How well do you understand public wildfire prediction maps?
And does the average member of the public understand these maps?
A research team in Australia is looking at a range of maps available to the public during fire emergencies to determine if the public understand them enough to take the right action to protect their lives and their communities.
Researchers from four universities are collaborating with all fire agencies in Australia for a national view on bushfire prediction maps. The Black Summer fires of 2019/20 prompted the need to better understand the potential of these maps. At the height of the fires, the New South Wales Rural Fire Service was concerned that many residents and holiday-makers did not fully appreciate the risk. So, they began publishing detailed predictive maps in the hope that more information would lead to better household decisions. But did more detailed maps better help the public? Hence, the need for this research.
Predictive maps display critical information, but knowledge is limited on the best design or how maps are actually used during active fires. As Dr Erica Kuligowski, Principal Research Fellow at RMIT University and Natural Hazards Research Australia explains:
“Maps are an important way to communicate spatial information and they are increasingly being used in natural hazards like bushfires. However, no evidence base exists on how these maps should be designed and communicated as well as how they should be disseminated to the public.”
The researchers surveyed more than 3,000 people across all Australian states and territories in 2022 and 2023 to see if and how the public understood maps differently from the fire agencies.
They were shown mocked-up maps with varied levels of detail and asked the following questions:
- Do you understand the purpose of this map?
- What action is it prompting you to take?
- How risky do you see the situation?
- What emotions are you feeling?
- What actions are you going to take?
They were also invited to provide open feedback, which provided a deeper level of insight for the researchers, particularly on whether it was the visuals, the text, or a combination of both that were seen as more important.
The survey participants used a range of maps during bushfires, including local fire agency maps, the Bureau of Meteorology, Google Maps, and third-party weather or hazard mapping platforms, like Windy app, Digital Earth Australia (DEA) hotspots map, and bushfire.io.
Maps were checked more often at certain times during the bushfire, especially for early information (when the fire had not yet spread to participants’ immediate areas) or when the fire was moving quickly. Many participants used maps frequently, between 20 to 50 times each day.
A combination of information sources was used by participants to get a broader picture of their bushfire situation, with maps only one tool in their information toolbox. Community meetings were particularly useful in increasing understanding of fire spread prediction maps, as fire agency experts were on hand to explain the maps in more detail and answer questions.
Responses identified a wide range of uses for the maps, with different purposes more important to some than others, including to:
- identify where they were in relation to the bushfire
- gather information about the bushfire and what to do next
- monitor the extent or rate of spread using the burnt areas shown on the map
- cross-reference map information with other sources
- confirm or explain the physical cues that they were seeing around them (for example, smoke or emergency response crews and vehicles responding to the fire)
- make judgments about how the fire might spread and the level of risk
- inform or warn others who may be at risk
- monitor the impact of the fire on their or others’ properties, especially after evacuation.
The research is ongoing to provide guidelines on good structure to be translated into agency policies from 2025. In brief, the study found that bushfire maps must be updated promptly, clearly display their time and date of issue, and include relevant information, with an understanding that including too much or complex information may be problematic for comprehension.
For more resources on this study, including two webinars, go to:
Hazardous Webinar – Community perceptions and understanding of predictive maps
The research is published in the International Journal of Wildland Fire
How does this compare with maps used elsewhere around the world? Are the challenges the same? Show Wildfire Today some of the better examples you have seen.
