## 3 Results
### Findings from the Semi-Structured Stakeholder Interviews  
We conducted semi-structured interviews with stakeholders that have been affected by the East Gippsland Black Summer fires as well as those who have been identified as important players in the recovery and resilience building process. Stakeholder interviews helped to understand where the Emergency DES would be located best and why, and what are the opportunities and challenges for Emergency DES adoption in East Gippsland (Section 3.4).  
This section discusses a possible location for the installation of Emergency DES technology in Gippsland, which has been informed by the district's emergency governance  
Figure 7: Emergency DES concept as envisioned by the Gippsland community group. Adopted from Innovation Proposal put forward by the Smart Grids Innovation Group (SGI), Gippsland Smart Specialisation Initiative, 2020. This image came from Voices of the Valley via the SGI Program, a community program managed by the Latrobe Valley Authority, Victoria/Australia.  
structure. Information about this governance structure was provided by an interviewee in a follow-up conversation. A relief facility hierarchy was developed by the local council, outlining the function, resources, amenities, and equipment requirements for each type of facility in an emergency (Table 3). The initial assessment shows that an Emergency DES concept could work at all facility level types, but the \"District Level\" appears to be the most promising scale at which to apply the Voices of the Valley concept (Table 3).  
The municipal and local level are least suitable. Municipal facilities are typically located in less remote, more populated areas further from the flame zones. The requirement to accommodate a larger number of people and equipment indicate that major energy services are required, thus a microgrid will not generate sufficient electricity. The local level is also unsuitable as many shelters are located in the flame zones. If the facilities at both the municipal and local level would be scaled up, they could be considered in the future. Ultimately, the district level is most suitable for the adoption of the Emergency DES concept. Here, facilities can be located further away from emergency services and major populations, but closer to the flame zones. The district level provides some level of energy resiliency, but at a smaller scale, which might be the best option.  
East Gippsland Shire Council's relief facility hierarchy can help determine the appropriate scale, requirements, and location for the Emergency DES. Once this is defined, the legal and regulatory implications associated with the chosen technologies and infrastructure can be fully explored and addressed. Starting with a pilot project that will involve a small number of engaged communities is an important first step to developing a replicable approach and a scalable model. However, there remain definitional issues on what constitutes as \"safe\", that can impact whether systems can be located at relief centres and whether they could be formally 'islanded' from the grid. The impact of lost communication plays a crucial role in the Emergency DES concept, but it is being further explored with telecommunications companies [65]. The domestic state assessment finds that public buildings, and buildings that serve as places where communities gather during an emergency, offer a good opportunity for the implementation of the Emergency DES concept. There have been other projects in the region which support such an approach, for example, the Solar on Public Buildings Project [66]. Next, we discuss the results of the PESTEL analysis on opportunities and challenges of DES uptake in East Gippsland.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline