No abstract

Recognition of projected increases in exposure to large-scale hazard events over the coming decades has identified a need to develop how disaster risk reduction and recovery are conceptualized and enacted. This paper discusses some strategies for pursing this goal in both disaster recovery and preparedness settings. The approaches discussed include understanding how communities learn from their hazardous experiences and transform these lessons into beliefs, relationships and capabilities that build future adaptive capacity. The paper draws on examples of transformative learning that illustrate how people can make fundamental shifts in how they think about, prepare for and respond to environmental challenge and change. Regarding transformation in pre-event settings, the paper first discusses why the addition of transformative strategies to disaster risk reduction programs is required. These include a need for rethinking socio-environmental relationships, increasing risk acceptance in the context of evolving hazardscapes, and countering beliefs regarding not preparing. The paper then offers strategies for motivating transformation and consolidating the outcomes of transformation in pre-event disaster risk reduction (DRR) strategies. A preliminary model that could inform the development of research questions on the development of transformative outcomes and their consolidation in enduring adaptive processes is presented.

PurposeTo examine the relationship between behavioural intentions and preparing for bushfire hazards and to test the hypothesis that intentions can inform how people reason about their relationship with environmental hazards.Design/methodology/approachSurvey data were collected from 280 residents in high bushfire risk areas and analysed using multiple regression analysis. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with a theoretical sample drawn from those who completed the survey. Data were analysed using grounded theory analysis strategies using the ATLAS.ti data analysis programme following the procedures for open, axial, and selective coding.FindingsThe analyses demonstrated that preparedness intentions reflect the outcomes of different ways of reasoning about their relationship with bushfire hazards and that “preparing” and “not preparing” represent discrete processes. Each outcome was supported by different attitudes towards preparing and by different predictor variables.Research limitations/implicationsPreparing and not preparing for natural hazards should be conceptualised as separate processes and additional research into their origins and precursors is required.Practical implicationsSeparate risk communication strategies are needed to counter reasons for “not preparing” and facilitate “preparing”. Strategies should accommodate the attitudes and beliefs that underpin these outcomes. To facilitate sustained preparedness, strategies should assist people to negotiate issues required to arrive at a decision to adopt protective measures.Originality/valueProvides novel insights into the relationship between people and natural hazards. It identifies a need to re‐think how risk communication strategies are developed and delivered.

No abstract