Human Behavior and Decision Making, Article Critique Example

Introduction

This is a critique of the article, Stay or Go?  Human Behavior and Decision Making in Bushfires and Other Emergencies (P. F. Johnson, 2011), which examines the policy of “leave early or stay and defend” (otherwise known as “stay or go” policy) in emergency situations such as bushfires or hurricane and flooding events.  The examination is important to help understand what drives some people to stay in a dangerous situation rather than follow evacuation orders, particularly in the bushfire situation.  It also helps to better utilize valuable emergency management resources, and protect the lives of emergency workers (including fire service personnel) and the public.

Problem Statement

The research examines the situation of bushfire security in Australia. Particular focus is based upon whether people should stay and attempt to defend their property or vacate the area. These types of decisions can be critical life threatening ones and as such more complex than the simple premise of ‘stay or go’ . The research conducted has provided a number of common factors that help to inform individuals and assist in that decision making process. In particular the need to more fully comprehend the group behaviour and socio-cultural factors involved.

Arguments

In favour of staying:

• The need to defend personal property because of the lack of adequate insurance coverage or inability to locate elsewhere;
• It may not be practical because of the business being in the same area as the property and the need to maintain individual livelihood;
• The inability to move owing to personal constraints like disability or cognitive impairment
• The inability to absorb complex information and make sensible decisions based upon personal circumstances

In favour of going

• The speed and severity of bushfires are extremely unpredictable and as such may quickly move you into a life threatening situation
• Many people do not comprehend the threat due to inexperience or lack of knowledge, the prudent option is to vacate the impacted area
• The value of human life should always take priority over possessions, regardless of circumstances, particularly where family and children are concerned.

Leaving early is always the safest option for those communities are in a high risk of bushfire situations. The fires can move in unpredictable patterns and late evacuation may put you in risk of being cut off or stranded with little help of rescue. This is of particular concern to the more vulnerable population of the community i.e. children, elderly and disabled people. There remains a strong need for improved communications to the public and making them more informed on the potential dangers in order to facilitate the right decision making process. (Mannix, 2011)

Analysis of Incident Information

The bushfires that occurred in Victoria during 2009 illustrated the importance of the decision making process. Considerable debate has taken place on the important safety policies and whether these need to be made mandatory to the public.  During this incident there was a loss of some 173 lives and considerable damage to land and property.  The review of the incident highlighted two main problems in the ‘stay or go’ decision making process. The first of these is that the risk assessment is not considered to have equal balance in the decision making process. The information to evacuate was not clearly defined and so led to confusion of people and blurred the decision making process. As such where the cues to leave are considered ambiguous the tendency is that people tend to stay at their properties.  (John Handmer, 2008)

In Victoria Legislation support the right of individuals to stay and defend their properties in the event of a bushfire.  Whereas in other Australian states the order of evacuation is mandatory. It therefore questions whether such policies in Victoria are prudent and leaves the door open for people to put themselves in harm’s way. The fighting of fires should be left in the hands of experienced and professional firefighting personnel who better understand how to manage the risks involved.

Many people have no real perception of the severity of bush fires and how changes in the direction of winds can move fires at an alarming pace and often without warning.  Those not leaving early enough can find themselves isolated and trapped and in a position of not being able to adequately deal with advancing fires that threaten their property.   The Royal commissioners made a number of important points that include: (1) People underestimate the amount of effort that is required in order to make a defensible position around their property (ii) People underestimate the need for early evacuation from their property and often leave it too late (iii) The concept of staying and defending your property is not a viable option where elderly people, children or the infirm are concerned (iv) There needs to be a holistic strategy developed that embraces entire communities in terms of emergency preparedness and evacuation procedures (v) There needs to be appropriate fireproof shelters where people can go in the event of emergencies.

Conclusions on Positions Taken

These finding consider information and lessons learned from approximately 13 other major bushfire incidents and other disaster scenarios in different countries i.e. Hurricane Katrina in the USA.  There is a particular need to better understand the psychological and sociological implications resulting from disaster scenarios. One of the most important aspects for the initial response team is communications.  It is useful to determine if Cell phone coverage is still available in the area.  This is the quickest and cheapest form of communication for the response team. If this is down we need to examine additional communication options.

The Emergency Response teams  need a quick predetermination on the number of people impacted by the disaster and the surrounding support infrastructure. For example, housing, sewage, water facilities.  You  then need to examine the indirect damage and this will be important to determine the amount of resources and relief that we will need to bring to the earliest part of this disaster response.  The most important aspect here is an estimate of how the communications and flow of goods and services have been impacted to the disaster zone. How many roads are out ?  Is the nearest airport still functional?  Is the nearest seaport still open?  Identify areas that might be used as helipad and temporary airstrips.  Identify secure zones where relief aid can be dropped in by parachute. Finally we need to look at the Secondary effects. In this case the outer shell or peripheral damage and those potentially in danger from the impacts of the initial disaster.  Early observation estimates are accepted but this might be supported with intelligent research and suitable internet sites might be appropriate here.

Overall the article provides an interesting and balanced view on the importance of making the right decisions.

References

John Handmer, K. H. (2008). Community Bushfire Safety. Collingwood VC: Csiro Publishing.

Mannix, I. (2011). Great Australian Bushfire Stories. Sydney NSW: Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

153. F. Johnson, C. E. (2011). Stay or Go? Human Behavior and Decision Making in Bushfires and Other Emergencies. Fire Technology, 48, 137-153.