Psychological differences between south-eastern Australian householders' who intend to leave if threatened by a wildfire and those who intend to stay and defend (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2015
Many populated areas of Australia are at high risk of bushfire. All state and territory rural fire services have community bushfire safety education programs providing information and advice to residents about bushfire danger, household risk assessment, and planning and preparing to leave safely or to defend a property assessed as being defensible. Following disastrous bushfires in Victoria in February 2009 resulting in the deaths of 172 civilians and destruction of more than 2000 homes, a programme of interviews with affected residents was conducted. This first study revealed generally low levels of both pre-bushfire perceptions of risk, and planning and preparation by householders. Between 2011 and 2014, six further post-bushfire householder interview studies were conducted. Despite fire agencies' community education endeavours subsequent to the 2009 fires: (a) appreciable percentages of residents interviewed in these six post-2010 studies did not believe that they were at-risk prior to the fire and had no plan for what to do if threatened; (b) of those with a plan, a minority were well-prepared to implement their planespecially if that plan was to leave; (c) very few householders self-evacuated before the fire on the basis of fire danger weather warnings. The findings and implications are discussed.
Bushfire survival preparations by householders in at-risk areas of south-eastern Australia
Australian Journal of Emergency Management
While Australian State and Territory governments devote considerable resources to combating bushfires, landowners and householders are increasingly expected to take responsibility for protecting their property and for their personal safety. All Australian states and territories have community bushfire safety programs in place which provide information and advice to householders about bushfire survival. A 2012 survey of 584 residents in at-risk areas of South-Eastern Australia found generally low levels of planning and preparation for bushfires. Householders’ lack of planning and preparation for safe evacuation if threatened was especially concerning.
International Journal of Wildland Fire, 2013
On Saturday 7 February 2009, 173 people lost their lives and more than 2000 houses were destroyed in bushfires (wildfires) in the Australian State of Victoria. The scale of life and property loss raised fundamental questions about community bushfire safety in Australia, in particular the appropriateness of the ‘Prepare, stay and defend or leave early’ policy. This paper presents findings from research undertaken as part of the Australian Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre’s (CRC) ‘2009 Victorian Bushfires Research Taskforce’. The research examined factors influencing patterns of life and property loss and survival across the fires through mail surveys (n=1314) of fire affected households. Just over half of the respondents (53%) stayed to defend their homes and properties, whereas the remainder left before or when the fires arrived (43%) or sheltered in a house, structure, vehicle, or outside (4%). Results reveal a survival rate of 77% for houses that were defended by one or more h...
It's just a natural way of life...? an investigation of wildfire preparedness in rural Australia
Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards, 2003
This study explores the preparedness of residents living in a rural community in Victoria, Australia, for wildfires, and the factors influencing their preparedness. Overall, participants were well aware of wildfire risks and appeared well prepared for the event of a fire. However, residents involved in agriculture and with a long-standing association with the area appeared better prepared than were those on small properties and newcomers. Their social networks, previous experiences with wildfires and grassfires, and involvement with the local fire brigade influenced preparedness of long-term residents. Characteristics of agricultural communities, including a culture of self-reliance, experience with fires as part of farming, and social cohesion, appeared to contribute to wildfire preparedness within this community. Included are recommendations encouraging preparedness for wildfires.
2005
Australian bushfire agencies have a position that people in the path of a fire should either prepare, stay and defend their properties, or leave the area well before the fire front arrives. The position is based largely on observations that evacuating at the last minute is often fatal and that, generally, a key factor in house survival during a wildfire is the presence of people in the building. In practice, full implementation of the position has been difficult for a range of reasons.
When it comes to preparing for bushfires, not all residents prepare to the same extent. In addition, they differ in the way they intend to respond to a fire threat. Results from a pilot study (Dunlop et al. 2012a, 2012b) suggest that differences in such intended fire responses may be related to differences in levels of preparedness for different types of preparedness. In order to further explore this we conducted a 2wave field-study amongst residents of fire prone areas in Western Australia during the 2011-2012 fire season. Results from 229 respondents showed that those who intended to defend completed more defence preparatory actions than those who had more ambiguous response intentions (e.g. defend until fire directly threatens property), even though this latter group also holds defending as a viable option. Those who intended to evacuate completed the fewest defence preparations and the fewest property preparations, and had the fewest survival kit items. This study thus supports the idea that those with more ambiguous response intentions are more likely to end up being under-prepared.
Living with bushfire risk: Social and environmental influences on preparedness
Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 23(3):41-8
This paper discusses the process of developing a model capable of informing the development of community outreach strategies to facilitate the sustained adoption of bushfire preparedness measures. Following the identification of anomalies in defining the predictors of preparedness, a qualitative study of the reasoning processes that influence whether or not people decided to prepare for bushfire hazards is presented. The findings of the qualitative study are used to revise the preparedness model. Finally, using data from 482 residents in high bushfire risk areas in Hobart, the ability of the revised model to account for differences in levels of household preparedness is discussed.
Self-evacuation archetypes in Australian bushfire
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2018
Australian householders respond to bushfire in diverse and complex ways according to their circumstances and characteristics. They tend not to simply make a binary decision to evacuate from or remain at their property, or simply to 'wait and see' what happens before they decide. Seven self-evacuation archetypes displaying universally recognisable, fundamentally human characteristics were identified through cluster and discriminant function analysis of data from 457 householders who had recently experienced a bushfire. These seven archetypes characterise the diverse attitudes and behaviour of typical groupings of householders faced with making a protective decision during a bushfire. The archetypes comprise those who deny a threat exists (Threat Denier), who do not believe that they are responsible for themselves (Responsibility Denier) or are unable to take responsibility for their safe evacuation (Dependent Evacuator). They include those who are determined to safely evacuate (Considered Evacuator), those who look to advice and guidance from their community (Community Guided) and those who make considerable efforts to remain but are concerned they lack the experience to do so successfully (Worried Waverers). Some, who are experienced with bushfire, selfreliant and well prepared are committed to remaining (Experienced Independents) but in unfavourable circumstances may evacuate. Bushfire safety policy and programs should not treat these householders as simply stereotypical 'evacuators' or 'remainers' but accommodate the diversity of these archetypes to effectively meet their educational and engagement needs.
Denial has often been used to explain why some residents at risk from natural hazards do not take appropriate threat mitigation actions. However, there has been little critical discussion of the concept of denial in relation to natural hazards. We examined the origins and development of the concept and noted that denial, as an explanation for inaction, is an inferred construct, not an observable phenomenon. We reviewed accounts that proposed denial as an explanation for residents failing to mitigate their natural hazard risk. We concluded that the concept has been used so inconsistently as to be meaningless without an explanation of the intended sense of the term. We discuss findings from reports of post-event interviews with residents threatened by severe Australian wildfires, and from a survey of agency community safety senior managers. The reports indicated that small percentages of residents in high-risk communities could be described as perhaps being in denial. The survey found that none of the wildfire agencies employed the concept formally. We suggest that it may be more useful to view most householders' failures to mitigate their wildfire risk as resulting from potential threats being entwined with more immediate higher priority competing demands of everyday life.
Predicting self-evacuation in Australian bushfire
Environmental Hazards, 2018
Australian bushfire safety policy does not require mandatory evacuation from bushfire as practiced in North America and other jurisdictions. Australian householders confronted with a bushfire threat must decide whether they remain and defend their property or evacuate. A better understanding of factors that influence householders' decisions to self-evacuate can inform bushfire safety policy. Studies have identified variables that motivate evacuation from various hazards, including wildfire, but factors shaping the decision processes are not well understood. The Protective Action Decision Model (PADM) provided a theoretical framework of factors influencing protective response to hazard to analyse the actions of householders affected by two bushfires. Three factors that predict self-evacuation were identified: the perception that evacuation is effective in protecting personal safety; the receipt of official warnings; and perceived threat to property. These findings reinforce the importance of increasing householder awareness and sensitivity to the danger posed by bushfire; the adequacy of people's bushfire preparedness; the effectiveness of early evacuation in protecting personal safety; and the potential persuasiveness of accurate, relevant and timely official warning messages in influencing safe evacuation from bushfire.