Householders' Stated Bushfire Survival Intentions Under Hypothetical Threat

Following the 2009 Victorian bushfires, members of the Bushfire CRC Research Task Force interviewed a cross-section of survivors. Analyses of the interview transcripts showed that the main driver of what householders did when they became aware of the threat was their prior plan or intention for responding to a bushfire threat.

The present study involved a survey (postal and on-line) of households in communities identified by fire agency staff in the ACT, NSW, Tasmania and Victoria as being at risk of bushfire attack. The aim was to better understand why householders intend to either: (a) leave as soon as possible, or (b) stay and defend their home, or (c) wait and see what develops before committing to a final action following a bushfire threat warning.

Participating householders were given a description of a bushfire threat warning scenario and asked what they would most likely do in this situation: leave as soon as possible; stay and defend their home; wait and see what developed before committing to a final action to either leave or stay and defend.

A total of 584 householders responded to the survey. Of these, 273 (47%) said they would leave as soon as possible; 139 (24%) said they would stay and defend; 172 (29%) said they would wait and see what developed before committing to a final action.

We concluded that different psychological processes drove each of the three choices. Those whose intention is to leave are motivated mostly by concerns about safety: their own and that of members of their family. They perceive staying and defending to be too risky. Following a bushfire threat warning, they are likely to experience anxiety about: (a) their house being destroyed; and (b) dangers while evacuating. These two sources of anxiety are likely to inhibit some householders intending to leave from doing so in a timely manner. Very few (approximately 2%) are likely to leave solely on the basis of an ‘extreme’ fire danger weather prediction. Despite concerns about safety, only a little more than one-third reported having planned what to do on a day of extreme fire danger, and what to do if a bushfire threat warning was received.

Those whose intention is to stay and defend are motivated mostly by: (a) the desire to protect their property (defined broadly as home, contents, possessions, pets/livestock, and, for some, their neighbours); and (b) confidence in their ability to do so. The desire to protect their possessions is given a higher priority than ensuring their own safety. Bushfire ‘survival’ probably does not resonate for them: they know that staying and defending involves risk. A little less than 60% reported having planned what to do on a day of extreme fire danger, and what to do if a bushfire threat warning was received.

Those whose intention is to wait and see are motivated mostly by concern not to make the wrong decision: (a) leaving unnecessarily and losing the house, being exposed to danger while evacuating, experiencing the inconvenience of evacuating; or (b) staying and being exposed to danger from a serious fire threat. They perceive their risk of being impacted by a bushfire to be relatively low and most believe that if a threat developed, they would have the time and the means to leave late safely. Seven per cent of these householders believe that authorities will warn them when it is time to leave or will protect them from any serious threat. One-quarter reported having planned what to do on a day of extreme fire danger, and what to do if a bushfire threat warning was received. Overall, these householders are somewhat less engaged with issues of bushfire safety compared with the other two groups of householders.