Better Be Ready! Evacuation Experiences During a Bushfire Emergency

Abstract

This paper reports on research undertaken for the Building Resilience for Bushfire-Affected Communities in Noosa Shire project, funded by the Australian Government. Being evacuated from a home in the path of a bushfire can be traumatic. Therefore, it is important for evacuees to have safe places to stay, both physically and psychologically. Using a qualitative approach, we aimed to (a) understand the experiences of people who were displaced from their homes and sheltered at evacuation centres during the Noosa Shire bushfires and (b) understand what support is needed during disasters, such as bushfires, to help create positive experiences for future evacuees. Twelve participants displaced by bushfires in Noosa, Australia, in 2019 recalled their experiences in semi-structured interviews (conducted in 2022–2023). Inductive thematic analysis using NVivo 13 identified three themes that can inform government and public disaster preparation and response: planning, support, and communication. Findings from this study centred around building community resilience and offer valuable insights for organising disaster evacuation processes and evacuation centres on a broader scale. For individuals, it involves planning optimal evacuation routes, gathering necessary personal items, feeling safe and calm in evacuation centres, and receiving regular and accurate communication from authorities during disaster events.

1. Introduction

Climate change is creating intensified and severe impacts on human communities [1]. Climate-related disaster events are projected to continue to increase into the future, with 560 disaster events per year globally predicted by 2030, amounting to approximately 1.5 disasters per day [2]. The increased frequency and severity of climate-related disasters [3] are influencing the scope and need for disaster planning. The increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters due to the impacts of anthropogenic climate change [2,4,5] has created a greater need for and reliance on evacuation centres.

Evacuation centres are an essential part of disaster management, although little research has been conducted into the features of evacuation centres that determine their effectiveness. An evacuation centre has been likened to a lifeboat [6] that “provides affected people with basic human needs, including accommodation, food, and water” [7]. Colwell [6] also emphasises that evacuation centres are lifeboats—not cruise ships—and that managing evacuees’ expectations is a key challenge. Similarly, when a disaster occurs, authorities focus on provisioning people with information and communicating planning that is needed for protective behaviours to manage risk and minimise harm.

The experience of being evacuated from a home in the path of a disaster such as a bushfire can be traumatic. For example, the experiences of people evacuated due to the largest fire in modern Swedish history [8] showed that evacuees experienced significantly greater cognitive, emotional, and personal consequences than nearby residents who were not evacuated. Such consequences for evacuees, when compared to non-evacuees, included ruminating, talking more about the fire, reliving the experience more by seeing, hearing, and smelling the fire, and feeling that their lives and view of the world had changed [8].

Human-induced climate change significantly increased the likelihood of the 2019–20 bushfires in Australia by an estimated 80% [9]. The 2019–20 bushfire season (also known as Black Summer) followed two years of significant dryness across many parts of the country [9]. Rainfall levels during the latter half of 2019 were very much lower than average across Queensland and, indeed, the lowest on record across much of Australia [10] (see Figure 1), creating extreme levels of fire danger. The resultant cost of the fires was over 38,000 insurance claims, an estimated AUD 4–5 billion of economic losses, with direct damages estimated at around AUD 2–3 billion, and the total cost to the country approached AUD 10 billion [3,11].

Following the Black Summer bushfires, The Australian Government Department of Industry, Science and Resources announced funding to support and promote recovery for communities impacted by the 2019–20 bushfires [12]. This paper reports on one component of a project undertaken in Noosa Shire that was funded by the Australian Government’s Black Summer Bushfire Recovery Grants program in response to the 2019 Black Summer bushfires. One stated objective of the grants program underpinning this research was to support the recovery and resilience of communities impacted at the local level [12]. The funding body was not involved in the project’s design, delivery, or research. The funded project had four components as follows: (1) installation of battery systems at two evacuation centres in Noosa Shire to improve and ensure energy security and reliability during disaster events; (2) bushfire and battery education to adults in Noosa Shire via community workshops to build public awareness of the evacuation centres’ disaster preparedness; (3) bushfire and battery education to students via delivery of curriculum-aligned education packages to local schools in Noosa Shire to teach students about how the battery systems can be used to reduce carbon emissions; and (4) quantitative research (surveys) to assess individual resilience and disaster-specific adaptation, and qualitative research (interviews) to understand evacuees’ experience of disaster evacuation centres and what types of support is needed. This paper will present findings from the qualitative research component of this larger project.

This qualitative study is based on a disaster event that happened in Noosa Shire in southeast Queensland, Australia. This locality is situated approximately 130 km north of Brisbane. Noosa Shire has a population of approximately 57,000 residents spread over 872 sq km [13]. In September 2019, Noosa Shire experienced two significant bushfires at Peregian Beach and at Cooroibah. Over 13,700 hectares were burnt across the shire. Approximately 8000 people were told to leave immediately and were evacuated from their properties [14]. Approximately 6000 people were evacuated from the Cooroibah bushfire in Noosa Shire, and hundreds of these evacuees were dispersed across six evacuation centres: 350 at the Noosa Leisure Centre, 110 at The J (a community hub), 25 at the Noosa Library, 20 at Cooroy Library, 90 at Christian Outreach Church, and 2 at Girraween Sports Complex [14]. During the Peregian Bushfires, 220 people sheltered at the Noosa Leisure Centre and 350 at The J Theatre [14]. Two houses were destroyed, as well as other structures, such as fences, sheds, and small dwellings. Other impacts included road closures, power outages, public transport and school shutdowns, and retail losses to businesses [14]. Fortunately, no lives were lost. However, these bushfires had a significant financial, resource, and emotional impact on residents and the community [15]. Many displaced residents were unable to return home for extended periods due to dangerous conditions and power outages and so sheltered in emergency evacuation centres.

The purpose of this present study is (a) to gain an understanding of the experiences of people who were displaced from their homes and sheltered at evacuation centres during the 2019 Noosa Shire bushfires and (b) to understand what support is needed during environmental disasters, such as bushfires, to help create physically and psychologically safe experiences for future evacuees. We conduct this using analysis of the experiences and stories of disaster evacuees in the Noosa Shire (southeast Queensland, Australia) within the context of individuals’ physical and psychological needs and safety. This paper identifies key themes and sub-themes drawn from participant interviews to better understand areas for strengthening community preparedness and response to natural disasters. To conclude, we recommend several preparedness actions to enhance the safety and wellbeing of evacuees during evacuation and bushfire preparedness of evacuation centre users. The research report identifies actions at the individual, organisational, and governmental levels to minimise risk and harm and enhance psychological and physical wellbeing.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

Adult members of the Noosa community who were displaced from their homes by the bushfires and sheltered in evacuation centres were invited to participate in research to explore their experiences. Participants were interviewed about their experience of evacuation, including their time spent in evacuation centres in Noosa, and were invited to share stories and photographs about their experience. The interview questions covered participants’ use and experiences of the evacuation centres—the facility, available services, and interactions with other people. Post-evacuation information was collected about the participants’ experiences of the bushfire’s impacts (e.g., physical damage to their home and surrounding area, post-disaster emotions) and their suggestions on how to improve evacuation centres for users. Follow-up prompts were provided, if needed, to explore how facilities can meet user needs, the types of services and personnel available, and the provision of communication and information to evacuees. Participants were asked about their evacuation experience and what preparedness steps they have taken post-disaster for future emergencies. Inclusion criteria were that participants were members of the Noosa community, aged 18 years and over, who were displaced from their homes by the bushfires and sheltered in an evacuation centre.

Ethics approval for this study was granted by the [insert University name here] Human Research Ethics Committee (reference no.: H22REA157). To address potential trauma responses, participants were offered contact information for counselling services if they indicated signs or symptoms of ongoing trauma after their bushfire evacuation experience.

2.2. Recruitment

Study participants were recruited via local media, from the Facebook pages of the Noosa Shire Council and affiliated organisations, and from community bushfire preparedness workshops held in Noosa. The recruitment strategy via various media was used because of its efficiency in reaching a large population of the community that undertook evacuation and utilised an evacuation centre. Direct recruitment of evacuees who stayed in an evacuation centre in the Noosa Shire was not possible. Evacuee lists held by the Australian Red Cross (humanitarian aid and community service charity) and the Noosa Shire Council were not available to the research team due to privacy policies.

2.3. Data Collection and Analysis

A qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviews and inductive thematic analysis was undertaken. Data were collected via semi-structured interviews involving twelve participants. Five participants were female, and seven participants were male. Among the ten interviews, eight interviews were conducted individually, while two interviews involved pairs (i.e., spouses). Each interview lasted approximately 40–50 min and took place either in person or via phone, based on participants’ preferences.

Interviews were digitally audio recorded and then transcribed. Participants were asked about their experiences during the 2019 Noosa Shire bushfires and their time spent at the evacuation centres. They were invited to bring to the interview photos, videos, or objects that reminded them of their bushfire evacuation experiences or the 2019 bushfire event. Only one participant contributed photographs to the research following their interview. These photographs have been used with consent in project presentations.

The transcribed interview data were de-identified and then analysed using a general inductive approach [16]. NVivo version 13 software [17] aided with coding and sorting of data during data analysis. The coded data were sorted into themes and sub-themes to understand the significance of the findings. Data were analysed by one researcher and then, to ensure rigour and reliability, validated by two other researchers. The number of participants needed to complete a study is revealed when data saturation occurs; that is, when no new additional original data emerges to inform the analyses [18,19]. Data saturation occurred after interviews involving 12 participants. Data analysis revealed one core theme, three subsidiary themes, and twelve sub-themes that provided details on the core and subsidiary themes.

3. Results

Data analysis revealed three key themes important in preparing for future natural disasters: Planning, Support, and Communication. The theme Planning had four sub-themes: Evacuation process, having a plan, unprepared for evacuation, and planning for future disasters. The theme Support had five sub-themes: Sense of community, feeling safe, wellbeing, sleeping at evacuation centres, and pets. Lastly, the theme of Communication had three sub-themes: Being informed, misinformation, and the unknown. A core theme emerged: Building Community Resilience. Table 1 provides an overview of the core theme, themes, and sub-themes. Findings under each theme will be described in the next section.

3.1. Planning

3.1.1. Evacuation Process

Bushfire planning processes by the government and other emergency services were recognised as being important by participants during the Noosa Shire bushfire disaster events. During the evacuation process, police directed participants specifically to the evacuation centres and established an exclusion zone for public safety. Concerns about having only one way in and out of the area were raised. Traffic jams on the main road heading north towards the evacuation centres were reported:

So, from there the police came around again and said, “Okay, you need to leave here, because we’re closing off more of Peregian Beach. Go to the evacuation centre at The J.”

(Participant 7)

Well, my worry about all of that is that there was only one way in, one way out, the David Low Way… A young couple … said, “Don’t go to the David Low Way. It’s chock-a-block. It’s a traffic jam. It’s gridlocked.” I’ve seen those pictures. They’re terrible, people trying to escape and get burnt in their cars. It has happened often.

(Participant 5)

During the evacuation process cars, were directed north to evacuation centres located north of the bushfire area. To avoid the heavy traffic from the mass evacuation of residents in the area, several evacuees decide to walk south along the beach to seek shelter from the fires. Participant 5 explained how shocked they were when they were refused entry to what they understood to be an emergency evacuation centre:

… a young man saying, “No, you can’t come in. You’ve got to go,” and pointing to a sign on the window. “You’ve got to go to Nambour or Maroochydore.” … I said, “We’ve got no car. We can’t go anywhere.” And he said, “You can’t come in,” and slammed the door shut. I mean, this was supposed to be a refuge, a centre where we could go to feel safe, an evacuation centre…We got turned away and, “No, you can’t come in.” That was a real shock, a terrible shock.

(Participant 5)

3.1.2. Unprepared for Evacuation

Varying degrees of bushfire evacuation planning were apparent amongst evacuation centre users. The bushfire in Peregian Beach caught many by surprise, so they evacuated their homes in a hurry without thinking of taking some basic essential items with them. In a rush to evacuate, a lack of planning meant items such as mobile phone chargers and spare items of clothing were forgotten:

Ideally, we probably had about 10, 15 min …. We didn’t think of pillows. We thought of toothbrush, no toothpaste. We thought of no undies. We honestly thought we’d only be gone a couple of hours… We had our mobiles, but no chargers.

(Participant 3)

Part of being prepared for a bushfire is having access to fire hydrants. The lack of access to fire hydrants in an emergency was raised as an issue:

When we moved in, we dug out our fire hydrant, because it was totally buried. So, it still had the, I know it’s a big yellow tag on the side of the road, the arrow, but you would never have found it. It was totally overgrown and buried in sand. So, I just wonder how many hydrants are accessible in this area?

(Participant 7)

3.1.3. Having a Plan

Pre-planning for a disaster was found to have psychological benefits to participants. For example, having a plan helped Participant 5 to stay calm during their evacuation. Part of their planning included having a towel ready to wet and put over their head:

I had a towel, so that if the flames came and my pathway was closed off to the beach, there were taps outside my place, or inside…. But I thought, I can wet the towel, put it over my head. And if I have to get down low and go, go, go, or I can run through the flames, so I wouldn’t breathe in, I wouldn’t get burnt. Put the dripping towel over me until I got to the water.……because I felt I knew what I was doing. I didn’t panic.

(Participant 5)

3.1.4. Planning for Future Disaster

During interviews, participants explained how they understood the importance of being prepared for another disaster. Participant 12 explained how having a plan is important preparation for future disasters:

I realised it could happen at any time and I suppose it’s no effort to do it. So, you might as well do it. I don’t see it as, you know, it is just a sensible thing to have ready. Because we are also prone to floods. So, it seems to the be norm, sensible thing to do. Then you don’t have to worry or panic of it happens.

(Participant 12)

3.2. Support

3.2.1. Sense of Community

Experiences from participants highlighted a sense of community. Evacuation centre users said they felt overwhelming support as the community rallied around to help them. Extensive support provided by the community had a positive impact on evacuees’ sense of wellbeing. Goodwill from the wider community meant donations of food and provisions were forthcoming, and strangers offered their spare rooms to evacuees staying in the evacuation centres.

What surprised me was that there were so many people in readiness and volunteering for that kind of event… it was actually all quite reassuring that there were so many people prepared and able to help us.

(Participant 2)

Every meal there was oodles of food. There were clothes we could have borrowed or taken from … they brought clothes along for people to use. I mean everyone was so kind and so, welcoming is the wrong word, but reassuring that it was all in hand and especially once we knew the wind had turned at the right time.

(Participant 10)

Someone came down and said, “I’ve got a spare room.”

(Participant 1)

She saw on the news that some people were being evacuated from Peregian, …and thought ‘I can maybe help’ so she looked for some old people! …Total stranger… She was so kind.

(Participant 10)

3.2.2. Feeling Safe

Several participants mentioned that there was a sense of calm within the evacuation centres and that made evacuees feel secure:

Everybody was fairly relaxed. There wasn’t anything you could do about it. You felt quite safe up there.

(Participant 6)

That’s right. There was no panic. That really felt there was no panic.

(Participant 3)

You just, I just felt a sense of calm there. It was easy and very relaxed.

(Participant 12)

To sum up their positive experience at the evacuation centre (at Noosa Leisure Centre), one evacuee said:

Just that it was an amazing experience and a good one to have done. Because now you know what is involved and I wouldn’t be at all fearful or worried. I would just go in, very calmly and go there.

(Participant 12)

3.2.3. Sleeping at Evacuation Centres

Sleeping at an evacuation centre can be problematic, especially for the elderly or those with special needs. Getting up and down from the floor can be difficult for the elderly. Having trouble getting up off the floor, this elderly participant decided it was easier to sleep in their car (in the evacuation centre carpark):

I stayed there only one night, because I’m 80-something and I’ve got really sick knees. And they put down a lot of mattresses, which was great. But once I got down on the mattress, I had a lot of trouble getting back up again. So, I tried sleeping on a couple of chairs and then I went out and tried to sleep in the car.

(Participant 2)

3.2.4. Pets

Being supported by being able to have pets at evacuation centres was appreciated, as remarked by Participant 2:

I live alone, but it was me and the cat…They have really good provisions around. In fact, he was better provided for than I was. They took him away, put him in a big cage, fed him, kept him out the back.

(Participant 2)

Concerns for evacuees’ health were raised when pets were invited into sleeping areas. For health reasons, having dogs in sleeping areas was not recommended. This was to ensure the safety and comfort of evacuees, explained Participant 9:

The state Member (of Parliament) was virtually doing the meet and greet and inviting everyone in along with their animals, etcetera … Animals are welcome, but they don’t come into the sleeping areas in the centre. … The reasons being, well, health to start with. People are allergic to dog hair. Some people are frightened of animals. … the evacuation centre becomes a person’s home… And if you’ve got a puppy dog in the bed next door to you and you don’t like puppy dogs, and also, what’s happening with that bed? Particularly if somebody else has got to use the mattress in the future.

(Participant 9)

Animals or pets had to be left behind, which was a source of concern for evacuation centre users, explained Participant 1:

Some of them couldn’t get all of their animals out in time, because you can only fit so many horses on a horse float at once. And they weren’t allowed to go back and get them, so that caused a bit of stress for them. But the main thing they were worried about was their houses and their animals.

(Participant 1)

3.2.5. Wellbeing

The wellbeing of evacuees was a high priority at the evacuation centres, and it was highlighted that support should also be extended to emergency services workers because they, too, are vulnerable during disasters:

And like the police and the firies, unfortunately, they’re all the front line and … they do get burnt out… they put in heart and soul because they’re there for their community… The health of the people in that room is vitally important. And again, the longer the event goes on, the more it impacts on them because they are in the forefront, the coal face trying to deal with all of everything that’s going on.

(Participant 8)

3.3. Communication

The communication theme relates to participants’ comments about some communication channels being open, but inconsistencies in communication, misinformation, and lack of information caused distress. Many participants communicated emotions such as disappointment, distress, and extreme worry that emanated from not knowing sufficient details about the unfolding events.

3.3.1. Being Informed

Participants were informed to evacuate through various means. Communications to evacuate came via landline, mobile phone texts (SMS), and by police doing door-to-door knocks. An example of effective communication was the alerts sent out to mobile phones via the SMS emergency messaging service telling participants (evacuees) to evacuate.

And at the same time, we were getting messages on the phone about enacting our bushfire plan at home where we live.

(Participant 9)

We’d had a few calls from friends, but I couldn’t get anything on the TV at the time telling me. I knew the flames were there. And eventually, the knock on the front door [police]. At the same time that there was a knock on the front door, my mobile went, and the home phone went. (Participant 3)

Another way participants were informed was online through the Noosa Shire Council’s Disaster Dashboard. Participant 2 explained how they were using the Council’s Disaster Dashboard to keep updated about the bushfire:

I was also using the council dashboard thing…the Council sends out information things. I don’t know how often, but quite regularly.

(Participant 2)

3.3.2. Misinformation

Participants explained that misinformation was being reported during the bushfires, which was a cause of distress. Misinformation was received via social media, including reports of the local supermarket (IGA), petrol station, hotel, and houses burning. Four years after the event, this participant’s voice still trembled when they recalled the misinformation:

The information on social media was that the whole of Peregian was burning, that the service station had gone, the hotel had gone, IGA had gone. Sorry. [voice trembling] … And then I got a notice on social media that the house at the bottom of the street was burning. [voice trembling] … So, that was the false information that was coming through was distressing.

(Participant 6)

3.3.3. The Unknown

Not knowing what was happening to their homes and animals was also a cause of distress for evacuees and a source of disappointment for authorities. The following participants explained how they would have liked to have been kept up to date to help manage expectations. Accurate and reliable information to evacuees about the status of their homes and property appeared to be lacking and pointed to both an absence of official information and a breakdown in communication.

Each of us individually would’ve been helped with a little bit more information. We’ve all got phones. But then they didn’t know themselves. I’m not really criticising. Nobody knew what was going on.

(Participant 1)

The thing that was disappointing was that we had no idea as to what was happening… Had no idea. In fact, we didn’t even know if when we came back, the house would still be here.

(Participant 6)

It’s down to the not knowing. The greatest thing that I got from people that were in those evacuation centres is the lack of information and not knowing what their situation was. They were in a bit of a limbo until they knew they had a home to go to or they knew their home had been impacted.

(Participant 8)

Participant 1 suggested that distress amongst evacuation centre users could be reduced by having a single point of contact for checking on animals and homes:

I know everybody’s run off their feet, but if there was someone that could’ve been contacted directly to go and individually check houses and animals and livestock and stuff, and contact the people in the evacuation centres, it would’ve caused a lot less stress…some people … they’ve got pumps that are set up that they didn’t get a chance to turn on their pumps, so it self-irrigates and fills up the troughs. And chooks need feeding, and goats, and things like that… If people could phone that person up and go, “Hello, I’m such-and-such. I live at whatever address. I’ve got this animal in this paddock. The switch for the pump is here. The horse food is over here. And can you just have a look?”

(Participant 1)

Acknowledgement that ongoing communication would be difficult for emergency service workers when they were busy doing critical work was described by Participant 4:

The fire brigade, people who actually knew what was going on, and the police who were involved in that locality were too busy doing their own thing to stop and give information out. That was probably the block. Whether that could be overcome, because you could imagine how there’s a fire raging, so you’re actually trying to put it out. You don’t want to say, walk away and start talking on your phones, telling people what’s going on. You’re focused on doing the right thing.

(Participant 4)

A combination of the three themes that emerged from the data, Planning, Support, and Communication, is proposed as crucial to building community disaster resilience (Figure 2). Disaster planning and preparation from individuals across all levels of government and emergency services is important as it minimises panic during disaster events such as bushfires. Varying levels of preparation and planning at an individual and organisational level were identified by participants. Support offered from local community, government, and emergency service providers facilitated evacuees’ wellbeing and promoted community resilience. Overwhelmingly, participants’ perceptions were that they felt supported and cared for by the community during the disaster event. Misinformation, lack of communication, and “not knowing” caused considerable distress for those sheltering in evacuation centres. Effective and ongoing communication emerged as an important factor during the disaster events.

4. Discussion

Building resilience in a community helps to ensure that people have the ability, are prepared for, and can recover from adversity [20,21]. A foundation of built community resilience is integral to pre-disaster preparedness, and this core theme emerged from the three themes identified to help establish resilience within a community: planning, communication, and support. Integrating planning, communication, and support processes forms the basis of a model to enhance a community’s resilience to persevere, adapt, and recover from adverse events. These three themes underpin effective pre-disaster preparedness, disaster response, and post-disaster recovery. Sub-themes provide insights from evacuees’ experiences and align with the United Nations’ Sendai Framework strategy to reduce vulnerabilities and enhance resilience [22].

The phrase ‘build back better’ [22] is directed at creating resilience to recover from future crises, which is captured in this research. The main project for building resilience, in this case, was identifiable in better infrastructure, enhanced disaster preparedness for evacuees, and a reliable energy supply to address vulnerabilities during times of crisis.

In summary, the three themes are captured in the investigation across the main project, including an analysis of the purpose and intention behind the installation of battery systems at two evacuation centres. Having the ability to provide a reliable supply of renewable energy to evacuation centres in the event of power outages during future disasters is critical to effective planning for these sorts of events and ensuring continuity in communication and the provision of basic support (e.g., lighting for security, hot meals, and drinks) in evacuation centres during disaster events. Another element involved community workshops, which were more specifically focused on communication about bushfire preparedness from emergency services personnel and information central to supporting the mental health of an affected community and ways to build resilience.

Planning for a disaster is the responsibility of the government, emergency services, and individuals. Better planning is a key area to mitigate the severity of adverse physical and mental health impacts on individuals and communities at risk or affected by disasters and is cited as one of the best ways to mitigate the severity of impacts on the community [3]. Effective planning for more extreme climate-related disasters [23], especially with bushfires, needs to address the identified frustration at the lack of proper planning, resourcing, and preparation from authorities [11]. This finding is tempered by recognition by survivors of bushfires that being well-prepared and having proper plans to prevent serious damage is not a panacea for survival, as many people discovered with the 2019–2020 bushfires in the Australian Capital Territory [24].

Inclusive planning with the community to consider vulnerabilities and develop tailored strategies provides for more targeted and effective interventions for bushfire preparedness at the individual and community level [25,26], with an emphasis on community-based programs and individual responsibility [27,28]. These efforts, when combined with climate change adaptation plans and more comprehensive plans for essential services [22], are part of central actions to relieve the health impacts of bushfires on people, as identified through an international meta-analysis [29]. However, there is a scarcity of research related to best practices for evacuation centres for people in similar bushfire-prone areas [29].

The findings revealed that evacuees have strong attitudes toward planning by authorities, both when it is lacking and when it is evident through the good availability of resources. An emotional response may result from a perceived lack of planning due to the severity of the impacts people experience, including a loss of faith and trust in authorities and, at times, frustration and anger towards governments for not acting enough to prevent the dangerous impacts of climate change and dissatisfaction and disappointment from poor resourcing [24,30]. While our research shows a range of negative emotions and attitudes resulting from perceived poor planning, it found that participant evacuees gained relief and calm through their experiences of well-prepared evacuation centres and their provisions in Noosa Shire. This shows a strong relationship between well-resourced planning by authorities and a reduced effect on people and the community. The criticisms and concerns about needing more information or reassurance about their property and/or animals were balanced with praise for the compassion and understanding of firefighters’ experiences and an acknowledgement of the difficulty of the time.

While planning is an essential part of effective evacuation, the current study found that a focus on planning and preparedness in bushfire management assumes that individuals who are informed about bushfire risks and evacuation are more likely to evacuate successfully. The individual initiative plays a crucial role in evacuating effectively during bushfire events to complement and enact plans made, and at times enforced, by authorities. For example, while authorities provide checklists and evacuation plans, it is up to individuals to enact those plans. Participants’ stories highlighted the importance of individual actions, communication, and initiative in enhancing evacuation outcomes during the Noosa Shire bushfires. When evacuees forgot essential items, such as toothbrushes and phone chargers, participants acknowledged it was a result of their last-minute enactment and the absence of planning.

There are numerous factors attributed to the lack of disaster preparedness and last-minute action by individuals discussed in the literature, from possessing a low belief in the efficacy of one’s preparedness measures to cultural mistrust of authorities or a culture lacking in safety and resilience [31,32]. The singular, static ‘cookbook’ model [33] and a one-size-fits-all approach to shaping preparedness behaviour are viewed as a failure for not being responsive to economic, social, cultural, and historical aspects that determine an individual or community’s disaster response [34]. Risk awareness alone is insufficient to foster preparedness action; campaigns and interventions require a combination of factors [35]. The main reasons for being unprepared for natural disasters identified by an international study include a lack of awareness, being unaware of where to buy items or secure resources, viewing the action as unnecessary [36], or opting not to take proactive measures despite being aware of risks [35]. These and other contributing factors, such as lack of time, not feeling responsible, financial outlay, and the need to acquire specialist knowledge, influence people’s level of preparedness and, by association, their disaster resilience [36].

Interestingly, efforts to engage residents in planning for natural disasters with educational information on preparedness are often met with low interest until they find themselves in a bushfire situation [25,37,38], resulting in a lack of essential awareness, knowledge, and preparations to adapt to rapidly changing situations. While authorities focus on provisioning people with information and communicating preparation actions that are needed for protective behaviours (e.g., evacuation plans) before bushfire events, it is often not until fires occur that evacuated people actively seek information from authorities (e.g., the status of homes). For evacuees, they sought frequent and reliable information to allay the worry and distress that escalates if a community is uninformed during a natural disaster. Unfortunately, disaster preparedness planning efforts at an individual level are often lacking.

During a disaster, evacuees and the public utilise information and communication technologies for information sharing and the generation of new information through social networks during crisis times [39]. Trust and confidence in fire emergency services will be high when residents receive abundant, timely information [40]. This highlights the value of frequent, open, and detailed communication to reduce the uncertainty and stress for evacuees [40]. As natural disasters become increasingly more frequent and extreme, communication before, during, and after these events becomes a more important function for emergency services.

The communication of bushfire-related information from emergency services for people sheltering in place, travelling to, or at evacuation centres is vital. The lack of interoperability of agency communications systems has been found to add to the challenge [11], along with the conflicting information that fills the environment [41]. Communication between emergency services and the public during an evacuation process is not infallible, as demonstrated when authorities were informed by a family member that an individual resident had been missed after three rounds of evacuation messages were sent via text, phone, and doorknocking. In this instance, one-way communication from the family member to the authorities was effective.

The reliability of information was emphasised when social media circulated misinformation, and this was addressed by authorities communicating clearly to not rely on social media for information and declaring some of it to be false and misleading. This helped clarify an otherwise alarming situation for residents and evacuees. From existing literature [30], it is apparent that social media provides an uncontrollable force of publicly available communication at a fast pace. Unfortunately, in this case, misleading information via video, images, and false assumptions circulated quickly in the community about the Peregian bushfire. This can obviously cause distress because visual images can falsely exaggerate the impact of the situation. This demonstrates the value and need for reliable information during the event, and research suggests that a renewed focus on post-disaster communication via social media can also skew public perception of the facts, which further impacts people’s process of recovery [30]. The results highlight the need for improved coordination and the dissemination of authoritative information [42].

Elements of good communication that emerged were based on a need for evacuees to be kept informed, and people expressed the relief experienced when they were informed. Clear communication, access, frequency, accuracy of information, and reliability of source were aspects of communication that emerged, and when evacuees are kept well informed, a reduction in distress can result. Improved coordination between emergency authorities to clarify communications to residents and evacuees was seen by participants as an important consideration. A coordinated approach to communication is connected to planning processes and efforts to better support future evacuees with up-to-date and reliable information. Authorities should work together to coordinate and align their planning [43]. Specifically, in terms of communication, a well-coordinated disaster plan with all stakeholders is especially crucial when there are several agencies involved in the evacuation and provisioning of support to communities.

Support systems, such as evacuation centres, are essential for people impacted by natural disasters to mitigate exacerbating existing hardships and health conditions, especially for vulnerable populations, such as the elderly, people with mental health or mobility issues, and pregnant women or those with young children. However, the use of existing infrastructure as evacuation centres is only one element of the support system required to provide a physically and psychologically safe environment. The devastating 2019 Australian Black Summer bushfires triggered anxiety, fear, helplessness, and worry, especially for parents and women in their 40s [44]. Evacuation centres lacked child-friendly facilities, and emergency services reported instances of pregnant women, and parents of infants prioritising their children’s wellbeing over their own, along with difficulty accessing clean resources [44].

While evacuation centres offer a physical haven of safety from disasters, they are not without issues. Gaps in communication and planning to accommodate the specific needs of vulnerable populations highlight the importance of inclusive planning to adequately resource centres. Oversight to cater to elderly and physically impaired individuals meant many individuals had difficulty in utilising low bedding. Issues with communication and planning allowed pets in the centres with some evacuees expressing concerns, with hygiene in sleeping areas. Similarly, supportive environments are also measured through individual experiences and communication, as highlighted when a participant was refused entry to a nominated evacuation centre. Support needs to also extend through communication practices.

While sheltering in evacuation centres, there was overwhelming support and kindness from the Noosa Shire community through acts of kindness from strangers, a feature also cited within the literature [44]. This shows that support encompasses more than providing resources and safety. These layers of support for people’s wellbeing in the immediate and long term need to be embedded into planning and preparedness and disaster response structures [3]. In the past, government, non-government, and community organisations have expressed a strong sense of community with survivors of natural disasters and provided high levels of support to each other during and after disasters [45]. Similarly, our participants reported a strong sense of community as the public rallied around them to provide provisions of food, shelter, and clothing. The timely provision of support to individuals and families impacted by natural disasters, along with a strong recovery, is important as it reduces the mental health toll on survivors [45].

While physical safety is prioritised during evacuation to escape bushfires, mental health support during and after bushfire exposures is also important. Investigating evacuee experiences after time has passed has been valuable. While the Noosa Shire bushfires occurred in 2019 and the interviews were undertaken in 2022 and 2023, we found long-lasting impacts on mental health after a traumatic bushfire experience. The mental health effects of worry and distress emerged strongly in the data. There is an increase in the need for psychological support for evacuees immediately and in the longer term [24,43,46]. Extreme worry and distress can impact evacuees even years after an event occurs. After 12–18 months, extreme rates of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress can still be present, as found from research on another devastating Australian bushfire disaster, with higher psychological distress correlated with higher exposure to bushfires with vulnerable populations being especially impacted [3]. Understanding the level and pattern of distress is essential to the design of constructive and positive support. More recent recommendations for increased preparedness have extended to the provision of psychological first aid and mental and emotional health support as elements that should be embedded in immediate and long-term recovery planning [3]. This is acknowledged and included in the 2019 bushfire recovery plan [15].

Concern for wildlife, loss of habitat, pets, and livestock causes considerable stress during disasters [15,47]. Strong links between not knowing about the welfare of pets and other animals left behind and distress repeatedly emerged in the data. The ‘not knowing’ affected the mental and emotional health and wellbeing of many participants around family members, property, and/or livestock left behind in the evacuation.

Our findings confirm the need to enhance mental health support during and after bushfire exposure and the value of investigating people’s experiences after time has passed. Bushfire exposure increases the chances of medical and mental illness after exposure [30], and the long-term impact on mental health after traumatic bushfire experiences can be severe [46,48], as evidenced by one study reporting twenty percent of people experiencing high levels of psychological stress three years later [49]. A challenge of disaster research involves limitations in understanding the mental health implications over the long term due to most disaster research being undertaken 1–2 years after the event [50]. It is worth noting that increased exposure and distress do not always result in more severe impacts for all affected people [3]. For example, for affected First Nations people and communities, high distress resulted in heightened resilience [3].

In the face of a changing climate, community disaster preparedness with safe places to shelter during traumatic events is essential. The 2009 Australian Black Saturday bushfires are a stark reminder of the need for preparedness and safe evacuation, as 173 people died either in their homes or en route while trying to evacuate [38]. Participants in our study expressed their concern about only having one road open during the Noosa Shire bushfire evacuation. Disaster preparedness goes beyond evacuation centres; it includes consideration of alternate escape routes during a disaster to protect lives and strengthen communities’ ability to respond to disaster threats. Emergency services ensure the safety of individuals and communities before, during, and after disasters [51]. The government is responsible for critical infrastructure, community preparedness, communication, coordination of evacuation centres, and disaster recovery [51].

Findings from this study have been presented to Noosa’s Local Disaster Management Group. In response, Noosa Shire Council has indicated an intention to incorporate some evidence into their Disaster Management Plan, and similarly, the Sunshine Coast Disaster District is considering how the findings can be applied in evacuation centres to facilitate best practices and facilitate social recovery outcomes.

Recommendations

Several key recommendations emerged from this research to enhance bushfire preparedness and resilience for evacuation centre users, especially those with limited road exit routes. These include exploring alternate evacuation routes for swift evacuation, such as beach access points to alleviate congestion, recommending optimal routes aside from the shortest routes, and using early messaging to manage traffic flow to reduce congestion and risk. Community education around the importance of maintaining fire hydrant access is needed. Comprehensive employee and volunteer training is recommended for efficient coordination at designated evacuation centres. Elevated sleeping options (such as camp beds) for older people or those with limited mobility should be made available to prevent injuries, aid wheelchair transfer, and improve safety. It is advisable not to allow pets into sleeping areas within evacuation centres. Finally, to minimise distress, ongoing communication to keep evacuees informed of the status of their homes and animals left behind is crucial.

5. Conclusions

Analysis of evacuation centre user interviews revealed three key elements essential to building community resilience: planning, support, and communication. Bushfire planning and preparation from an individual, organisational, and a governmental level is fundamental to minimise panic and distress caused by bushfire events. Support offered to evacuation centre users by emergency services, local government, and the extended community during disasters aids psychological wellbeing following bushfire events. Planning and support for evacuees reduce stress, while misinformation or lack of information is a major cause of distress for evacuation centre users. To minimise distress, it is important for evacuation centre users to be given ongoing, accurate information and be kept up to date with the status of damage to their homes and property. Outcomes from the research will be useful to inform government policy around disaster preparation and management and how to foster community recovery and resilience after major episodic events such as bushfires. Findings from this research can be used to inform the management of bushfire evacuation centres and how to make the centres more physically and psychologically safe places for future bushfire evacuees.

6. Limitations

A limitation of this study is the sample size (n = 12). Sample sizes in qualitative research are small compared to quantitative research because the sample size in qualitative research is determined to be appropriate when data saturation occurs [52]. Another limitation is that this study was undertaken in one location only (Noosa Shire, Queensland, Australia), so the findings are not generalisable. Findings from this research are, however, transferrable, meaning results may resonate with others, facilitating generalised understanding of the concepts within the findings.

Author Contributions

C.C.A.: conceptualisation, investigation, methodology, formal analysis, supervision, data curation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, visualisation, project administration, and funding acquisition. S.F.R.: conceptualisation, investigation, methodology, validation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, visualisation, and funding acquisition. L.P.B.: conceptualisation, methodology, validation, writing—original draft, and funding acquisition. V.R.T.: conceptualisation, investigation, methodology, validation, supervision, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, and funding acquisition. S.K.J.: Writing—review and editing. A.T.N.: visualisation and conceptualisation. P.C.T.: supervision, visualisation, writing—original draft, and writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was reviewed and approved by the University of Southern Queensland (Australia) Human Research Ethics Committee: approval number: H22REA157, approved 1 August 2022.

Informed Consent Statement

All participants provided informed consent.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the Noosa Shire Council and Zero Emissions Noosa for their in-kind support during this project.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study, in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figures and Table

Figure 1. Bureau of Meteorology rainfall map showing unprecedented dry conditions and widespread decline in rainfall across Australia in 2019. (Image available under Creative Commons Attribution CC-BY 3.0 AU Deed 3.0).

Figure 2. Diagrammatic representation of the core theme Building Community Resilience informed by Planning, Support, and Communication.

Table 1

Core theme (Building Community Resilience), themes and sub-themes.

Building Community Resilience
Theme	Subtheme
Planning	▪ Evacuation process ▪ Having a plan ▪ Unprepared for evacuation ▪ Planning for future disaster
Supportt	▪ Sense of community ▪ Feeling safe ▪ Wellbeing ▪ Sleeping at evacuation centres ▪ Pets
Communication	▪ Being informed ▪ Misinformation ▪ The unknown

References

1. Campbell, S.L.; Anderson, C.C.; Wheeler, A.J.; Cook, S.; Muster, T.; Johnston, F.H. Managing extreme heat and smoke: A focus group study of vulnerable people in Darwin, Australia. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 13805. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su142113805]

2. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Human Cost of Disasters: An Overview of the Last 20 Years 2000–2019; Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters: Brussels, Belgium, 2020; Available online: https://www.undrr.org/publication/human-cost-disasters-overview-last-20-years-2000-2019 (accessed on 9 November 2023).

3. Heffernan, T.; Macleod, E.; Greenwood, L.-M.; Walker, I.; Lane, J.; Stanley, S.K.; Evans, O.; Calear, A.L.; Cruwys, T. Mental Health, Wellbeing and Resilience After the 2019–20 Bushfires: The Australian National Bushfire Health and Wellbeing Survey–A Preliminary Report; Australian National University: Canberra, Australia, 2022; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25911/AG7D-7574]

4. Di Virgilio, G.; Evans, J.P.; Blake, S.A.P.; Armstrong, M.; Dowdy, A.J.; Sharples, J.; McRae, R. Climate change increases the potential for extreme wildfires. Geophys. Res. Lett.; 2019; 46, pp. 8517-8526. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083699]

5. Hanna, L.; Chersich, M.; Pham, M.; Areal, A.; Haghighi, M.; Manyuchi, A.; Swift, C.; Wernecke, B.; Robinson, M.; Hetem, R. Australia’s 2020 summer shows our changed climate future-a public health preparedness challenge. Eur. J. Public Health; 2020; 30, (Suppl. S5), [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckaa165.374]

6. Colwell, S. Evacuation centres are lifeboats, not cruise ships: Managing expectations and prioritising improvements. Aust. J. Emerg. Manag.; 2021; 36, pp. 11-12.

7. Australian Disaster Resilience Knowledge Hub. Australian Disaster Resilience Glossary 2018. Available online: https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/glossary/?wordOfTheDayId=&keywords=&alpha=&page=1&results=50&order=AZ (accessed on 8 April 2024).

8. Knez, I.; Willander, J.; Butler, A.; Ode Sang, Å.; Sarlöv-Herlin, I.; Åkerskog, A. I can still see, hear, and smell the fire: Cognitive, emotional, and personal consequences of a natural disaster, and the impact of evacuation. J. Environ. Psychol.; 2021; 74, 101554. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101554]

9. van Oldenborgh, G.J.; Krikken, F.; Lewis, S.; Leach, N.J.; Lehner, F.; Saunders, K.R.; van Weele, M.; Haustein, K.; Li, S.; Wallom, D. et al. Attribution of the Australian bushfire risk to anthropogenic climate change. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.; 2021; 21, pp. 941-960. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-941-2021]

10. Bureau of Meteorology. Six-Monthly Rainfall Deciles for Australia 01/07/2019-31/12/2019. Available online: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/maps/rainfall/?variable=rainfall&map=decile&period=6month&region=nat&year=2019&month=12&day=31 (accessed on 12 April 2024).

11. Ahmed, I.; Ledger, K. Lessons from the 2019/2020 ‘Black Summer Bushfires’ in Australia. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.; 2023; 96, 103947. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103947]

12. Australian Government Department of Industry, Science and Resources. Funding for Bushfire Recovery and Resilience Projects in 2019–20 Bushfire Affected Areas. Black Summer Bushfire Recovery Grants Program 2021. Available online: https://business.gov.au/grants-and-programs/black-summer-bushfire-recovery-grant (accessed on 9 April 2024).

13. Noosa Shire Council. Community Profile 2023. Available online: https://www.noosa.qld.gov.au/ (accessed on 9 April 2024).

14. Noosa Shire Council. Noosa Shire Council: 2019 Bushfires-Local Recovery Plan. Available online: https://www.qra.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-08/Noosa_bushfires_recovery_plan_0.PDF (accessed on 9 April 2024).

15. Queensland Reconstruction Authority. 2019 Queensland Bushfires. State Recovery Plan 2019–2022. Available online: https://www.qra.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-08/2019_qld_bushfires_recplan_2019-20_lr.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2024).

16. Thomas, D. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. Am. J. Eval.; 2006; 27, pp. 237-246. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748]

17. Lumivero. NVivo; version 13, R1 Lumivero: Denver, CO, USA, 2020; Available online: https://lumivero.com (accessed on 6 June 2022).

18. Liamputtong, P. Qualitative Research Methods; 3rd ed. Oxford University Press: South Melbourne, Australia, 2009.

19. Francis, J.; Johnston, M.; Robertson, C.; Glidewell, L.; Entwistle, V.; Eccles, M.; Grimshaw, J. What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychol. Health; 2010; 25, pp. 1229-1245. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08870440903194015]

20. Bali, R.T. Importance of community awareness and preparedness in disaster risk reduction. Res. Rev. Int. J. Multidiscip.; 2022; 7, pp. 40-57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.31305/rrijm.2022.v07.i10.005]

21. Chandra, A.; Acosta, J.D.; Howard, S.S.; Uscher-Pines, L.; Williams, M.V.; Yeung, D.; Garnett, J.A.; Meredith, L.S. Building community resilience to disasters: A roadmap to guide local planning. Rand Health Q.; 2011; 1, 6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.7249/RB9574] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28083162]

22. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Available online: https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-framework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030 (accessed on 9 March 2024).

23. Fitzgerald, G.J.; Capon, A.; Aitken, P. Resilient health systems: Preparing for climate disasters and other emergencies. Med. J. Aust.; 2019; 210, pp. 304-305. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5694/mja2.50115] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30906994]

24. Kim, S.; Freebairn, L.; Draper, G.; Raulli, A.; Chalker, E.; Gomez, A.; Ryan, L.; Blume, K.; Anstey, K.A.; Eramudugolla, E. et al. Older Adults’ Experiences During the 2019–2020 Bushfires: The PATH Through Life Project; ACT Health: Canberra, Australia, 2023; 68.Available online: https://www.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/2258426/Older-adults-experiences-during-the-2019-2020-bushfires,-the-PATH-through-life-project-2023.pdf (accessed on 9 March 2024).

25. McLennan, J.; Elliott, G.; Wright, L. Bushfires survival preparations by householders in at-risk areas of south-eastern Australia. Aust. J. Emerg. Manag.; 2014; 29, pp. 11-17.

26. Muir, C.; Gilbert, J.; O’Hara, R.; Day, L.; Newstead, S. Physical bushfire preparation over time in Victoria, Australia. Disaster Prev. Manag.; 2017; 26, pp. 241-251. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/DPM-06-2016-0126]

27. MacDougall, C.; Gibbs, L.; Clark, R. Community-based preparedness programmes and the 2009 Australian bushfires: Policy implications derived from applying theory. Disasters; 2014; 38, pp. 249-266. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/disa.12049]

28. Weber, D.; Moskwa, E.; Robinson, G.M.; Bardsley, D.K.; Arnold, J.; Davenport, M.A. Are we ready for bushfire? Perceptions of residents, landowners and fire authorities on Lower Eyre Peninsula, South Australia. Geoforum; 2019; 107, pp. 99-112. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.10.006]

29. Kako, M.; Steenkamp, M.; Ryan, B.; Arbon, P.; Takada, Y. Best practice for evacuation centres accommodating vulnerable populations: A literature review. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.; 2020; 46, 101497. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101497]

30. To, P.; Eboreime, E.; Agyapong, V.I.O. The impact of wildfires on mental health: A scoping review. Behav. Sci.; 2021; 11, 126. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bs11090126]

31. Fazel, S.; Haghani, M.; Mojtahedi, M.; Rashidi, T.H. The role of individual preparedness and behavioural training in natural hazards: A scoping review. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.; 2024; 105, 104379. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104379]

32. Tekeli-Yeşil, S.; Dedeoğlu, N.; Braun-Fahrlaender, C.; Tanner, M. Factors Motivating Individuals to Take Precautionary Action for an Expected Earthquake in Istanbul. Risk Anal.; 2010; 30, pp. 1181-1195. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01424.x]

33. Rawsthorne, M.; Howard, A.; Joseph, P.; Sampson, D.; Harris, M.K. Understanding community-led disaster preparedness. Aust. J. Emerg. Manag.; 2023; 38, pp. 49-54. Available online: https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/agispt.20230529089136 (accessed on 27 September 2024). [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47389/38.2.49]

34. Shukla, M.; Amberson, T.; Heagele, T.; McNeill, C.; Adams, L.; Ndayishimiye, K.; Castner, J. Tailoring household disaster preparedness interventions to reduce health disparities: Nursing implications from machine learning importance features from the 2018–2020 FEMA national household survey. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2024; 21, 521. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21050521] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38791736]

35. Perez-Fuentes, G.; Verrucci, E.; Joffe, H. A Review of Current Earthquake and Fire Preparedness Campaigns: What Works?. Dynamics of Disasters—Key Concepts, Models, Algorithms, and Insights. DOD 2015 2016; Kotsireas, I.; Nagurney, A.; Pardalos, P. Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; Volume 185, [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43709-5_13]

36. Han, Z.; Wu, G. Why do people not prepare for disasters? A national survey from China. NPJ Nat. Hazards; 2024; 1, 1. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s44304-024-00001-2]

37. Whittaker, J.; Haynes, K.; Handmer, J.; McLennan, J. Community safety during the 2008 Australian ‘Black Saturday’ bushfires: An analysis of household preparedness and response. Int. J. Wildland Fire; 2013; 22, pp. 841-849. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1071/WF12010]

38. Whittaker, J.; Blanchi, R.; Haynes, K.; Leonard, J.; Opie, K. Experiences of sheltering during the Black Saturday bushfires: Implications for policy and research. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.; 2017; 23, pp. 119-127. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.05.002]

39. Atkinson, S. How does information really flow in communities during a natural disaster. Aust. J. Emerg. Manag.; 2023; 38, pp. 6-8.

40. Stidham, M.; Toman, E.; McCaffrey, S.; Schinder, B. Improving an inherently stressful situation: The role of communication during wildfire evacuations. Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Human Dimensions of Wildland Fire; San Antonio, TX, USA, 27–29 April 2010; pp. 96-103. Available online: https://research.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/38522 (accessed on 23 September 2024).

41. Dootson, P.; Kuligowski, E.; Greer, D.A.; Miller, S.G.; Tippett, V. Consistent and conflicting information in floods and bushfires impact risk information seeking, risk perceptions, and protective action intentions. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.; 2022; 70, 102774. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102774]

42. Halloway, D.; Green, L. FireWatch: Community engagement and the communication of bushfire information. Proceedings of the Emerging Issues in Communication Research & Police Conference; University of Canberra News & Media Research Centre, Canberra, Australia, 18–19 November 2013; pp. 127-136. Available online: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2013/343/ (accessed on 22 September 2024).

43. Duckett, S.; Mackey, W.; Stobart, A. The Health Effects of the 2019–20 Bushfires: Submission to the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements. The Grattan Institute 2020. Available online: https://grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Grattan-Institute-submission-to-Royal-Commission.pdf (accessed on 8 June 2023).

44. Gribble, K.; Hamrosi, M.; Hull, N. The Black Summer Bushfires Put an Enormous Strain on Families and Young Children. We Can’t Make the Same Mistakes Again. Conversation Media Group 2023. Available online: https://theconversation.com/the-black-summer-bushfires-put-an-enormous-strain-on-families-with-young-children-we-cant-make-the-same-mistakes-again-205026 (accessed on 18 April 2023).

45. Harris, M.S.; Musa, G.; Brookman, R.M. The significance of community support for survivors of a natural disaster. Open Fam. Stud. J.; 2016; 8, pp. 37-46. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874922401608010037]

46. Bryant, R.A.; Waters, E.; Gibbs, L.; Gallagher, H.C.; Pattison, P.; Lusher, D.; MacDougall, C.; Harms, L.; Block, K.; Snowdon, E. et al. Psychological outcomes following the Victorian Black Saturday bushfires. Aust. N. Z. J. Psychiatry; 2014; 48, pp. 634-643. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0004867414534476]

47. Biddle, N.; Edwards, B.; Herz, D.; Makkai, T.; McAllister, I. ANU Poll 2020: Bushfires, the Environment, and Optimism for the Future. ADA Dataverse, V2. Available online: https://doi.org/10.26193/S1S9I9 (accessed on 18 April 2023). [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.26193/S1S9I9]

48. Zhang, Y.; Workman, A.; Russell, M.A.; Williamson, M.; Pan, H.; Reifels, L. The long-term impact of bushfires on the mental health of Australians: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Psychotraumatol.; 2022; 13, 2087980. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20008198.2022.2087980]

49. Camilleri, P.; Healy, C.; Macdonald, E.; Nicholls, S.; Sykes, J.; Winkworth, G.; Woodward, M. Recovery from bushfires: The experience of the 2003 Canberra bushfires three years after. J. Emerg. Prim. Health Care; 2010; 8, pp. 1-15. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.1.112]

50. McFarlane, A.C.; Van Hooff, M. Learning for the future: The challenge of disaster research. Aust. N. Z. J. Psychiatry; 2014; 48, pp. 600-602. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0004867414539236]

51. Commonwealth of Australia. A National Approach to National Disasters: The Commonwealth Government response to the Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements 2020. Available online: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/resource/download/national-approach-national-disasters.docx#:~:text=The%20Commonwealth%20Government%20will%20establish,and%20recover%20from%20all%20hazards (accessed on 26 November 2024).

52. Burns, N.; Grove, S.; Gray, J. Understanding Nursing Research: Building An Evidence-Based Practice; 5th ed. Elsevier Saunders: Maryland Heights, MO, USA, 2011.