Expecting the Unexpected: Predicting Physiological and Psychological Wildfire Preparedness from Perceived Risk, Responsibility, and Obstacles

Ilona McNeill, Patrick Dunlop, Jonathan Heath, Timothy Skinner, D Morrison

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    People who live in wildfire-prone communities tend to form their own hazard-related expectations, which may influence their willingness to prepare for a fire. Past research has already identified two important expectancy-based factors associated with people's intentions to prepare for a natural hazard: Perceived risk (i.e., perceived threat likelihood and severity) and perceived protection responsibility. We expanded this research by differentiating the influence of these factors on different types of wildfire preparedness (e.g., preparations for evacuation vs. for defending the house) and measured actual rather than intended preparedness. In addition, we tested the relation between preparedness and two additional threat-related expectations: the expectation that one can rely on an official warning and the expectation of encountering obstacles (e.g., the loss of utilities) during a fire. A survey completed by 1,003 residents of wildfire-prone areas in Perth, Australia, revealed that perceived risk (especially risk severity) and perceived protection responsibility were both positively associated with all types of preparedness, but the latter did not significantly predict preparedness after controlling for other predictors and demographics. Also, the two new expectancy-based factors were significantly associated with all types of preparedness, and remained significant predictors of some types of preparedness after controlling for other predictors and demographics: the expectation of being able to rely on an official fire warning and expecting to lose electricity both still predicted less preparedness around house resilience, and expecting to lose water still predicted increased planning preparedness. We discuss public policy implications that follow from this research.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)1829-1843
    Number of pages15
    JournalRisk Analysis
    Volume33
    Issue number10
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Oct 2013

      Fingerprint

    Cite this