and the ways in which that loss is configured by insurance only as a
‘bricks and mortar’ exercise to be assessed, compensated, and rebuilt.
In neoliberal models of addressing disaster risk through market-based
financialisation, the impacts of bushfire on the non-monetary meanings and
values of home are absent. Insurance is known to exacerbate social inequalities pre- and post-disaster (Booth & Tranter 2018), with consequent
pleasantly surprised to discover that his lost belongings were insured to a
higher level than he had expected. Although the loss of his cabin and its contents, as well as the devastating impacts on the surrounding bushland, had
been painful experiences for Ben, the unexpectedly large financial payout,
and the ease of the process of filling in his claim, had provided him with
valuable time with which to recover. Rather than replacing lost items, Ben
instead used his insurance payout to finance time off work, during which
he cleared the fire-damaged parts of his property, and worked on finishing his home. These acts of post-fire homemaking and engagement with the
transformed property were important to Ben’s recovery process, and were
of more significant value to him than replacing lost belongings.
Attending to these bushfire survivor accounts suggests the need to understand time and labour, particularly as they relate to processes of homemaking, as intangible objects of enormous value that nonetheless remain
uninsurable. A significant impact of bushfire is lost time, both in terms of the
lost time that went into making the home pre-fire, and the time it will take to
make a post-fire life. In some cases, insurance reduced this impact, including
through payouts that funded the purchase of labour and time from builders.
In others, insurance took up more time, and required more effort in navigating complex policies and negotiating disputes with assessors. Again, the
bushfire survivors calculated the value of insurance to their recovery via factors that were either non-monetary or that circumvented financial hurdles.
Conclusion
As argued by Whittle et al. (2012, p. 68), ‘recovery is more than just a ‘bricks
and mortar’ exercise to be measured through statistics of displacement and
return or economic damage.’ Equally, a home is more than simply a set of
material (and insurable) structures. It is also a spatial and temporal process
of creation and maintenance, enfolded with emotional, mnemonic, and affective meanings. The material destruction of a home by fire is a devastating
loss, and witnessing or engaging with the ruins is often a confronting yet
important moment for survivors (Schlunke 2016; Eriksen & Ballard 2020).
For insured householders, insurance offers at least some confidence in their
financial capacity to rebuild. Lost material structures and belongings can be
imagined into presence in a rebuilt and restored future. Yet, impacts on emotional wellbeing, intangible currencies, and irreplaceable objects must equally
be negotiated through the recovery process. In this chapter, we have explored
how survivors negotiate the disjuncture between their understanding of home
and loss, and the ways in which that loss is configured by insurance only as a
‘bricks and mortar’ exercise to be assessed, compensated, and rebuilt.
In neoliberal models of addressing disaster risk through market-based
financialisation, the impacts of bushfire on the non-monetary meanings and
values of home are absent. Insurance is known to exacerbate social inequalities pre- and post-disaster (Booth & Tranter 2018), with consequent