A Provisional Conceptual Model of Human Behavior in Response to Wildland-Urban Interface Fires

Abstract

With more frequent and destructive wildfires occurring in the growing wildland-urban interface (WUI), the ability to ensure the safe evacuation of potentially large groups of people is of increasing importance. This is a challenging task made only more difficult by the fact that there is often little warning and that evacuations often need to take place in a short period of time. The creation of credible and effective evacuation models is needed within the fire safety engineering community to help address this challenge. Although potentially difficult to represent, a critical component in developing such models is the consideration of what people will do in response to a WUI fire. In this literature review, research relating to WUI fire evacuations was collected to identify the factors that influence protective action decision-making and response during these events, specifically whether someone chooses to evacuate or not. To supplement the findings, related hurricane evacuation literature was also reviewed for such factors. The factors that were identified relate to sociodemographic factors, social and environmental cues, preparation and experience, familial responsibilities, location, and credible threat and risk assessment. These factors were organized according to the Protective Action Decision Model (PADM) to create a conceptual model of protective action decision-making. This is the first step in being able to incorporate such factors and their corresponding impact on public response into comprehensive WUI evacuation models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Figure 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    WUI fire refer to wildfires/bushfires/forest fires that infringe upon the wildland-urban interface.

  2. 2.

    Wildfire research include that which referred to bushfires and forest fires.

  3. 3.

    Despite the practiced policy of evacuation in the United States, a number of studies suggest a growing number of people do not want or intend to evacuate automatically in the event of a wildfire and a small number of communities have looked into implementing a version of evacuation alternatives, primarily shelter in place [46, 59, 88, 89]. With that said, such cases are rare and such methods are still typically seen as a last resort if evacuation is not a possibility.

References

  1. 1.

    McCaffrey S, Toman E, Stidham M, Shindler B (2015) Social science findings in the United States. In: Paton D (ed) Wildfire hazards, risks and disasters. Elsevier, Watham, pp 15–34

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Liu Y, Stanturf J, Goodrick S (2010) Trends in global wildfire potential in a changing climate. For Ecol Manag 259:685–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Jolly WM, Cochrane MA, Freeborn PH et al (2015) Climate-induced variations in global wildfire danger from 1979 to 2013. Nat Commun 6:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Toman E, Stidham M, McCaffrey S, Shindler B (2013) Social science at the wildland-urban interface: a compendium of research results to create fire-adapted communities. Newtown Square, PA

  5. 5.

    Harrison SP, Marlon JR, Bartlein PJ (2010) Fire in the earth system. In: Dodson J (ed)Changing climates, earth systems and society. Springer, Netherlands, pp 21–48

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, and Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service (2001) Urban wildland interface communities within the vicinity of federal lands that are at high risk from wildfire. Fed Reg 66(3):751–777

  7. 7.

    Paveglio TB, Jakes PJ, Carroll MS, Williams DR (2009) Understanding social complexity within the wildland–urban interface: a new species of human habitation? Environ Manag 43:1085–1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-009-9282-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Radeloff VC, Hammer RB, Stewart SI, et al (2005) The wildland–urban interface in the United States. Ecol Appl 15:799–805. https://doi.org/10.1890/04-1413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Cova TJ (2005) Public safety in the urban–wildland interface: should fire-prone communities have a maximum occupancy? Nat Hazards Rev 6:99–108. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2005)6:3(99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    KPMG Canada (2017) May 2016 Wood buffalo wildfire post-incident assessment report prepared for Alberta emergency management agency final report

  11. 11.

    Eglash R (2016) 60,000 Israelis evacuated in Haifa as fires continue to rage—The Washington Post. In: Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/11/24/five-countries-help-israel-fight-massive-fires/?utm_term=.d20a4de96d23. Accessed 12 Oct 2018

  12. 12.

    Tierney L (2018) The grim scope of 2017’s California wildfire season is now clear. The danger’s not over. In: Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/national/california-wildfires-comparison/?utm_term=.2cf517e58af8. Accessed 12 Oct 2018

  13. 13.

    Achenbach J, Wootson Jr. CR, Williams EA (2018) Death toll rises to 25 as 200,000 flee the most destructive fires in California’s history. In: Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/10/trump-blames-gross-mismanagement-wildfires-leave-trail-death-destruction-california/?utm_term=.980095553651. Accessed 15 Nov 2018

  14. 14.

    Jones S (2017) Portugal forest fires under control after more than 60 deaths| World news| The Guardian. In: Guard. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/22/portugal-forest-fires-under-control. Accessed 12 Oct 2018

  15. 15.

    (2018) Greece Wildfires: Dozens Dead in Attica Region. In: BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44932366

  16. 16.

    FEMA America (2014) How to Prepare for a Wildfire. https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/98111

  17. 17.

    Beverly JL, Bothwell P (2011) Wildfire evacuations in Canada 1980-2007. Nat Hazards 59:571–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9777-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Mccaffrey S, Rhodes A, Stidham M (2015) Wildfire evacuation and its alternatives: perspectives from four United States’ communities. Int J Wildland Fire 24:170–178.https://doi.org/10.1071/wf13050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Handmer J, Tibbits A (2005) Is staying at home the safest option during bushfires? Historical evidence for an Australian approach. Environ Hazards 6:81–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazards.2005.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Haynes K, Handmer J, McAneney J, et al (2010) Australian bushfire fatalities 1900–2008: exploring trends in relation to the ‘Prepare, stay and defend or leave early’ policy. Environ Sci Policy 13:185–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2010.03.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Ronchi E, Gwynne S, Rein G, et al (2017) e-Sanctuary: open multi-physics framework for modelling wildfire urban evacuation. Quincy, MA

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Paveglio TB, Carroll MS, Jakes PJ (2008) Alternatives to evacuation—Protecting public safety during wildland fire. J For 106:65–70

    Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Kumagai Y, Carroll MS, Cohn P (2004) Coping with interface wildfire as a human event: lessons from the disaster/hazards literature. J For 102:28–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/102.6.28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Sorensent JH (1991) When shall we leave? Factors affecting the timing of evacuation departures. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 9:153–165

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Sorensen JH (2000) Hazard warning systems: review of 20 years of progress. Nat Hazards Rev 1:119–125. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2000)1:2(119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Thompson RR, Garfin DR, Silver RC (2017) Evacuation from Natural disasters: a systematic review of the literature. Risk Anal 37:812–839. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Trainor JE, Murray-Tuite P, Edara P, et al (2013) Interdisciplinary approach to evacuation modeling. Nat Hazards Rev 14:151–162. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Lindell MK, Perry RW (2004) Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Cova TJ, Johnson JP (2002) Microsimulation of neighborhood evacuations in the urban–wildland interface. Environ Plan A 34:2211–2229. https://doi.org/10.1068/a34251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Cova TJ, Dennison PE, Drews FA (2011) Modeling evacuate versus shelter-in-place decisions in wildfires. Sustainability 3:1662–1687. https://doi.org/10.3390/su3101662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Herrera-Restrepo O, Triantis K, Trainor J, et al (2016) A multi-perspective dynamic network performance efficiency measurement of an evacuation: a dynamic network-DEA approach. Omega 60:45–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.04.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Murray-Tuite P, Wolshon B (2013) Evacuation transportation modeling: an overview of research, development, and practice. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 27:25–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2012.11.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Beloglazov A, Almashor M, Abebe E, et al (2016) Simulation of wildfire evacuation with dynamic factors and model composition. Simul Model Pract Theory 60:144–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2015.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Tierney KJ, Lindell MK, Perry RW (2001) Facing the unexpected: disaster preparedness and response in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Mileti DS, Sorensent JH (1990) Communication of emergency public warnings A social science perspective and state-of-the-art assessment. Federal Emergency Management Agency , Oak Ridge

    Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Drabek TE (1986) Human system responses to disaster : an inventory of sociological findings. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Kuligowski ED (2011) Terror Defeated: Occupant Sense-making, Decision-making and Protective Action in the 2001 World Trade Center Disaster. University of Colorado, Denver

    Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Groner, Norman (2009) A situation awareness analysis for the use of elevators during fire emergencies. In: International symposium on human behavior in fire: conference proceedings. Interscience Communications, London, UK, pp 61–72

  39. 39.

    Perry RW, Lindell MK, Greene MR (1981) Evacuation planning in emergency management. Lexington Books, Lexington

    Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Aguirre BE, Wenger D, Vigo G (1998) A test of the emergent norm theory of collective behavior. Sociol Forum 13:301–320. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022145900928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Turner RH, Killian LM (1972) Collective behavior. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Mileti DS, Beck EM (1975) Communication in Crisis. Commun Res 2:24–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365027500200102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Mileti DS, O’Brien PW (1992) Public response to aftershock warnings. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO

  44. 44.

    Kuligowski ED, Lombardo FT, Phan LT, et al (2014) Final report: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Technical Investigation of the May 22, 2011, Tornado in Joplin, Missouri. Gaithersburg, MD

  45. 45.

    Sutton PJ, Shklovshi I (2008) Backchannels on the front lines: Emergent use of social media in the 2007 Southern California fire. In: Fiedrich F, Van de Walle B (eds) Proceedings of information systems for crisis response and management conference (ISCRAM). Washington, D.C

  46. 46.

    Mozumder P, Raheem N, Talberth J, Berrens RP (2008) Investigating intended evacuation from wildfires in the wildland–urban interface: application of a bivariate probit model. For Policy Econ 10:415–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2008.02.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Mclennan J, Elliott G, Omodei M (2012) Householder decision making under imminent wildfire threat: stay and defend or leave? Int J Wildland Fire 21:915–925. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf11061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Mclennan J, Elliott G, Omodei M, Whittaker J (2013) Householders’ safety-related decisions, plans, actions and outcomes during the 7 February 2009 Victorian (Australia) wildfires. Fire Saf J 61:175–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2013.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 49.

    Benight C, Gruntfest E, Sparks K (2004) Colorado wildfire 2002. University of Colorado Boulder, Colorado Springs

    Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Strawderman L, Salehi A, Babski-Reeves K, et al (2012) Reverse 911 as a complementary evacuation warning system. Nat Hazards Rev 13:65–73. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Whittaker J, Handmer J (2010) Review of key bushfire research findings. RMIT University, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  52. 52.

    Cohn PJ, Carroll MS (2006) Evacuation behavior during wildfires: results of three case studies. West J Appl For 21:39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. 53.

    Whittaker J, Haynes K, Handmer J, McLennan J (2013) Community safety during the 2009 Australian “Black Saturday” bushfires: an analysis of household preparedness and response. Int J Wildland Fire 22:841–849. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf12010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. 54.

    Whittaker J, Eriksen C, Haynes K (2016) Gendered responses to the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria, Australia. Geogr Res 54:203–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.12162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. 55.

    Eriksen C, Gill N, Head L (2010) The gendered dimensions of bushfire in changing rural landscapes in Australia. J Rural Stud 26:332–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2010.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. 56.

    Paveglio T, Prato T, Dalenberg D, Venn T (2014) Understanding evacuation preferences and wildfire mitigations among Northwest Montana residents. Int J Wildland Fire 23:435. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf13057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. 57.

    Mclennan J, Elliott G, Omodei M (2011) Issues in community bushfire safety: analyses of interviews conducted by the 2009 Victorian bushfires research task force. La Trobe University, Bundoora

    Google Scholar 

  58. 58.

    Proudley M (2008) Fire, families and decisions. Aust J Emerg Manag 23:37–43

    Google Scholar 

  59. 59.

    McCaffrey SM, Winter G (2011) Understanding homeowner preparation and intended actions when threatened by a wildfire. In: McCaffrey SM, Fisher CL (eds) Proceedings of the second conference on the human dimensions of wildland fire. Newtown Square, pp 88–95

  60. 60.

    Tibbits A, Whittaker J (2007) Stay and defend or leave early: policy problems and experiences during the 2003 Victorian bushfires. Environ Hazards 7:283–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 61.

    McLennan J, Paton D, Beatson R (2015) Psychological differences between South-Eastern Australian householders’ who intend to leave if threatened by a wildfire and those who intend to stay and defend. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 11:35–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.11.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. 62.

    McLennan J, Cowlishaw S, Paton D, et al (2014) Predictors of South-Eastern Australian householders’ strengths of intentions to self-evacuate if a wildfire threatens: two theoretical models. Int J Wildland Fire 23:1176–1188. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf13219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. 63.

    McNeill IM, Dunlop PD, Skinner TC, Morrison DL (2016) A value-and expectancy-based approach to understanding residents. Int J Wildland Fire 25:378–389. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf15051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. 64.

    AFAC (2005) Position Paper on Bushfires and Community Safety. https://www.wildfirelessons.net/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=76919e34-3063-4749-b4c7-1af68ec35abd&forceDialog=0

  65. 65.

    Mclennan J, Elliott G (2013) “Wait and See”: the elephant in the community bushfire safety room? In: Thornton R, Wright L (eds) Proceedings of bushfire CRC & AFAC 2012 Conference Research Forum. Perth, pp 56–69

  66. 66.

    McNeill IM, Dunlop PD, Skinner TC, Morrison DL (2015) Predicting delay in residents’ decisions on defending v. evacuating through antecedents of decision avoidance. Int J Wildland Fire 24:153–161. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf12213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. 67.

    McLennan J, Ryan B, Bearman C, Toh K (2018) Should we leave now? Behavioral factors in evacuation under wildfire threat. Fire Technol 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-018-0753-8

  68. 68.

    Bateman JM, Edwards B (2002) Gender and evacuation: a closer look at why women are more likely to evacuate for hurricanes. Nat Hazards Rev 3:107–117. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2002)3:3(107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. 69.

    Dow K, Cutter SL (2001) Public orders and personal opinions: household strategies for hurricane risk assessment. Environ Hazards 2:143–155. https://doi.org/10.3763/ehaz.2000.0220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. 70.

    Whitehead JC, Edwards B, Van Willigen M, et al (2001) Heading for higher ground: factors affecting real and hypothetical hurricane evacuation behavior. Environ Hazards 2:133–142. https://doi.org/10.3763/ehaz.2000.0219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. 71.

    Stein RM, Dueñas-Osorio L, Subramanian D (2010) Who evacuates when hurricanes approach? The role of risk, information, and location. Soc Sci Q 91:816–834. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2010.00721.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. 72.

    Huang S-K, Lindell MK, Prater CS, et al (2012) Household evacuation decision making in response to Hurricane Ike. Nat Hazards Rev 13:283–296. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)nh.1527-6996.0000074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. 73.

    Dash N, Gladwin H (2007) Evacuation decision making and behavioral responses: individual and household. Nat Hazards Rev 8:69–77. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2007)8:3(69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. 74.

    Lindell MK, Lu J-C, Prater CS (2005) Household decision making and evacuation in response to Hurricane Lili. Nat Hazards Rev 6:171–179. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2005)6:4(171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. 75.

    Lazo JK, Bostrom A, Morss RE, et al (2015) Factors affecting hurricane evacuation intentions. Risk Anal 35:1837–1857. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 76.

    Smith SK, McCarty C (2009) Fleeing the storm(s): an examination of evacuation behavior during Florida’s 2004 hurricane season. Demography 46:127–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. 77.

    Baker EJ (1991) Hurricane evacuation behavior. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 9:287–310

    Google Scholar 

  78. 78.

    Murray-Tuite P, Yin W, Ukkusuri S, Gladwin H (2012) Changes in evacuation decisions between Hurricanes Ivan and Katrina. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2312:98–107. https://doi.org/10.3141/2312-10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. 79.

    Dixon DS, Mozumder P, Vásquez WF, Gladwin H (2017) Heterogeneity within and across households in hurricane evacuation response. Networks Spat Econ 17:645–680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-017-9339-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. 80.

    Hasan S, Ukkusuri S, Gladwin H, et al (2011) Behavioral model to understand household-level hurricane evacuation decision making. J Transp Eng 137:341–348. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)te.1943-5436.0000223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. 81.

    Riad JK, Norris FH, Ruback RB (1999) Predicting evacuation in two major disasters: risk perception, social influence, and access to resources 1. J Appl Soc Psychol 29:918–934. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb00132.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. 82.

    Solís D, Thomas M, Letson D (2010) An empirical evaluation of the determinants of household hurricane evacuation choice. J Dev Agric Econ 2:188–196

    Google Scholar 

  83. 83.

    Dow K, Cutter SL (2002) Emerging hurricane evacuation issues: Hurricane Floyd and South Carolina. Nat Hazards Rev 3:12–18.1 https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2002)3:1(12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. 84.

    Petrolia DR, Bhattacharjee S (2010) Why Don’t coastal residents choose to evacuate for hurricanes? Coast Manag 38:97–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920751003605365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. 85.

    Barnshaw J, Trainor J (2010) Race class and capital amidst the hurricane Katrina diaspora. In: Brunsma D, Overfelt D, Picou JS (eds) The sociology of Katrina: Perspectives on a modern catastrophe, Chap 5, 2nd ed. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD, pp 103–118

  86. 86.

    Lindell MK, Kang JE, Prater CS (2011) The logistics of household hurricane evacuation. Nat Hazards 58:1093–1109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9715-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. 87.

    Lovreglio R, Kuligowski ED, Gwynne SMV, Strahan K (2019) A modelling framework for householder decision-making for wildfire emergencies (under review)

  88. 88.

    Paveglio TB, Carroll MS, Jakes PJ (2010) Alternatives to evacuation during wildland fire: exploring adaptive capacity in one Idaho community. Environ Hazards 9:379–394. https://doi.org/10.3763/ehaz.2010.0060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. 89.

    Stidham M, Toman E, Shindler B (2011) Improving an Inherently Stressful Situation: The role of communication during wildfire evacuations. In: Proceedings of the second conference on the human dimensions of wildland fire. USDA forest service, San Antonio, TX, pp 96–103

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Richard Peacock and Nelson Bryner from NIST for review of this article. This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant, the Society of Fire Protection Engineering (SFPE) Foundation Dr. Guylène Proulx OC Scholarship, and the International Association of Wildland Fire (IAWF) graduate scholarship.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lauren H. Folk.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Folk, L.H., Kuligowski, E.D., Gwynne, S.M.V. et al. A Provisional Conceptual Model of Human Behavior in Response to Wildland-Urban Interface Fires. Fire Technol 55, 1619–1647 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-019-00821-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Wildland urban interface
  • Wildfires
  • Hurricanes
  • Evacuation
  • Human behavior
  • Conceptual model