@article {bnh-5616, title = {Australian householders{\textquoteright} psychological preparedness for potential natural hazard threats: An exploration of contributing factors}, journal = {International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction}, year = {2019}, month = {06/2019}, abstract = {

Considerable attention has been given by researchers to householders{\textquoteright} material, or physical, preparedness for impact of a severe natural hazard. Somewhat less attention has been paid to psychological preparedness for such an event. This paper first reviews conceptual formulations of psychological preparedness for disasters, and self-report measures of the construct. Previous research findings about correlates of psychological preparedness are discussed. We report findings from a survey of 1,253 Australian households. Scores on two psychological preparedness subscales (Knowledge and management, Anticipation and awareness) were correlated with scores on a measure of material preparedness. For both women and men, seven factors were found to be associated with both psychological and material preparedness: (a) information awareness about psychological preparedness, (b) previous emergency services training or experience, (c) previous experience of natural hazard threat, (d) higher mindfulness scores, (e) higher active engagement coping style scores, (f) low stress scores, and (g) low depression scores. It was concluded that important issues remain to be addressed about how householder psychological preparedness for disasters is best conceptualised, measured, and modified.

}, keywords = {Coping, disasters, Mindfulness, Natural hazards, Psychological preparedness, Stress}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101203}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420918310690}, author = {Danielle Every and Jim McLennan and Amy Reynolds and Trigg, Josh} } @article {bnh-5007, title = {Australian wildland-urban interface householders{\textquoteright} wildfire safety preparations: {\textquoteleft}Everyday life{\textquoteright} project priorities and perceptions of wildfire risk}, journal = {International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction}, year = {2018}, month = {10/2018}, abstract = {

Globally, many residents of wildland-urban interface (WUI) communities are at risk of wildfire attack but do not undertake adequate preparations. Householder wildfire risk perception has been proposed as an important influence on risk mitigation preparatory actions. However, research findings have been inconsistent. We conducted a meta-analysis of 10 studies and found the average correlation between wildfire risk perception and risk mitigation actions to be small: r = 0.17. In order to investigate wildfire risk perception and mitigation further we conducted two studies of Australian WUI householders{\textquoteright} wildfire risk perceptions and mitigation actions in the context of their everyday life activities conceptualised as {\textquoteleft}household projects{\textquoteright}. Study 1 involved 32 interviews. Both household wildfire safety project priority rankings (r = 0.47) and wildfire risk perception ratings (r = 0.44) were related significantly to number of completed wildfire preparation actions. Study 2 involved 127 householders completing an online survey, with 83 providing household wildfire safety project priority rankings. These rankings were related significantly to number of completed wildfire safety preparation actions (r = 0.38), but risk perception ratings were not related significantly (r = 0.08). Implications of viewing wildfire preparation actions as being situated in everyday life contexts are discussed.

}, keywords = {Bushfire, everyday life, personal projects, risk mitigation, WUI risk perception}, doi = {10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.09.017}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420918308719$\#$!}, author = {Christopher Bearman and Jim McLennan and Kubra Koksal and Danielle Every} } @article {bnh-5064, title = {Should we leave now? Behavioral factors in evacuation under wildfire threat}, journal = {Fire Technology}, year = {2018}, month = {07/2018}, pages = {30}, chapter = {1}, abstract = {

Wildfires pose a serious threat to life in many countries. For police, fire and emergency services authorities in most jurisdictions in North America and Australia evacuation is now the option that is preferred overwhelmingly. Wildfire evacuation modeling can assist authorities in planning evacuation responses to future threats. Understanding residents{\textquoteright} behavior under wildfire threat may assist in wildfire evacuation modeling. This paper reviews North American and Australian research into wildfire evacuation behavior published between January 2005 and June 2017. Wildfire evacuation policies differ across the two regions: in North America mandatory evacuations are favored, in Australia most are advisory. Research from both regions indicates that following a wildfire evacuation warning some threatened residents will wish to remain on their property in order to protect it, many will delay evacuating, and some residents who are not on their property when an evacuation warning is issued may seek to return. Mandatory evacuation is likely to result in greater compliance, enforcement policies are also likely to be influential. Self-delayed evacuation is likely if warnings are not sufficiently informative: residents are likely to engage in information search rather than initiating evacuation actions. The wildfire warning and threat histories of a location may influence residents{\textquoteright} decisions and actions. The complexities of behavioral factors influencing residents{\textquoteright} actions following an evacuation warning pose challenges for wildfire evacuation modeling. Suggestions are offered for ways in which authorities might reduce the numbers of residents who delay evacuating following a wildfire warning.

}, keywords = {Bushfire, delay, Evacuation, human behavior, modeling, Wildfire}, doi = {10.1007/s10694-018-0753-8 }, url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10694-018-0753-8}, author = {Jim McLennan and Barbara Ryan and Christopher Bearman and Keith Toh} } @article {bnh-3345, title = {On the concept of denial of natural hazard risk and its use in relation to householder wildfire safety in Australia}, journal = {International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction}, volume = {21}, year = {2017}, month = {03/2017}, pages = {176-186}, chapter = {176}, abstract = {

Denial has often been used to explain why some residents at risk from natural hazards do not take appropriate threat mitigation actions. However, there has been little critical discussion of the concept of denial in relation to natural hazards. We examined the origins and development of the concept and noted that denial, as an explanation for inaction, is an inferred construct, not an observable phenomenon. We reviewed accounts that proposed denial as an explanation for residents failing to mitigate their natural hazard risk. We concluded that the concept has been used so inconsistently as to be meaningless without an explanation of the intended sense of the term. We discuss findings from reports of post-event interviews with residents threatened by severe Australian wildfires, and from a survey of agency community safety senior managers. The reports indicated that small percentages of residents in high-risk communities could be described as perhaps being in denial. The survey found that none of the wildfire agencies employed the concept formally. We suggest that it may be more useful to view most householders{\textquoteright} failures to mitigate their wildfire risk as resulting from potential threats being entwined with more immediate higher priority competing demands of everyday life.

}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.12.006}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420916306720}, author = {Jim McLennan and Danielle Every and Christopher Bearman and Wright, Lyndsey} } @article {bnh-1744, title = {At-risk householders{\textquoteright} responses to potential and actual bushfire threat: An analysis of findings from seven Australian post-bushfire interview studies 2009{\textendash}2014}, journal = {International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction}, volume = {12}, year = {2015}, month = {19/02/2015}, pages = {319-327}, chapter = {319}, abstract = {

Many populated areas of Australia are at high risk of bushfire. All state and territory rural fire services have community bushfire safety education programs providing information and advice to residents about bushfire danger, household risk assessment, and planning and preparing to leave safely or to defend a property assessed as being defensible. Following disastrous bushfires in Victoria in February 2009 resulting in the deaths of 172 civilians and destruction of more than 2000 homes, a programme of interviews with affected residents was conducted. This first study revealed generally low levels of both pre-bushfire perceptions of risk, and planning and preparation by householders. Between 2011 and 2014, six further post-bushfire householder interview studies were conducted. Despite fire agencies{\textquoteright} community education endeavours subsequent to the 2009 fires: (a) appreciable percentages of residents interviewed in these six post-2010 studies did not believe that they were at-risk prior to the fire and had no plan for what to do if threatened; (b) of those with a plan, a minority were well-prepared to implement their plan {\textendash} especially if that plan was to leave; (c) very few householders self-evacuated before the fire on the basis of fire danger weather warnings. The findings and implications are discussed.

}, keywords = {Wildfire; Community safety; Risk perception; Mitigation; Decision making}, doi = {doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.02.007}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420915000205}, author = {Jim McLennan and Paton, Douglas and Wright, Lyndsey} } @article {bnh-1663, title = {Capturing community experiences: South Australian bushfires January 2014}, number = {052}, year = {2015}, month = {03/2015}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Lightning strikes in January 2014 caused a number of significant bushfire events in South Australia that continued into February. Fires in and around Eden Valley, Bangor and Rockleigh provided an opportunity to conduct research into the bushfire risk perceptions, decision-making processes and behaviour of residents across three very different fire events involving a rapid-onset fire (Eden Valley), a long-campaign fire (Bangor), and repeat fire incidents (Rockleigh).

During April and May 2014, 171 residents in affected communities were interviewed and 606 South Australians participated in a complementary online (statewide) survey. Approximately one in two (49\%) survey respondents considered their residential area to have been impacted by fire, and almost one in five (17\%) indicated that they were directly impacted by the fires, and one in five (20\%) experienced fire threat without property damage. The aim of the research was to inform SA Country Fire Service about community members{\textquoteright} experiences of bushfires in South Australia, with particular attention to a range of research questions grouped under the three themes discussed below. The nature of the study has allowed us to provide observations and insights on each one of these themes. However, it should be noted that cause and effect relationships between the factors should not be inferred.

}, isbn = {978-0-9941696-2-4}, issn = {052}, author = {Trigg, Josh and Rainbird, Sophia and Kirrilly Thompson and Christopher Bearman and Wright, Lyndsey and Jim McLennan} } @article {bnh-1612, title = {Capturing community members{\textquoteright} bushfire experiences following the 12 January 2014 Parkerville (WA) fire: supplementary online survey}, year = {2015}, month = {02/2015}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, abstract = {

This is the companion volume for the report entitled Capturing community members{\textquoteright} bushfire experiences: Interviews with residents following the 12 January 2014 Parkerville (WA) Fire prepared by Professor Jim McLennan. The current document presents findings from the online survey developed to complement the community interviews undertaken and detailed by Professor McLennan in that report.

Both pieces of work were undertaken as part of the study conducted by the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC for the Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) of Western Australia following the bushfire in the Parkerville area on 12 January 2014.

The purpose of that study was to assist DFES to learn as much as possible about residents{\textquoteright} prior understandings of bushfire safety and risk, and their experiences during the fires, thus contributing to improved community bushfire safety in the future. The reader is referred to the aforementioned report for an overview of the circumstances of that fire and background to the study.

The online survey was included in the broader study to enable those who were not at home at the time the interview teams were in the field and unable to avail themselves of the opportunity to participate in the study though a telephone interview to have their experiences recorded and considered. The online survey was open to all residents in the Shire of Mundaring from May to early July 2014.

Despite wide promotion of the survey, the number of respondents who ultimately completed the questionnaire (58) was small. This means that the results should be used carefully and should be seen as a glimpse of the views of a self-selected group of Shire of Mundaring residents who are particularly interested in bushfire-related matters.

}, isbn = {978-0-9941696-1-7}, author = {Wright, Lyndsey and Jim McLennan} } @article {bnh-1611, title = {Capturing community members{\textquoteright} bushfire experiences: interviews with residents following the 12 January 2014 Parkerville (WA) fire}, year = {2015}, month = {02/2015}, institution = {Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC}, abstract = {

On Sunday 12 January 2014, a bushfire destroyed 57 homes across three Perth Hills localities: Parkerville, Stoneville and Mount Helena. Following the fire, Department of Fire and Emergency Services (DFES) senior management requested the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre (BNHCRC) to coordinate a post-bushfire interview survey of residents in the bushfire-affected area, in collaboration with DFES Community Engagement staff. The purpose was to assist the DFES to learn as much as possible about residents{\textquoteright} prior understandings of bushfire safety and risk, and their experiences during the fires, thus contributing to improved community bushfire safety in the future. Over 3 days (2{\textendash}4 April 2014), five BNHCRC{\textendash}DFES interview teams visited properties in and near the fire-scar area, resulting in interviews with 91 households. This report summarises findings from these interviews. Where appropriate, the findings have been compared with those from previous Bushfire CRC post-bushfire interview studies conducted following fires in Victoria (2009), Western Australia (2011); Tasmania (2013) and NSW (2013). A summary of the major findings from these six previous Bushfire CRC post-bushfire interview studies is in an appendix (Appendix F). No attempt has been made to relate the findings to recent inquiries and reviews conducted into Western Australian bushfires, this being beyond the scope of the present study. Some suggestions about future community bushfire safety endeavours are offered for consideration

}, isbn = {978-0-9941696-0-0}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {bnh-2533, title = {Secondary Traumatic Stress in Postdisaster Field Research Interviewers}, journal = {Journal of Traumatic Stress}, year = {2015}, month = {01/2016}, abstract = {

Numerous studies show that those involved in disaster response may develop posttraumatic stress disorder or experience secondary traumatic stress (STS). There are few reports about the experiences of postdisaster field research interviewers. We report findings from a follow-up study of researchers who conducted postwildfire field research interviews with residents affected by 5 severe wildfire events in Australia over the period 2009{\textendash}2014. There were 33 postwildfire research interviewers who reported their experiences, and 18 of them (54.5\%) described distressing interviews involving deaths, surviving severe threats to life, and destruction of houses. There were 27 (81.6\%) who reported having experienced 1 or more STS symptoms on a 20-item measure. Those who conducted interviews following a multifatality wildfire event reported higher levels of STS symptoms compared with researchers whose interviews followed nonfatal wildfires. There were 21 (63.6\%) researchers who reported that their interviewing experiences had positive effects on their lives. This indicates that the researcher role of gathering information so that future wildfire risk could be mitigated may have served a protective function.

}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jts.22072/abstract;jsessionid=03E06FC8DFD29B9B128449799C0A6E51.f01t01?userIsAuthenticated=false\&deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=}, author = {Jim McLennan and Lynette Evans and Sean Cowlishaw and Lindsay Pamment and Wright, Lyndsey} } @article {bnh-2216, title = {Stress and Growth Experiences Reported by Post-Bushfire Field Research Interviewers}, year = {2015}, month = {09/2015}, abstract = {

Background: There are numerous reports that those involved in disaster response and recovery are at-risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder, acute stress reaction, or secondary traumatic stress. There are few reports of research concerning the experiences of post-disaster field research interviewers. During the period 2009{\textemdash}2014, post-bushfire research interviews were conducted with residents affected by seven major bushfire events in four Australian states. This report describes findings from follow-up surveys of those who conducted five of these post-bushfire research interview studies. The aim was to investigate (a)\ the nature of their experiences; and (b)\ their perceptions of the adequacy of the training and preparation for the work.

Method: Sixty-five post-bushfire research interviewers were contacted and invited to take part in an interview or complete a survey questionnaire about their post-bushfire research experiences. Thirty-three researchers (51\%) provided 38 responses: one researcher described experiences on each of three deployments, three researchers described their experiences on each of two deployments.

Results: Of the 38 responses, 9 (24\%) described no stress symptoms associated with the interviews; 26 (68\%) described little to mild levels of stress symptoms; 3 (8\%) reported moderate levels of stress symptoms. Twenty three researchers (64\%) reported that their experiences overall were positive. Reports about training and preparation were mostly positive.

Conclusions: Interviewing residents affected by future disaster events will be psychologically impactful for many who conduct post-disaster field research. For the majority, the experience will probably have some distressing elements, but will be viewed positively overall. A small percentage will experience moderate levels of secondary stress, especially if the event involved multiple fatalities, but this will be relatively transient. The approach to training and preparation used for the post-bushfire field interviews is probably adequate, but needs to be evaluated more rigorously.

}, author = {Jim McLennan and Lynette Evans} } @article {bnh-1881, title = {The {\textquoteright}University Human Research Ethics Committees{\textquoteright} Provisions for Expedited Reviews of Above-low Risk Research Such as Post-disaster Community Interview Studies}, year = {2015}, month = {06/2015}, abstract = {

There is widespread agreement among researchers and emergency services personnel that changes in climate and human settlement patterns in Australia will result in more frequent natural disaster events in future. Emergency management agencies need to know how community members prepare for and respond to disasters. The Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre (BNHCRC) may expect to be asked to respond to requests from emergency services agencies for researchers to go into the field to interview survivors about their experiences quite soon after disaster events such as bushfires, cyclones, floods, and severe storms. Researchers are most likely to come from universities. Some circumstances may require very rapid review of above-low risk ethics applications from university researchers seeking to conduct post-disaster field studies, by university human research ethics committees (HRECs). In 2014 Australia{\textquoteright}s 39 university HRECs were contacted and asked to describe any provisions they had for such expedited reviews. Replies were received from 28 HRECs (72\%). Nine of these 28 described provisions for expedited review of above-low risk applications--four described formal procedures, and five described ad hoc procedures that could be followed if required. Nineteen HRECs (68\%) stated that they had no provisions currently for expedited review of above-low risk ethics applications; six of these discussed possible ways in which such a request might possibly be facilitated depending on circumstances. It was concluded that university researchers who may be asked by the BNHCRC to conduct post-disaster field research involving human participants should investigate their particular university HREC{\textquoteright}s provisions (if any) for expedited review of above-low risk research well in advance of an actual disaster event and plan for possible post-disaster research accordingly. One approach suggested by several of the responding HRECs was that researchers should prepare a generic ethics application for possible above-low risk post-disaster research, secure provisional ethics approval, and submit a subsequent Application For Modification of the research for expedited approval once the specifics of a study are known.

}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {bnh-2607, title = {Bushfire survival preparations by householders in at-risk areas of south-eastern Australia}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management}, volume = {29}, year = {2014}, abstract = {

While Australian state and territory governments devote considerable resources to combating bushfires, landowners and householders are increasingly expected to take responsibility for protecting their property and for their personal safety. All Australian states and territories have community bushfire safety programs in place which provide information and advice to householders about bushfire survival. This paper describes findings from a 2012 survey of 584 residents in at-risk areas of south-eastern Australia and describes generally low levels of planning and preparation for bushfires. Householder lack of planning and preparation for safe evacuation if threatened was especially concerning1.\ 

}, url = {https://ajem.infoservices.com.au/items/AJEM-29-02-05}, author = {Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn and Wright, Lyndsey} } @article {bnh-1741, title = {Community Understanding and Awareness of Bushfire Safety: October 2013 Bushfires - Overview}, year = {2014}, abstract = {

This overview provides a consolidation of the findings from the interviews and online surveys conducted by the\ Bushfire CRC researcher into the community understanding of bushfire safety and responses in the context of the\ October 2013 Bushfires in NSW. This work was commissioned by NSW Rural Fire Service.\ This research had two separate {\textendash} but interconnected {\textendash} components, (i) a series of interviews with residents in\ a number of fire impacted communities, and (ii) an online survey (also targeted to those communities but open\ more broadly to fire impacted areas in NSW ) each of these has been analysed and reported upon in detail in the\ reports submitted. Both components focused on common themes and the following summarises the combined\ responses.\ 

The executive summaries from the two individual reports are provided at the end of the consolidated findings.

}, isbn = {978-0-9925027-3-7}, author = {Wright, Lyndsey and Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian and Bronwyn Horsey and Trent Penman} } @article {bnh-1742, title = {Community Understanding and Awareness of Bushfire Safety: October 2013 Bushfires - Part 1}, year = {2014}, abstract = {

The calendar year 2013 was one of the worst on record for destructive bushfires in NSW. In January,\ fires swept across numerous areas, destroying more than 50 homes. Then in October, bushfires\ again threatened many communities, with more than 200 homes lost. Following both of these\ bushfire events, NSW Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS) asked the Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre\ (CRC) to: (a) coordinate a program of interviews with residents in three seriously affected areas; and\ (b) commission an online survey of residents in the same affected areas. The purpose was to assist\ the organisation to learn as much as possible about residents{\textquoteright} prior understandings of bushfire risk\ and their experiences during the fires, thus contributing to improved community safety for the\ future.

For this study NSW RFS identified three areas that had been impacted by significant bushfire events\ during October 2013: (i) greater Blue Mountains (including locations at Bell, Clarence, Dargan,\ Lithgow, Mount Irvine; Mount Victoria; Faulconbridge, Springwood, Winmalee, Yellow Rock){\textemdash}\ significant fire activity 16 October{\textendash}13 November; (ii) Port Stephens (including locations at Medowie,\ Raymond Terrace, Tomago, Williamtown; Salt Ash){\textemdash}significant fire activity 13{\textendash}23 October; and\ (iii) Wingecarribee Shire (including locations at Balmoral Village, Colo Vale, Yanderra, Yerrinbool){\textemdash}\ significant fire activity 17{\textendash}24 October.

}, isbn = {978-0-9925027-3-7}, author = {Jim McLennan and Wright, Lyndsey and Birch, Adrian} } @article {bnh-1745, title = {Predictors of south-eastern Australian householders{\textquoteright} strengths of intentions to self-evacuate if a wildfire threatens: two theoretical models}, journal = {International Journal of Wildland Fire}, volume = {23}, year = {2014}, month = {11/11/2014}, pages = {1176-1188}, chapter = {1176}, abstract = {

Householder evacuation in the face of a wildfire threat is the survival option advocated by fire agencies. However, late evacuation is common and has resulted in loss of life. The primary aim of this study was to investigate potential predictors of householders{\textquoteright} strength of intention to leave early in response to a bushfire threat warning. A survey of 584 residents of bushfire-prone locations in south-eastern Australia was conducted. Theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and protection motivation theory (PMT) were used to explore predictors of strength of householders{\textquoteright} intentions to leave, or to stay and defend following a bushfire warning. TPB was a useful predictor of strength of intention to leave, but PMT was not such a useful predictor of strength of intention to leave. Householder efficacy and self-characterisation were important contributors, whereas perceptions of severity and susceptibility to threat were not found to be significant contributors. Neither model performed well in predicting strength of intention to stay and defend. The findings are discussed in relation to community wildfire safety research and practice.

}, keywords = {Natural hazards, stay or go policy}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/WF13219}, url = {http://www.publish.csiro.au/?paper=WF13219}, author = {Jim McLennan and Sean Cowlishaw and Paton, Douglas and Beatson, Ruth and Elliott, Glenn} } @article {bnh-1746, title = {Psychological differences between south-eastern Australian householders{\textquoteright} who intend to leave if threatened by a wildfire and those who intend to stay and defend}, journal = {International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction}, volume = {11}, year = {2014}, month = {29/11/2014}, pages = {35-46}, chapter = {35}, abstract = {

Disastrous wildfires have occurred often in south-eastern Australia. Following multi-fatality wildfires in Victoria on 7 February 2009 the national approach to community wildfire safety, {\textquoteleft}Prepare, stay and defend or leave early{\textquoteright}, came under intense critical scrutiny. The approach was revised subsequently so as to emphasise leaving as the safest option in the event of a wildfire warning. This study reports findings from a survey of 584 residents of at-risk locations. The majority (47\%) reported that they intended to leave if warned of a bushfire threat. However, a substantial minority (24\%) reported that they intended to stay and defend their home. A further 29\% reported that they intended to wait and see what developed before making a final decision. Those intending to leave differed from those intending to stay and defend in several ways. Those intending to leave were characterised generally by being more concerned about the danger posed by bushfires, they viewed themselves as more vulnerable to bushfire threat and they were worried about their house being destroyed in their absence. Those intending to stay and defend were motivated, mostly, to protect their valued property and they believed that their efforts would be successful. They did not perceive themselves to be risk takers. Those intending to leave generally reported rather low levels of preparations for leaving safely. An appreciable percentage of those intending to stay and defend reported levels of preparations for safe defence which were probably inadequate for safe and effective defence.

}, keywords = {Bushfire; Community safety; Evacuation; Property defence}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.11.008}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420914001162}, author = {Jim McLennan and Paton, Douglas and Beatson, Ruth} } @article {BF-3950, title = {Community safety during the 2009 Australian {\textquoteleft}Black Saturday{\textquoteright} bushfires: an analysis of household preparedness and response}, journal = {International Journal of Wildland Fire}, year = {2013}, month = {31/05/2013}, doi = {10.1071/WF12010}, url = {http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/WF12010.htm}, author = {J Whittaker and Katharine Haynes and John Handmer and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-4277, title = {Householders{\textquoteright} safety-related decisions, plans, actions and outcomes during the 7 February 2009 Victorian (Australia) wildfires}, journal = {Fire Safety Journal}, volume = {61}, year = {2013}, month = {10/2013}, pages = {175-184}, chapter = {175}, abstract = {This study examined decisions made by householders under wildfire threat. Data were obtained from interviews with survivors of severe wildfires in Victoria (Australia) on 7 February 2009 which killed 172 civilians and destroyed more than 2000 homes. Prior to this, Australian fire agency community wildfire safety policy was that residents should: {\textquoteleft}Prepare, stay and defend or leave early{\textquoteright}. Most of the 223 interviewees who stayed and defended did so because this was their wildfire safety plan, and they believed that they would be successful despite the predicted extreme fire danger weather. In 79\% of cases, defence was successful; for the remaining 21\% the house was destroyed and several lives were imperilled. Of the 216 who left for a safer location only 39\% said that this was their wildfire safety plan; for most, the action of leaving was triggered by realisation of the imminent threat posed by the fire; 36\% self-evacuated under hazardous conditions. The findings suggest that community wildfire safety programs should emphasize: (a) the risks associated with staying to defend a property; and (b) how householders should prepare in order to leave safely if a fire threatens.}, keywords = {Community wildfire safety, Decision making, Evacuation, Property defence, Risk perception, Wildfire survival}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2013.09.003}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037971121300146X}, author = {Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn and Omodei, Mary and J Whittaker} } @article {BF-3339, title = {Householder decision-making under imminent wildfire threat: stay and defend or leave?}, journal = {International Journal of Wildland Fire}, volume = {online early}, year = {2012}, month = {July 2012}, abstract = {The study examined aspects of decision-making that distinguish between those who stay and defend their property and those who leave for an assumed safer location when a community comes under imminent threat from a severe wildfire. The data were obtained from field interviews with 49 survivors of the Murrindindi wildfire (Victoria, Australia, 7 February 2009) in which 38 people perished and that destroyed the small township of Marysville. Uncertainty about the level of threat was a major feature of the decision-making context in the period immediately preceding the impact of the fire. The majority of those who stayed and defended did so because they were committed to this plan of action. For most of those who left, the action of leaving was triggered by realisation of the severe threat posed by the intensity or location of the fire.}, doi = {10.1071/WF11061}, author = {Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn and Omodei, Mary} } @article {BF-3160, title = {Issues in Community Bushfire Safety: Analyses of Interviews Conducted by the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Research Task Force}, year = {2012}, month = {March 2012}, abstract = {1. Immediately following the 7 February 2009 Victorian bushfires the Bushfire CRC organised a multi-agency Task Force to investigate and report on four aspects of the fires: arson (in collaboration with Victoria Police); fire behaviour; building survivability and infrastructure; and human behaviour and community safety. This last involved interviewing a cross-section of survivors about their experiences. 2. A total of 552 field interviews were conducted, resulting in 496 usable and informative interview transcripts. The transcripts were analysed following coding of aspects of survivors{\textquoteright} accounts. This report describes findings in relation to issues of householder bushfire knowledge, planning, preparedness, decisions, actions, threats, and hazards. 3. The aim of the report is to inform fire and emergency services agencies about survivors{\textquoteright} beliefs, plans actions, and experiences which may have implications for current community bushfire safety policies, priorities, programs, and practices. 4. Survivors{\textquoteright} accounts covered eight fire complexes: Beechworth, Bendigo, Bunyip, Churchill, Horsham, Kilmore, Murrindindi, and Narre Warren. Of the 496 transcripts, 360 were from residents of isolated rural properties, 99 were from residents of rural towns, and 37 were from residents of bushland-urban interface (suburban) streets. 5. Bushfire survival plans: It is estimated that 81\% of those who planned to stay and defend had undertaken more than minimal long term preparation to do so, while 34\% of those whose plan was to leave safely had undertaken more than minimal long term preparation to do so. Overall, 6\% of survivors planned to {\textquoteleft}wait and see{\textquoteright} before committing to a course of action; 9\% had an unclear household bushfire plan; 70\% of bushland-urban interface survivors had no household bushfire plan. 6. Actions on the day: Of the 496 survivors, 8\% were not at home on 7 February 2009 by chance; 2\% were not at home by choice to be somewhere safer; 28\% left safely before impact of a fire; 16\% left under hazardous conditions; 36\% stayed and defended their home successfully; 9\% stayed and attempted to defend but were unsuccessful; 2\% sheltered in place passively. 7. Overall, less than one-third of those interviewed had undertaken a high level of long term preparation to implement their household bushfire survival plan. A little more than half of the bushland-urban interface residents had undertaken no preparation. 8. Although many of those interviewed did not provide information on awareness of fire danger weather, 50\% of those who did evidenced a high level of awareness of fire danger weather on 7 February 2009. However, these were all residents of isolated rural properties or towns: almost half of the bushland-urban residents were not aware of the predicted fire danger weather in relation to a potential threat to their property from a bushfire. 9. On five indicators of bushfire {\textquoteleft}readiness{\textquoteright} (long term preparation, awareness of fire danger weather, physical readiness for a possible bushfire, awareness of an approaching fire, and readiness to act upon knowledge of an imminent bushfire threat) residents of isolated rural properties described higher overall readiness levels than did residents of rural towns and bushland-urban interface residents{\textemdash}the latter described very low levels of readiness to survive a bushfire. 10. It seems that most residents of isolated rural properties had a reasonable level of awareness of bushfire risk in general, and had personalised this and undertaken long term property preparation to defend against bushfire which may have been adequate for {\textquoteleft}typical{\textquoteright} low to moderate intensity bushfires. 11. Most residents of bushland-urban interface dwellings did not understand themselves to be at-risk of bushfires, notwithstanding their proximity to bush or grassland. Residents of rural towns varied: some had an understanding of their risk similar to those who resided on isolated rural properties, some had an understanding similar to bushland-interface residents in relation to bushfire risk. Others had bushfire risk understandings intermediate between these. 12. There is some indication that those interviewees who stated an expectation that they would receive an official warning that their property was under threat, and/or that they would be given firefighting assistance had lower levels of general readiness to survive bushfires. 13. The most immediately useful sources of information for residents under bushfire threat were cues from the environment: smoke, flames, embers, sounds. 14. Most of those whose bushfire plan was to leave did so. Most of those who planned to stay and defend did so{\textemdash}however, 20\% decided to leave instead when they became aware of the intensity and/or proximity of the fire. Most of those whose {\textquoteleft}plan{\textquoteright} was to wait and see left, as did the majority of those who had no plan and most of those whose plan was unclear. 15. Most (80\%) of the homes which were defended actively survived, while 52\% of the homes not actively defended survived. 16. There was no compelling evidence that house survival was related to level of long term property preparation. 17. Compared with those who left, those who stayed and defended described higher levels of bushfire readiness in the form of: long term preparation; general knowledge of bushfires; awareness of predicted fire danger weather; physical readiness for a possible bushfire on the day; and awareness of an approaching fire. They were also less likely to report expecting a warning from authorities that their properties would be threatened by a bushfire. 18. Overall, those who stayed and defended were exposed to considerably higher levels of threat to life. However, 8\% of those who left were exposed to severe or extreme levels of threat when forced to take last resort shelter as a result of leaving at the last minute. 19. The major determinant of residents{\textquoteright} decisions to stay and defend was a prior commitment to this course of action, coupled with a belief that their preparations were adequate and that they were capable of defending successfully. For most of those who left, the decision to leave was a complex mix of neither intending nor preparing to defend, and triggering by information about: the proximity and intensity of the fire, the perceived threat posed by the fire, and concern for the safety of family members. 20. Almost two-thirds of those who stayed and defended reported that their efforts were compromised to a greater or a lesser degree by equipment failure{\textemdash}involving mostly water and power supply. Three quarters had no back-up plan in the event that defence failed and the house burned. 21. About one in five of those on their property on the day reported that the safety of pets and/or livestock was a factor in their decisions and actions. 22. One quarter of those on their property on the day indicated that a lack of official information and warnings about the fire potentially exposed them to greater risk. 23. It seems that many residents who choose to stay and defend are likely to: underestimate the potential severity of a bushfire attack; overlook vulnerabilities of the house structure; not take into account possible failure of equipment and physical capabilities; and not prepare for survival in the event that defence is unsuccessful and the house burns. 24. It seems that bushfire survival plans to leave safely are difficult for many at-risk householders to prepare for, commit to, and implement. Few are likely to relocate to a place of safety before there is some indication of an actual bushfire threat (not just a prediction of a total fire ban day), and many are unlikely to leave in the absence of a trigger event which leads them to conclude that their property is likely to come under attack and it is {\textquoteleft}time to leave{\textquoteright}. It should be noted that that many of these findings based on survivors{\textquoteright} accounts correspond closely with Key findings concerning the bushfire fatalities reported by J. Handmer, S. O{\textquoteright}Neil, and D. Killalea in their report to the 2009 Victorian Bushfires }, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/resources/issues-community-bushfire-safety-analyses-interviews-conducted-2009-victorian-bushfires-re}, author = {Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn and Omodei, Mary} } @proceedings {BF-3756, title = {When residents come under imminent wildfire threat, what aspects of decision making distinguish those who stay and defend their home from those who leave?}, year = {2012}, pages = {87-89}, publisher = {IAWF}, abstract = {bushfires (wildfires) occurring on days of extreme fire danger following long periods of low rainfall (Haynes et al 2008). A review of fatalities in disaster-level bushfires suggested that: (1) most deaths occurred when residents fled at the last minute and resulted from either vehicle crash or radiant heat; and (2) many who died in or near houses were elderly or otherwise impaired (Handmer \& Tibbits, 2005). In its 2005 Position Statement the Australasian Fire Authorities Council concluded that: {\textquotedblleft}By extinguishing small ignitions, people of adequate mental, emotional, and physical fitness, equipped with appropriate skills and basic resources can save a building that would otherwise be lost to fire{\textquotedblright} (p 6). These considerations led to a general Australian fire agency community safety policy message to residents at-risk of bushfires to: {\textquoteleft}prepare, stay and defend or leave early{\textquoteright} (Tibbits et al. 2008).}, url = {http://www.iawfonline.org/pdf/3rd\%20Human\%20Dimensions\%20Conference\%20Proceedings\%20-\%20FINAL.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn and Omodei, Mary} } @proceedings {BF-3057, title = {Bushfire Survival-Related Decision Making: What the Stress and Performance Research Literature Tells Us}, year = {2011}, month = {2011}, publisher = {Bushfire CRC}, address = {Sydney, Australia}, issn = {978-0-9806759-9-3}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/resources/pages-307-319-bushfire-survival-related-decision-making}, author = {Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn and Omodei, Mary and Ilona M McNeill and Patrick Dunlop and Suss, J} } @proceedings {BF-3055, title = {Capturing Community Members{\textquoteright} Bushfire Experiences: The Lake Clifton (WA) Fire}, year = {2011}, month = {2011}, publisher = {Bushfire CRC}, address = {Sydney, Australia}, issn = {978-0-9806759-9-3}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/resources/pages-272-277-capturing-community-members-bushfire-experiences-lake-clifton-fire}, author = {Patrick Dunlop and Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn and Leanne Kelly and Riseborough, K and Meagan Tyler and Peter Fairbrother} } @article {BF-3138, title = {Community Members{\textquoteright} Decision Making Under the Stress of Imminent Bushfire Threat - Murrindindi Fire}, year = {2011}, month = {July 2011}, institution = {La Trobe University}, abstract = {This is a report of findings from a pilot analysis of three data sets concerning experiences of those affected by the Murrindindi Fire on Saturday, 7 February 2009: (a) 51 transcripts of interviews with survivors conducted by members of the Bushfire CRC Research Taskforce; (b) 15 lay witness statements to the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission; and (c) evidence presented to the Royal Commission concerning the 38 fatalities that occurred on 7 February 2009 as a result of the Murrindindi Fire. The Interim and Final Reports of the Royal Commission were also consulted. There were two aims: First to investigate community members{\textquoteleft} plans, decisions and actions in relation to the Murrindindi Fire. Second, to develop data analysis procedures to apply subsequently to: (i) the complete data set of 608 Taskforce interview transcripts; (ii) the complete data set of approximately 100 Royal Commission lay witness statements; (iii) the evidence presented to the Royal Commission concerning the 173 fatalities resulting from the 7 February 2009 Victorian bushfires. The body of the report describes findings from the pilot study of decision making by community members under imminent bushfire threat. The procedures developed appear to be suitable to apply to the three larger data sets: (i), (ii), and (iii), described above. Ten {\textquoteleft}lessons{\textquoteright} about decision making by community members under imminent bushfire threat emerging from the pilot study are proposed. 1. Lack of accurate, timely, specific, and personally-relevant information about the fire threat undermines sound survival-related decision making. Uncertainty is a major threat to survival. (page 55) 2. Communities influence decision making by individual members via shared, normative, beliefs about bushfire risk. If a majority of community members believe that their community is not at risk, most individuals will be psychologically unready to make sound survival-related decisions under imminent bushfire threat. (page 54) 3. Advice and information from particular {\textunderscore}others{\textquoteleft} will be a major determinant of an individual{\textquoteleft}s decision making{\textemdash}the more so under conditions of uncertainty. Information and advice from close family members, and from people perceived to have bushfire-related expertise (firefighters, SES, police) will be extremely influential. (page 55) 4. What others are observed to be doing is an important determinant of an individual{\textquoteleft}s decision making. People are social beings and take their cues about what to do by noting what others are doing in a given situation{\textemdash}especially a situation characterised by uncertainty. (page 55) 5. Under imminent bushfire threat decision making and action is gendered. Men are more likely to stay and defend their property; women are more likely to leave{\textemdash}especially if they have strong feelings of responsibility for the physical or psychological wellbeing of other family members. (pages 12, 28, 43) 6. Commitment to a bushfire plan may be a path to disaster{\textemdash}especially a plan to stay and defend. Better that any plan is conditional upon specific conditions being met before being implemented, and has fall-back options. (pages 10, 12, 18, 35-39) 7. The legendary {\textunderscore}Murphy{\textquoteleft} was an optimist with regards to bushfires. All involved should be warned to expect and be ready for something really important going seriously wrong at the worst possible time with potentially fatal consequences (page 19, pages 35-39). [The general literature on human factors aspects of safety in hazardous environments suggests that thorough rehearsal and practice of intended actions may offer some protection]. 8. Some individuals should not be in a situation where they are at risk of bushfire attack: people under 18, those aged 70 or more, those with disabilities or other impairments{\textemdash}physical, social, psychological. (Table 3, pages 51-53) 9. In extremis, an individual{\textquoteleft}s ability to: (a) down-regulate negative emotions like fear and anxiety; (b) maintain an attentional focus on emerging threats from the environment; and (c) keep actions coupled tightly to surviving in a potentially lethal environment will largely determine survival. (pages 21-23). 10. For a variety of complex reasons, some individuals will choose to act in ways that jeopardise their safety, and the safety of others. (Table 3, pages 51-53) }, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/resources/community-members-decision-making-under-stress-imminent-bushfire-threat-murrindindi-fire}, author = {Jim McLennan and Elliott, Glenn} } @article {BF-2789, title = {What Applied Social Psychology Theories Might Contribute to Community Bushfire Safety Research After Victoria{\textquoteright}s {\textquotedblleft}Black Saturday{\textquotedblright}}, journal = {Australian Psychologist}, year = {2011}, month = {08/2011}, abstract = {From 1900 to 2008, bushfires in Australia claimed 552 lives. Partly in response to disastrous fires in 1967 and 1983, a national community bushfire safety policy emerged, summarised as {\textquotedblleft}prepare, stay and defend, or leave early.{\textquotedblright} On 7 February 2009, {\textquotedblleft}Black Saturday,{\textquotedblright} Victoria experienced Australia{\textquoteright}s worst-ever day of bushfires: 173 people died as a result and more than 2,000 homes were destroyed. Three investigations in the aftermath of the fires indicated significant shortcomings in the effectiveness of current approaches to community bushfire safety generally. We examine whether application of social psychological theories from the fields of health promotion and injury prevention might play a role in improving community bushfire safety. We review four theoretical approaches: the theory of planned behaviour, the extended protection motivation theory, the extended parallel process model, and the terror management health model. We conclude that there is good evidence supporting the general utility of each of these theories as predictive of health-promoting behaviour. Furthermore, there are sound reasons to conclude that they hold promise for addressing important problematic issues in community bushfire safety practice.}, issn = {00050067}, doi = {10.1111/j.1742-9544.2011.00041.x}, author = {Beatson, Ruth and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-2496, title = {Work-family conflict and crossover in volunteer emergency service workers}, journal = {Work \& Stress}, volume = {24}, year = {2010}, month = {10/2010}, pages = {342 - 358}, abstract = {A growing literature indicates that organizational and work demands place pressure on the partners and families of volunteer workers as it does on paid workers. This study evaluated a conceptual model integrating workfamily conflict and stress crossover theoretical frameworks, to investigate the mechanisms by which emergency service volunteer work, specifically, predicts outcomes for the partners of volunteers. Matched data from 102 couples in which one partner was an Australian emergency services volunteer  firefighter, ambulance officer or emergency rescue volunteer  were analysed using structural equation modelling analyses. Findings suggested that one mechanism by which inter-role conflict related to partner adjustment was through elevated withdrawn marital behaviour and decreased intimacy reported by the couple, which indirectly affected partners{\textquoteright} distress. This finding regarding withdrawn behaviour appears to be novel and may also be applicable to paid workers. Alternative mechanisms involving role overload and angry marital behaviour were not supported. These findings extend limited research which has adapted organizational theory to understand processes affecting volunteer workers, and advance conceptual accounts of the mechanisms through which the partners and families of workers are impacted by inter-role conflict.}, doi = {10.1080/02678373.2010.532947}, author = {Sean Cowlishaw and Lynette Evans and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1308, title = {The balance between volunteer work and family roles: Testing a theoretical model of work-family conflict in the volunteer emergency services}, journal = {Australian Journal of Psychology}, year = {2009}, author = {Sean Cowlishaw and Lynette Evans and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1320, title = {Impacts of emergency service volunteering on family members and relationships: Integrating work-family conflict and crossover models in the volunteer emergency services}, year = {2009}, author = {Sean Cowlishaw and Lynette Evans and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1310, title = {Volunteer firefighting and family life: An organisational perspective on conflict between volunteer and family roles}, journal = {Australian Journal on Volunteering }, volume = {13}, number = {2}, year = {2008}, month = {12/15/2008}, pages = {21-31}, url = {http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=580578472457285;res=IELHSS}, author = {Sean Cowlishaw and Jim McLennan and Lynette Evans} } @article {BF-2383, title = {Why Would You Do It? Age and Motivation to Become a Fire Service Volunteer}, journal = {Australian and New Zealand Journal of Organizational Psychology}, volume = {1}, year = {2008}, month = {08/2008}, pages = {7 - 11}, abstract = {Australian communities are very dependent on volunteer-based fire services for protection against fires and other hazards. However, overall volunteer numbers have declined significantly over the past decade, due mostly to the impact of economic and demographic changes on Australian society. One effect of these is that volunteer fire service memberships are ageing. Little is known with certainty about what motivates individuals to become fire service volunteers. A survey of 455 CFA volunteers suggested that those who volunteer do so because of a mix of community-safety, community-contribution, and self-oriented motivations. It appears that younger volunteers are more likely to be motivated by self-oriented perceived benefits from volunteering compared with older volunteers. However, they are no less motivated, on average, by community-safety concerns and community contribution desires than are older volunteers.}, doi = {10.1375/ajop.1.1.7}, author = {Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian} } @article {BF-1339, title = {Factors impacting on recruiting and retaining Australia{\textquoteright}s volunteer firefighters: Some reseach evidence}, journal = {Australian Journal on Volunteering}, volume = {12}, number = {2}, year = {2007}, author = {Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian and Beatson, Ruth and Sean Cowlishaw} } @article {BF-1303, title = {"The Human Factors Interview Protocol: A Tool for the Investigation of Human Factors Issues in Emergency Management"}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management}, year = {2007}, author = {Elliott, Glenn and Omodei, Mary and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1313, title = {NSW Grain Belt Community Survey 2005 - Evaluating the community s understanding about the NSW Rural Fire Service}, journal = {Australian Journal on Volunteering }, volume = {1}, number = {12}, year = {2007}, month = {5/16/2007}, pages = {14-25}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/grainbelt_survey_report_1_final.pdf}, author = {Birch, Adrian and Jim McLennan} } @proceedings {BF-1323, title = {Volunteer firefighting: A job for a woman?}, year = {2007}, address = {Adelaide}, author = {Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian and Beatson, Ruth and Sean Cowlishaw} } @article {BF-1322, title = {Who{\textquoteright}s interested? The NSW Grain Belt community survey about volunteering with the NSW Rural Fire Service}, journal = {Australian Journal on Volunteering }, volume = {1}, number = {12}, year = {2007}, month = {5/16/2007}, pages = {14-25}, author = {Birch, Adrian and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-2337, title = {Decision Making Effectiveness in Wildfire Incident Management Teams}, journal = {Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management}, volume = {14}, year = {2006}, month = {03/2006}, pages = {27 - 37}, abstract = {During large scale wildfires, suppression activities are carried out under the direction of an Incident Management Team (IMT). The aim of the research was to increase understanding of decision processes potentially related to IMT effectiveness. An IMT comprises four major functions: Command, Operations, Planning, and Logistics. Four methodologies were used to study IMT processes: computer simulation experiments; analyses of wildfire reports; interviews with IMT members; and cognitive ethnographic studies of IMTs. Three processes were important determinants of IMT effectiveness: information management and cognitive overload; matching component function goals to overall goals; and team metacognition to detect and counter task-disruptive developments. These processes appear to be complex multi-person analogues of individual Incident Command processes identified previously. The findings have implications for issues such as: creating IMTs; training IMTs; managing IMTs; and providing decision support to IMTs.}, doi = {10.1111/j.1468-5973.2006.00478.x}, author = {Jim McLennan and Holgate, Alina M. and Omodei, Mary and Wearing, Alexander J.} } @conference {BF-1327, title = {The South Australian CFS survey of women volunteers}, booktitle = {2nd Women in Firefighting Conference}, year = {2006}, url = {http://www.afac.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/6843/Women_volunteers_survey_SACFS.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1338, title = {Survey of ACT Rural Fire Service Women Volunteers}, year = {2006}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/publications/citation/bf-1338}, author = {Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian and Palmer, A} } @article {BF-1314, title = {Australian rural fire services{\textquoteright} recognition and service awards for volunteers}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management }, volume = {20}, number = {4}, year = {2005}, month = {2005}, pages = {17-21}, abstract = {All Australian rural fire services have recognition and service award schemes for their volunteers. However, there are considerable differences among the eight agencies in the number of recognition opportunities available, the variety of awards available, and the minimum length of service required to qualify for an award. It is suggested that fire services review their recognition and award systems to maximise the effectiveness of these schemes in contributing to volunteer commitment and retention.}, url = {http://www.ema.gov.au/www/emaweb/rwpattach.nsf/VAP/\%283273BD3F76A7A5DEDAE36942A54D7D90\%29~AJEM_Vol20_Issue4.pdf/$file/AJEM_Vol20_Issue4.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan and Bertoldi, M} } @article {BF-1307, title = {Australia{\textquoteright}s women volunteer firefighters: A literature review and research agenda}, journal = {Australian Journal on Volunteering }, volume = {2}, number = {10}, year = {2005}, pages = {18-27}, url = {http://www.volunteeringaustralia.org/html/s02_article/default.asp?nav_top_id=61\&nav_cat_id=162}, author = {Beatson, Ruth and Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1337, title = {Estimates of the Likely Impact on TFS Operational Volunteer Fire Fighter Numbers of Introducing Mandatory Fitness Standards}, year = {2005}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/tfs_report_2005_1_agefitness-2.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian} } @article {BF-1304, title = {Identifying the Causes of Unsafe Firefighting Decisions: A Human Factors Interview Protocol}, year = {2005}, author = {Omodei, Mary and Jim McLennan and Reynolds, C} } @article {BF-2319, title = {A potential crisis in wildfire emergency response capability? Australia{\textquoteright}s volunteer firefighters}, journal = {Global Environmental Change Part B: Environmental Hazards}, volume = {6}, year = {2005}, month = {2005}, pages = {101 - 107}, abstract = {In most OECD countries, emergency response to accidents and natural disasters is very dependent on a trained workforce of emergency services volunteers: fire, rescue, medical, care and relief. With its large area, sparsely settled population, and frequent periods of low rainfall, Australia is particularly vulnerable to the threat posed by wildfires. There are an estimated 220,000 rural fire volunteers (in a population of 20 million) in eight state and territory volunteer rural fire services. These fire services have experienced significant decreases in volunteer numbers over the past decade, a trend which is true also of North American volunteer fire services. An investigation suggests that the decrease is driven by two related sets of factors: economic and demographic. Globalisation and deregulation of the economy, and technological innovation, have resulted in structural changes in the nature of work: privatisation, casualisation, self-employment, and demands for increased productivity. These factors make it more difficult for members of communities to volunteer, regardless of their motivation to do so. Further, like many other OECD countries, Australia{\textquoteright}s birth rate has fallen over the last three decades, resulting in a decline in the proportion of the population aged between 25 and 45 years{\textemdash}a trend that is unlikely to be reversed in the foreseeable future. These economic and demographic changes make it difficult for Australian volunteer rural fire agencies to meet their community protection responsibilities. Responding to these challenges may require radical changes in the way that these fire services are organised and supported.}, doi = {10.1016/j.hazards.2005.10.003}, author = {Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian} } @article {BF-1334, title = {Occasional Report Number 2004:1 Exit Interviews and Surveys (EISs) for Volunteers}, year = {2004}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/voluteerism_exit_interviews.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1331, title = {Recruiting New Rural Fire Service Volunteers: Direct Expenditure Estimates}, year = {2004}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/occasional_report3-replacement_estimates.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1330, title = {Recruitment and Retention of Volunteers: Rural Fire Services{\textquoteright} Issues and Initiatives}, year = {2004}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/jim_mcl-_issues-initiatives_-_july_5.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1332, title = {Report Number 3: 2004 Profiles of Australia{\textquoteright}s Volunteer Firefighters (revised)}, year = {2004}, institution = {BCRC}, type = {Research Report}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/report_3-profile.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1329, title = {Volunteer Data Base Collection and Management for Strategic Planning and Policy Development: A Comparison Across Fire Services}, year = {2004}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/jim_mcl-_data_management_-_report_2_2004.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan} } @article {BF-1333, title = {Volunteer Recruitment and Retention Issues: A Review of the Literature}, year = {2004}, url = {http://www.bushfirecrc.com/sites/default/files/managed/resource/report_4_lit_reviewd3.pdf}, author = {Jim McLennan and Birch, Adrian and Acker, Felix and Beatson, Ruth and Jamieson, Robert} }