Island vulnerability and resilience to wildfires: A case study of Corsica

The number of wildfires occurring globally is exacerbated by urbanisation and changes in weather patterns. In response, researchers have conducted studies of wildfires and human behaviour in regions such as Australia and the USA. Regions in Europe have received less attention, despite facing the same issues. Even more overlooked are one particular type of territory: islands. With their climates, islands across the Mediterranean remain attractive second home and tourist destinations, resulting in urban development. Yet due to certain features (e.g. cultural, socio-political, geographical), the ways in which their people deal with wildfires may differ somewhat from that in some mainland territories. This paper explores human behaviour in wildfire emergencies in the context of island vulnerability and resilience in Europe, with the Mediterranean island of Corsica as a case study. Qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews (n = 8) with Corsican professionals involved in wildfire management and quantitative analysis of around 100 surveys from civilians was conducted. This analysis revealed that Corsica’s population approach to wildfire safety is shaped by available information as well as a strong risk culture, which stands in contrast with new/temporary residents moving into the island each summer season. The results drawn from the analysed sample suggest potential social vulnerability in wildfires when a decision to evacuate the population is taken by emergency managers as the most effective emergency response. Population behaviour were not influenced by property attachment, perceived risk, hazard knowledge, community closeness and locus of control, suggesting that island WUI resident characteristics may not be generalised from human behaviour in wildfires studies carried out in the USA or Australia

Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic analysis of a non-domestic Passivhaus retrofit

This paper presents a thermodynamic and exergoeconomic analysis of a recently-retrofitted Passivhaus non-domestic building. The selected case study, a Community Centre located in London, underwent a deep-energy retrofit in 2011, becoming the first ‘non-domestic Passivhaus’ retrofit in the country. As the building was retrofitted per Passivhaus standards, which is based solely on First Law analysis, a thermodynamic investigation can provide a novel means by which to assess its exergy efficiency and cost-effectiveness. As such, the aim of this paper is to conduct a comprehensive exergy and exergoeconomic analysis, presenting novel performance indicators for the pre-retrofit and post-retrofit Passivhaus building. First law outputs show that the improvement presents high levels of energy savings (75.6%), reductions in carbon emissions (64.5%), and occupant thermal comfort improvement (28.8%). Second law outputs present a reduction in primary exergy input reduction of 56.4% and exergy destructions of 60.4%, leading to improve building exergy efficiency from 9.8% to 18.0%. Nevertheless, exergoeconomically the building did not perform as expected due to high capital cost and exergy destructions cost rates. These results give an insight into the thermodynamic impact of the Passivhaus approach, providing a critical assessment of the strengths and limitations of the standard under both thermodynamic laws

When disaster strikes: human responses to wildfires and evacuation in the south of France and Australia

The number of wildfires occurring globally is increasing, exacerbated by urbanisation and changes in weather patterns. People’s safety is threatened by this growing problem. Consequently, researchers have conducted studies of wildfires and human behaviour in response to wildfire evacuations in regions such as Australia and the USA. Regions in Europe have received less attention, despite facing the same issues. In addition, due to the different methods and focuses applied in existing disaster research, it proves challenging to compare and utilise results of multiple studies when developing tools for community safety (e.g. evacuation simulation models, for use in planning and training). This research addresses these gaps by: • devising a framework for data collection and organisation (CIBER-t) • applying mixed methods and a research focus shaped by this framework • collecting data from various sources (media, professionals involved in wildfire management, residents) in wildland-urban interface/intermix (WUI) areas in the European region of southern France • identifying, quantifying and contextualising aspects of individual and group behavioural responses to wildfires in these WUI areas • comparing the French data with new data from Australia, thereby building an understanding of behaviours that may be generalised or regionally-specific • using the combined data to create regression models that predict behavioural outcomes such as the decision to evacuate and evacuation delay times • considering the potential for regression and evacuation models to assist researchers, practitioners, policy-makers, and the public in improving community safety Through qualitative and quantitative analysis, a representation has emerged of how people respond across different stages of a wildfire, external and internal factors influencing such behaviour, and vulnerabilities. The results also reveal that some but not all human behaviours can be generalised across regions. Therefore, this research expands the knowledge-base upon which to develop wildfire safety tools and measures, but highlights the need for further regional data and context

Cross-cultural comparison of behavioural itinerary actions and times in wildfire evacuations

Evacuation of residents during wildfire is a highly time-sensitive process. Available time may be limited. Previous research on other types of incident demonstrate that individuals delay their evacuation by first undertaking actions in response to the threat. However, currently there is little evidence of what actions individuals undertake (‘behavioural itineraries’), how many, which are prioritised, and how much time is committed to them in a wildfire. Additionally, where some understanding exists concerning human behaviour in wildfire evacuations, data has mostly been acquired from Australia; European regions, which are increasingly threatened by wildfires, lack attention. This study presents the first cross-cultural investigation of its kind: survey data (N = 293) from the South of France and Australia were compared. Participants with actual experience of wildfires and those inexperienced yet residing in at-risk areas answered questions about what they did or would hypothetically do, respectively, and for how long, prior to commencing evacuation. Results revealed that, across the two regions, the discrete actions comprising behavioural itineraries were similar overall, albeit their priority sometimes differed. However, when analysed by category, the prioritisation of actions was uniform across samples. Of significance is the finding that regional differences were also observed in relation to: mean number of actions, time committed to actions and the influence of socio-demographic factors, indicating geographical and cultural determinants. Implications for future research, evacuation modelling and wildfire management, education and training are discussed

Exploring ‘wait and see’ responses in French and Australian WUI wildfire emergencies

For Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) residents, wildfire is a constant, growing risk. A timely response to wildfire is vital for human survival. Yet, upon receiving fire cues, previous studies show that instead of taking protective action, people often first wait and see how the situation unfolds. The circumstances under which ‘wait and see’ responses manifest have received research attention in Australia and North America. However, it is unclear whether the findings extend to European regions, given the scarcity of such research there. So, this study surveyed and systematically compared the responses of residents in French and Australian at-risk regions (N = 450). Those with recent wildfire experience described their actual responses; those lacking experience provided responses to a hypothetical fire. The results showed regional differences, with participants in France tending to choose to ‘wait and see’ more often than participants in Australia. There was less waiting when participants received environmental as compared to social cues, although the type of environmental/social cue appeared to moderate this behaviour. The cessation of waiting requires further study but early signs are that it may not always be followed by optimal action. Lacking preparedness and wildfire experience affected responses. Peri-event perceived risk also proved meaningful, unlike pre-event perceived risk. These findings have implications for wildfire evacuation modelling (when developing simulation scenarios and evacuation triggers) as well as for wildfire management (when using evacuation models for planning or response, when designing interventions such as the education of residents)