Hazard perceptions and preparedness of t

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0965-3562.htm Hazard perceptions and preparedness of Taranaki youth Hazard perceptions Kirsten K Finnis and David M Johnston Joint Centre for Disaster Research, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand 175 Kevin R Ronan School of Psychology and Sociology, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia, and James D White Department of Geology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between participation in hazard education programs and levels of hazard awareness, risk perceptions, knowledge of response-related protective behaviour and household preparedness Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire examining various measures including participation in hazard education programmes, risk perceptions and household preparedness was delivered under teacher guidance to high school students in three different locations in the Taranaki Region of New Zealand A total of 282 valid questionnaires were returned Data were analysed by means of chi-squared, t-test and ANOVA Findings – Students who have participated in hazard education programmes are more likely to have better knowledge of safety behaviours and higher household preparedness However, even with hazard education, some aspects of hazard awareness and the uptake of family emergency plans and practices were found to be poor Overall, hazard education was found to be beneficial and helps to create potentially more-resilient children and communities Research limitations/implications – The research is limited to the views of the students The study would benefit from a parallel study of parents or caregivers to give a more accurate report of household preparedness and family emergency plans and practices The research highlights areas of change for future hazard education programmes and provides support for the continued inclusion of this topic in the curriculum Originality/value – The paper offers insight into the effectiveness and benefit of incorporating hazard education into the school curriculum in New Zealand Keywords Youth, Risk assessment, Strategic planning, Hazards Paper type Research paper Introduction This study gathered information from students from Taranaki, New Zealand, regarding levels of hazard awareness, risk perceptions, knowledge of response-related protective behaviour and household preparedness, and assesses whether there are differences in these factors between the three locations and students who have and have not participated in hazard education This purpose of this evaluation is to This research was funded by the University of Otago through Dr James White and GNS Science (Research Grant: C05X0402) in conjunction with Massey University and the Foundation for Research Science and Technology (Research Grant: MAUX0401) Disaster Prevention and Management Vol 19 No 2, 2010 pp 175-184 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0965-3562 DOI 10.1108/09653561011037986 DPM 19,2 176 determine whether students who participate in hazard education have better awareness of hazards in their area, have more reasonable risk perceptions and are better prepared than students who have not participated in hazard education programmes Public education campaigns aimed at adults to increase their hazard awareness and preparedness are often evaluated (e.g Anderson-Berry et al., 2003; Turner et al., 1986; Faupel et al., 1992; Lopes, 1992; Mileti and Darlington, 1995; Mileti and Fitzpatrick, 1993; AC Nielsen, 2003; Farley, 1998), however, the effectiveness of school-based hazard education programmes is infrequently reported (Finnis et al., 2004; Johnston and Houghton, 1995; Ronan and Johnston, 2001, 2003) As hazards not necessarily occur when families are together at home, it is as important for youth to be aware of and prepared for hazards as it is for adults, so that they can respond and cope effectively to an emergency situation Having both adults and youth educated in, and undertaking hazard preparedness measures promotes overall personal, family and community resilience The Taranaki Region of New Zealand is susceptible to a range of hazards, the most significant of which are flooding, earthquakes, high winds (tornadoes and cyclones) and volcanic eruption (Taranaki Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, 2004) In the last ten years, 77 weather warnings have been issued by the MetService for the region Five major floods have occurred in the last 20 years, with the most recent in 1998 Storms with high winds were experienced in 1996 and 1997 from the remains of Cyclones Fergus and Drena Inglewood was hit by a tornado in 1990, and a swarm of tornadoes crossed the region in 2007 Felt earthquakes average seven a year, with a magnitude 6.4 earthquake occurring in the region in 2005 At the centre of the region lies Mt Taranaki, an andesitic stratovolcano, that may well erupt within the next 50 years according to geological records (Turner et al., 2007) Studies have shown that previous eruptions deposited ash as far as Auckland (over 250 km away) (Shane, 2005) and have generated numerous debris avalanches and lahars (Neall and Alloway, 1993) Hazard education in New Zealand is currently a minor part of the curriculum and is not widely taught in schools Until 2002, hazard education was taught in New Zealand schools as part of an integrated social studies syllabus in Years to 10 (ages 11 to 14), then as part of the geography syllabus, an elective subject, from Years 11 to 13 (Macaulay and Logie, 1996) In the current National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) curriculum, hazard education and civil defence issues may be addressed through the science curriculum in years to 13, however, civil defence and natural disasters are only given as “sample learning contexts”, and not have to be included in science education New Zealand’s Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management found that several issues precluded hazard education being commonly taught; the information does fit link with curriculum, there is competition for class time with in the set curriculum, there is limited interest and commitment from teachers, are limited and inconsistent resources, and though different age groups need to be targeted, written material tends to be produced for adults and not children (Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management, 2003) To address these issues a new school resource specifically targeted at children aged 10-13 years of age and designed to be better integrated with the school curriculum was launched in 2007 (Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management, 2006) Within the region, the Taranaki Regional Council has been active in promoting volcanic hazard education in primary and secondary schools by providing teachers with resource kits and guided fieldtrips to the volcano Although education is being provided, little is known about whether it helps students better understand hazards and be prepared This lack of demonstrated effectiveness may also be a contributing factor to its lack of inclusion in the curriculum Examining whether or not hazard education is beneficial can either provide a case for more strongly embedding it into the curriculum if it is working, or a reason to withdraw or redevelop it if no benefit is found Of course there is no true test of the benefit of hazard education until students have experienced a hazard and it can be determined whether they acted and coped better than students who had not participated in education Until this happens, the benefit of education and resilience potential can be nevertheless assessed by examining the difference in levels of accurate hazard and safety behaviour knowledge and levels of preparedness between students who have, versus those who have not participated in hazards education This study supplements other investigations recently undertaken in New Zealand and the USA that have measured youths’ risk perceptions, hazard awareness and preparedness and identified factors contributing to vulnerability in communities (Ronan and Johnston, 2001; Ronan et al., 2001; Johnston and Benton, 1998; Johnston et al., 2001; Johnston and Houghton, 1995, Finnis et al., 2004) Method Procedure In April 2003, staff at high schools in the Taranaki towns of Inglewood, Stratford and Opunake were consulted regarding the purpose of the study and their potential involvement Schools that agreed to participate in the study were sent packages containing sets of questionnaires and return envelopes This allowed the questionnaires to be administered by the teachers to the students at a time which was either relevant to the study topic or convenient to the students and teachers Discussion with the teachers concerning how to administer the survey was carried out personally during school consultation or later via phone or e-mail The teachers were given the option to administer the survey as part of a class exercise or, if class time was not available, as part of homework Measures The questionnaire used in the study was modified from that used in the Ronan and Johnston (2001) study, and included more region-specific questions The questionnaire assessed the following: each student’s hazard awareness and risk perceptions, psychological issues, knowledge of response-related protective behaviours, involvement with hazard education program(s), interaction with parents, and preparedness activities Hazard awareness and risk perceptions Participants were asked to identify from a list of hazards (flood, storm with high winds, house fire, earthquake, volcanic eruption, tsunami, chemical spill and tornado), the two most likely to affect them at home, and to rate the likelihood of occurrence in their area and potential to cause injury of each hazard on a 3-point scale (1 ¼ likely, ¼ a chance, ¼ unlikely) Knowledge of response-related protective behaviours Students were asked to select from a list the appropriate behaviour or behaviours to undertake in the event of each Hazard perceptions 177 DPM 19,2 178 hazard (e.g “Duck, cover, hold” in the event of an earthquake) Each hazard had a range of three to six possible responses with differing numbers of correct responses A total of 16 correct responses could be selected, ten of these being classified as “vital” behaviours Students were instructed that they could select more than one option if it represented an appropriate response These items were chosen from those that are commonly discussed in education programs and public education material Preparedness activities Having family plans, practising in home- and school-based emergency practices and having adopted specific household hazard adjustments were classified as preparedness activities for this study Students were asked to recall whether their family had an emergency plan, and if they had ever practised what to in an emergency at school or with their family The students were then asked to identify what adjustments they knew their family to have adopted from a list of 23 items including: having a flashlight, transistor radio with spare batteries, fire extinguisher, first-aid kit and a stockpile of water and food for three days, having a designated place to store these items, having a smoke detector, rearranging breakable items, installing latches on cabinet doors, storing hazardous materials safely, adding lips to shelves, strapping the water heater, bolting house to foundation, bracing the pile foundation, having the home inspected for resistance, placing a wrench near turn off valves, having an emergency contact person, someone in the family learning how to put out fires, someone in the family learning how to administer first aid and finding out which hazards are more likely in their area Results Participants A total of 282 students from the three schools participated in the survey: 102 from Inglewood High School, 107 from Stratford High School and 73 from Opunake High School Of these, 137 were males and 135 and females (ten declined to answer) The students’ ages ranged between 13 and 18 (M ¼ 14.21, SD ¼ 1.24) Ethnic diversity was limited primarily to European (n ¼ 201) and Ma¯ori (n ¼ 62) with small numbers of Asian (n ¼ 4), Pacific Islander (n ¼ 1) and Other (n ¼ 9) 230 students claimed to have participated in hazard education programs There is no significant difference in participation in hazard education programs between the schools, x (2, 282) ¼ 4.48, p 0.10 Hazard awareness and risk perceptions Table I shows the frequencies of the hazards chosen to be the most likely to affect students at home, and the means and standard deviations of the hazards thought most likely to occur locally in the future and cause injury House fire was selected by the students as the hazard most likely to occur at home and to cause injury, and earthquakes and storms with high winds were chosen as the most likely to occur locally in the future No significant difference was found in the hazards chosen most likely to occur at home between the three locations The perceived likelihood of tsunami and tornadoes occurring locally in the near future was significantly different between the schools F (2, 278) ¼ 8.34, p , 0.001 and F (2, 279) ¼ 4.40, p , 0.05, respectively Scheffe´ post hoc analysis indicated that Opunake students perceive the risk of tsunami greater than students from Inglewood and Stratford High Schools, p , 0.001, and Inglewood students perceive the risk of tornadoes greater than students from Opunake and Stratford, p , 0.001 A significant difference in the perceived likelihood of floods and tsunami causing injury was found between the schools F (2, 279) ¼ 8.34, p , 0.001 and F (2, 279) ¼ 4.40, p , 0.05, respectively Opunake students perceive the risk of injury from flood greater than students from Inglewood and Stratford High Schools, p , 0.001, and Inglewood students perceive the risk of injury from tsunami less than students from Opunake and Stratford, p , 0.001 Hazard awareness was found to be significantly different between students who had attended hazard education and those who had not, x (7, 549) ¼ 15.83, p , 0.05 The frequency of the hazard-educated students choosing storm with high winds was higher (17 per cent versus 10 per cent), and tsunami lower (1 per cent versus per cent), than students who have not participated in hazard education All other hazards were chosen by the students at approximately the same frequency Volcanic eruption was perceived by educated students (M ¼ 1.94, SD ¼ 0.59) as more likely to occur in future than by non-hazard-educated students (M ¼ 2.21, SD ¼ 0.61), t(279) ¼ 2.93, p , 0.01 The perceived likelihood of injury caused by storms with high winds was found to be significantly greater in non-educated students (M ¼ 1.86, SD ¼ 0.61) than in educated students (M ¼ 2.08, SD ¼ 0.64), t(274) ¼ 2.67, p , 0.05 Hazard perceptions 179 Knowledge of response-related safety behaviours Students were knowledgeable of most protective behaviours Of the vital behaviours, two students selected no correct behaviours and 13 selected all ten Table II reports the descriptive statistics for knowledge for both the total and vital safety behaviours No significant differences in the knowledge of either total or vital safety behaviours were found between the schools However, for both total and vital behaviours, students who have participated in hazard education programs (M t ¼ 10.20, SD t ¼ 2.96/Mv ¼ 7.20, SDt ¼ 1.74) chose significantly more correct behaviours than Hazard House fire Earthquake Storm with high winds Volcanic eruption Flood Chemical spill Tornado Tsunami Behaviours Total Vital Hazard awareness (%) 34 21 18 15 2 Risk perception Occurrence Injury 1.64 1.59 1.59 1.99 2.02 2.27 2.57 2.78 (0.60) (0.58) (0.59) (0.60) (0.66) (0.64) (0.55) (0.46) 1.49 1.79 2.04 1.60 2.23 1.92 1.84 2.03 (0.57) (0.60) (0.64) (0.66) (0.68) (0.66) (0.72) (0.86) Range Mean SD 0-16 0-10 9.95 7.06 3.13 1.87 Table I Frequencies of hazards chosen as most likely to occur at home and means (and standard deviations) of hazards most likely to occur locally in the future and cause injury (1 ¼ likely – ¼ unlikely) Table II Descriptive statistics for knowledge of response-related safety behaviours DPM 19,2 180 those who have not participated in the programs (Mt ¼ 8.83, SDt ¼ 3.58/ Mv ¼ 6.44, SDt ¼ 2.29), tt(274) ¼ 2.90, p , 0.01/tv(274) ¼ 2.67, p , 0.01 Preparedness activities Overall, students reported having fewer than half of the preparedness items listed (M ¼ 8.57, SD ¼ 4.53) Ten students claimed their household had no preparedness measures and three reported having all of them No significant difference in the number of reported preparedness measures was found between the three schools The reported number of preparedness measures was significantly higher in students who have participated in hazard education programs (M ¼ 8.97, SD ¼ 4.36) than non hazard-educated students (M ¼ 6.83, SD ¼ 4.89), t(280) ¼ 3.13, p , 0.01 Table III presents the frequencies of students who have or have not undertaken emergency practices, and of those who have, not have or are unsure of whether their families have emergency plans Significant differences between the schools in emergency plan knowledge were found, x 2ready (4, 280) ¼ 14.22, p , 0.01, x 2evacuate (4, 278) ¼ 10.58, p , 0.05 and x 2meet (4, 277) ¼ 11.92, p , 0.05 Table III shows the variations in the frequencies of plans reported across the schools No significant difference in practise participation was found between the schools Significantly more students who have participated in hazard education programs reported participating in school practices than students who have not participated in hazard education, x (1, 273) ¼ 5.45, p , 0.05 No significant difference between educated and non-educated students was found for family practices Discussion Hazard awareness and risk perceptions of the students, collectively, are reasonably accurate with the exception of flooding Although the last major flood to occur in the Practice or plans Table III Reported plans and practice frequencies Has your whole family practised together what to if there is an emergency? Have you ever practised what to in an emergency at school? Does your family have an emergency plan that tells you what to to be ready for an emergency? Inglewood Stratford Opunake Does your family have a plan on how to evacuate your house? Inglewood Stratford Opunake Have you and your family arranged a place to meet if you are away from home and there is an emergency? Inglewood Stratford Opunake No (%) Not sure (%) Yes (%) 87 10 90 21 13 35 18 48 52 43 48 31 35 22 33 54 64 52 43 31 28 30 37 14 18 18 28 37 26 19 31 29 36 27 39 29 38 52 region was in 1998, Taranaki is subject to high rainfall and localised flooding can occur regularly Tsunami is perceived as a greater risk to Opunake students due to the town being located on the coastline Students in Inglewood perceive the risk of tornadoes greater than other students due to their first hand experience of the tornado that struck the town in 1990 Hazard education was found to impact awareness of the risk of volcanic eruptions and storms with high winds While volcanic eruption does pose an extreme hazard, flood awareness and risk perceptions need to be raised as this is a more commonly occurring hazard Although, on average, the students have a good knowledge of both vital and total safety behaviours, some students are still unaware of any, or are aware of very few, correct behaviours Participation in hazard education was found to increase participating students’ knowledge of safety behaviours Household preparedness measures reported by the students were low This may be a poor representation of what preparedness items are actually kept in the home, as students may not be aware of what measures their parents or caretakers have undertaken Some families might be more active in including their children in preparedness activities Some may not wish to “frighten” their children by being seen preparing for a disaster so not involve them Some families will just be poorly prepared Students who have participated in hazard education programs, however, did report their household having a higher number of preparedness measures This education may lead children to discuss the program with their household, as found by Ronan and Johnston (2001), which encourages family members to undertake some preparedness activities Family emergency plans and practises are poorly reported among the students School practices were reported by nearly all the students presumably as fire drills are compulsory in all schools It is uncertain why there are some distinct variations in the frequencies of reported household emergency plans between the three towns Students in Stratford tend to be more certain of not having a readiness plan, whereas students in Inglewood appear to be more certain of not having evacuation plans Students in Opunake may be more likely to have plans about where to meet because it is an isolated community, with the potential of easily being cut off from the rest of the region It is not on a main highway and is surrounded by rivers and the ocean Hazard education was not found to have much of an effect on emergency plans and practices, the exception being school practices As part of the education program, students may have been required to participate in a school- or classroom-based emergency drill These results demonstrate that future education programs need to include or change program components in order to encourage household planning and practices Since this study was conducted, a new education program has been introduced into New Zealand primary schools, which may address some of the flaws in the old programs and curriculum As yet, no study of the effectiveness of this new program has been conducted, only a survey of teacher/school satisfaction (Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management, 2006) Not only does an assessment of the new program need to be undertaken immediately, but a longitudinal study should be done to observe whether what students have learned is remembered for a long time or if hazard education needs to be re-introduced within the high school curriculum Hazard perceptions 181 DPM 19,2 182 Conclusions This study has shown that students who have participated in hazard education programs have better knowledge of safety behaviours and report higher levels of household preparedness Hazard education was found to influence students’ hazard awareness and risk perceptions for some hazards, however awareness and risk perceptions of more salient hazards such as flooding remain poor Household emergency plans and practises were reported to be uncommon and the numbers of students reporting having plans and participating in practices were unaffected by hazard education Overall, Taranaki students who have participated in hazard education programs are likely to be more resilient in the event of a disaster because of their better knowledge of safety behaviours and higher household preparedness However, levels of resilience could be further increased if aspects of hazard education programs, such as reviewing all hazards Taranaki is subject to, and encouraging students to develop and undertake family emergency plans and practices, were to be incorporated or revised This study has established that hazard education in Taranaki schools has been beneficial, and that programs should be continued and children encouraged to participate in them References Anderson-Berry, L.J., King, D and Crane, G (2003), Assessment of the Effectiveness of Various Methods of Delivery of Public Awareness Information on Tropical Cyclones to the Queensland Coastal Communities, Emergency Management Australia, Canberra Farley, J.E (1998), Earthquake Fears, Predictions, and Preparations in Mid-America, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL Faupel, C.E., Kelley, S.P and Petee, T (1992), “The impact of disaster education on household preparedness for Hurricane Hugo”, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, Vol 10 No 1, pp 5-24 Finnis, K., Standring, S., Johnston, D and Ronan, K (2004), “Children’s understanding of natural hazards in Christchurch, New Zealand”, Australian Journal of Emergency Management, Vol 19 No 2, pp 11-20 Johnston, D.M and Benton, K (1998), “Volcanic hazard perceptions in Inglewood, New Zealand”, The Australian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, Vol 1998 No Johnston, D.M and Houghton, B (1995), “Secondary school children’s perceptions of natural hazards in the Central North Island, New Zealand”, New Zealand Journal of Geography, Vol 99, pp 18-26 Johnston, D.M., Driedger, C., Houghton, B., Ronan, K and Paton, D (2001), “Children’s risk perceptions and preparedness: a hazard assessment in four communities around Mount Rainier, USA – preliminary results”, Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt Lopes, R (1992), Public Perception of Disaster Preparedness: Presentations Using Disaster Images, The American National Red Cross, Washington, DC Macaulay, J and Logie, J (1996), “Natural hazards education in New Zealand”, in Lidstone, J (Ed.), International Perspectives on Teaching about Hazards and Disasters, Channel View Publications, Clevedon Mileti, D.S and Darlington, J.D (1995), “Societal response to revised earthquake probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Area”, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, Vol 13 No 2, pp 119-45 Mileti, D.S and Fitzpatrick, C (1993), The Great Earthquake Experiment: Risk Communication and Public Action, Westview Press, Boulder, CO Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management (2003), National Civil Defence Emergency Management Strategy 2003-2008: Resilient New Zealand, Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management, Wellington Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management (2006), Report on the Educator Survey on What’s the Plan, Stan?, Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management, Wellington Neall, V.E and Alloway, B.V (1993), Volcanic Hazards at Egmont Volcano, Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management, Wellington Nielsen, A.C (2003), Monitoring the Effectiveness of Earthquake Commission’s Communication Programme, Earthquake Commission, Wellington Ronan, K.R and Johnston, D.M (2001), “Correlates of hazard education programs for youth”, Risk Analysis, Vol 21 No 6, pp 1055-63 Ronan, K.R and Johnston, D.M (2003), “Hazards education for youth: a quasi-experimental investigation”, Risk Analysis, Vol 23 No 5, pp 1009-20 Ronan, K.R., Johnston, D.M., Daly, M and Fairley, R (2001), “School children’s risk perceptions and preparedness: a hazards education survey”, Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, Vol 2001 No Shane, P (2005), “Towards a comprehensive distal andesitic tephrostratigraphy framework for New Zealand based on eruptions from Egmont volcano”, Journal of Quaternary Science, Vol 20 No 1, pp 45-57 Taranaki Civil Defence Emergency Management Group (2004), Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan for Taranaki, Taranaki Regional Council, Stratford Turner, M.B., Cronin, S.J., Bebbington, M.S and Platz, T (2007), “Developing probabilistic eruption forecasts for dormant volcanoes: a case study from Mt Taranaki, New Zealand”, Bulletin of Volcanology, Vol 70 No 4, pp 507-15 Turner, R.H., Nigg, J.M and Heller-Paz, D (1986), Waiting for Disaster: Earthquake Watch in California, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA About the authors Kirsten Finnis is a research officer at the Joint Centre for Disaster Research, Massey University, New Zealand Her research focuses on public education and disaster psychology, including work with children She has worked with GNS Science, the Earthquake Commission and the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management on public education and hazard research projects Kirsten Finnis is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: kirstenfinnis@gmail.com David M Johnston has been employed with GNS Science since 1993 and his research is focused on reducing the vulnerability of New Zealand’s society, economy and infrastructure to natural hazards In November 2006, he took up a joint position with Massey University as Director of the Joint Centre for Disaster Research He has been involved in developing integrated risk management strategies for different hazard events, using techniques such as scenario development, mitigation planning and community education programs He is also interested in assessing social and economic impacts of natural and environmental hazard events He is the Leader, Cities and Volcanoes Commission, International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth’s Interior, Assistant Editor of the International Journal of Mass Hazard perceptions 183 DPM 19,2 184 Emergencies and Disasters and on the Editorial Board of The Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies Kevin R Ronan is Professor of Clinical Psychology at Central Queensland University As a clinical psychologist, his research program looks at intervention approaches both before and after disasters as well as in other areas of clinical psychology This includes research and interventions for other problems of youth (e.g conduct disorder, child maltreatment, anxiety disorders) and adults (e.g schizophrenia) He is the author of many disaster-related publications, including a recent book on promoting community resilience in schools and with youth and families James D White is an Associate Professor of Volcanology at the University of Otago His research primarily focuses on physical volcanology but his interests also include understanding the societal impact of eruptions He is the Associate Editor of Bulletin of Volcanology and Island Arc, and is on the editorial board of the Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research and International Journal of Earth Sciences (Geol Rundschau) To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints View publication stats