People’s Panel survey – Risk perception to volcanic hazards
(Determining Volcanic Risk in Auckland (DeVoRA)
July 2015
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE
Coomer, M.A.; Lambie, E.S.; Wilson, T.; Potter, S.H.; Leonard, G.S.; Maxwell,
K.; Bates, A.; Keith, H. 2015. DEVORA Volcanic Survey: People’s Panel,
GNS Science Report 2015/39. 60 p.
DEVORA Volcanic Survey: People’s Panel
M.A. Coomer
S.H. Potter
A. Bates
E.S. Lambie
G.S. Leonoard
H. Keith
T. Wilson
K. Maxwell
GNS Science Report 2015/39
July 2015
M.A. Coomer, GNS Science, PO Box 30 368, Lower Hutt, New Zealand 5011
E.S. Lambie, Joint Centre for Disaster Research, GNS Science, PO Box 30 368, Lower Hutt,
New Zealand 5011
T. Wilson, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140
S.H. Potter, Joint Centre for Disaster Research, GNS Science, PO Box 30 368, Lower Hutt,
New Zealand 5011
G.S. Leonard, GNS Science, PO Box 30 368, Lower Hutt, New Zealand 5011
K. Maxwell, Auckland Council, Private Bag 92300, Victoria Street West, Auckland 1142
A. Bates, Auckland Council, Private Bag 92300, Victoria Street West, Auckland 1142
H. Keith, Auckland Council, Private Bag 92300, Victoria Street West, Auckland 1142
© Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences Limited, 2015
www.gns.cri.nz
ISSN 1177-2425 (Print)
ISSN 2350-3424 (Online)
ISBN 978-0-478-19992-5 (Print)
ISBN 978-0-478-19993-2 (Online)
CONTENTS
1.0
KEY FINDINGS .......................................................................................................... 1
2.0
BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................... 3
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.0
SURVEY BACKGROUND ...................................................................................... 3
HOW RESULTS WILL BE USED ............................................................................. 3
ABOUT THE PEOPLE’S PANEL ............................................................................. 3
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 4
SURVEY RESULTS.................................................................................................... 5
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
PARTICIPATION AND RETURN RATES ................................................................... 5
INFORMED ABOUT VOLCANIC RISK ....................................................................... 6
PREPAREDNESS .............................................................................................. 11
VOLCANO KNOWLEDGE .................................................................................... 17
WARNINGS...................................................................................................... 25
ERUPTION KNOWLEDGE ................................................................................... 29
ERUPTION ACTIONS AND EVACUATION ............................................................... 34
4.0
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... 55
5.0
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 55
APPENDICES
A1.0
APPENDIX 1 ............................................................................................................ 59
GNS Science Report 2015/39
i
1.0
KEY FINDINGS
This data report contains tables and graphs of the results of a survey on the Auckland
People’s Panel risk perception to volcanic hazards. The results will be used by Auckland
Council to improve their public education and information campaigns, and to refine their
response plans and procedures.
Key Findings
Volcanic risk perception and information seeking:

76.8% of panellists know there is a risk of future volcanic activity but are not confident
that they know what to do in the event of an eruption

87.1% of panellists know of the eruption risk.

15.0% of panellists have sought information on the risk of volcanic eruptions in
Auckland and 84.1% have not. Of those that have, 55.4% of panellists had sought
information online, while 29.8% used books, journals, magazines, TV, radio or
newspaper. The rest used smartphone apps or contacted specific agencies. A wide
range of other sources were also used, e.g., work, school, lectures, movies, museum.

Only 5.1% reported correctly the size of the Auckland Volcanic Field while 44.7%
reported correctly the approximate date of the last eruption. Only 0.9% know that the
next volcanic eruption could occur at any time, and 14.5% know that the size of the
next eruption may devastate an area 6 km from the centre of the eruption.

The majority of panellists expect an official warning time of 2–3 days or less leading up
to a volcanic eruption, with the majority stating that they would need less than one
day’s warning.

89.2% of panellists report having a good understanding of disasters that could occur in
Auckland and of the effects of the disasters.

The great majority of panellists consider that more information and advice should be
provided by authorities to communities with only 1.3% reporting that they consider
themselves to be well prepared.
Volcanic event preparedness:

2.9% of panellists consider themselves to be very prepared for a volcanic eruption.
72.6% are partially prepared and 23.4% said they are not prepared at all.

62.5% of panellists reported having the necessary items to survive a disaster.
Intended behaviour before a volcanic event:

Participants report that they would expect to have the following provided by authorities
– information on how to respond, volcanic risk, eruption timings, alternative
accommodation, evacuation transport and financial assistance.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
1
Intended behaviour during a volcanic event: (eruption scenario given)

If an eruption was imminent the majority of panellists stated that they would get
prepared and keep informed. Many would check on others and/or evacuate, while 5.1%
wouldn’t do anything immediately.

If told to evacuate, 5.4% of panellists stated that they would stay put at least
temporarily. Factors affecting people’s ability to evacuate included caring for
pets/animals, finding available accommodation, dislocation from friends and family,
disability, job/study, lack of availability of transport, lack of finances, and home security
would affect people’s ability to evacuate.

62.7% of panellists would take one car from their household when evacuating and
33.7% would take more than one car, with others leaving by boat, by bicycle or
motorbike. 4.2% are reliant on public transport.
Disruption to life during a volcanic event:
Many of the panellists found the following actions as being potentially disruptive to their lives:

Evacuation to outside of the region – 95.1%

Evacuation within the region – 94.5%

Able to stay at home with power and water affected – 97.1%

Able to stay at home but roads and public buildings affected – 94.7%

Workplace or place of education affected – 70.1%
2
GNS Science Report 2015/39
2.0
BACKGROUND
2.1
SURVEY BACKGROUND
The city of Auckland (with a population of 1.4 million people) is built on a volcanic field made
up of more than 50 eruptions from different vents. The most recent eruption at Auckland
Volcanic Field occurred approximately 600 years ago (e.g., Needham et al., 2011). Auckland
is also at risk from ash fall from eruptions at large central North Island volcanoes.
In March 2015, a People’s Panel survey was conducted in the Auckland region to help
understand:




The volcanic risk perception of Aucklanders
How prepared Aucklanders are for coping during a volcanic event
Their intended behaviour before a volcanic event and
Their intended behaviour in the event of volcanic activity.
Auckland Council sought responses from residents across the community with a range of
viewpoints and experiences. The following report summarises the key results and comments
identified in the People’s Panel survey.
2.2
HOW RESULTS WILL BE USED
Auckland Council’s Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) department,
together with GNS Science, University of Auckland and University of Canterbury
researchers, have analysed volcanic risk perceptions and evacuation preparedness in
Auckland from the data collected in this survey.
The results will be used to improve public education and information campaigns, and to
refine response plans and procedures.
2.3
ABOUT THE PEOPLE’S PANEL
The People’s Panel aims to provide an opportunity for Aucklanders to get involved with a
range of council issues, giving feedback by regularly completing online surveys and getting
involved with focus groups and other activities as needed.
Panellists volunteer to be part of the Panel, and are emailed surveys about Auckland
monthly, however they only participate in those surveys that interest them. Panellists are
recruited to be ‘typical’ members of the public – that is they include members of the public
who come from a range of backgrounds and a range of levels of involvement with the
council.
At the time of surveying there were over 21,000 people registered with the Panel, with
representation from residents of each local board area and by age group and ethnicity. The
People’s Panel is not yet representative of the wider Auckland population and ongoing
recruitment is conducted to improve participation from particular areas, age groups and
ethnicities.
For
more
information
about
the
People’s
Panel
visit
www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/peoplespanel. The panel ideally supplements other research,
consultation and engagement activities used to provide public perceptions to help inform
decision-making processes.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
3
2.4
METHODOLOGY
This survey was open from 26 March to 12 April and one reminder was sent to those who
had not responded. In total, 5589 completed surveys were received, with a response rate of
approximately 27%.
The survey included questions on demographics, volcanic awareness, preparedness and
warnings. Some of the questions that participants were asked used volcanic eruption
scenarios and targeted respondents’ intended behaviour.
The survey was developed by Auckland Council in consultation with researchers from
University of Canterbury, University of Auckland and GNS Science. Questions were
developed using two previous unpublished surveys completed in 2008 by GNS Science and
the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) as part of Exercise
Ruaumoko. Exercise Ruaumoko was a national Civil Defence and Emergency Management
(CDEM) exercise that tested New Zealand's arrangements for mitigating and responding to a
volcanic eruption in Auckland (MCDEM, 2008). However, since 2008, new areas of interest
have emerged; therefore the survey has incorporated these in addition to the questions
presented in the 2008 study.
Ethics notification was submitted to the University of Canterbury Human Ethics Committee
(HEC). The survey was then emailed to the People's Panel with an explanation of the
purpose of the research and a confidentiality statement.
Surveys provide an effective way to gather data from large geographically-dispersed
populations. The data from an online survey can be collected quickly and efficiently,
however, no researcher is present to immediately answer any questions respondents may
have. This method has a demographic bias in that respondents need to have online access,
and because they self-selected when they signed up to the People’s Panel and decided to
complete this survey. Additionally, as the survey was not completed in a controlled setting, it
is possible that participants accessed answers to questions online while completing the
survey. All anonymised survey findings and reports are available on the Auckland Council
website1.
1
4
http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/HaveYourSay/Pages/PeoplesPanel.aspx?
utm_source=shorturl&utm_medium=print&utm_campaign=Peoples_Panel, accessed on 6 July 2015
GNS Science Report 2015/39
3.0
SURVEY RESULTS
This report contains the results of the collected survey data, which were analysed using
SPSS software. Each question is stated, and the results presented using a data table and/or
a graph, followed by a short description based on the analysis. Key results are briefly
outlined in the Key Findings section at the start of this report.
3.1
PARTICIPATION AND RETURN RATES
Of the approximately 21,000 People’s Panel members that this questionnaire was emailed
to, 5589 responses were received giving a return rate of 26.6%.
Some questions had multiple options for responding, where participants could choose more
than one option. Therefore the participation percentage was calculated for each option out of
the number of people who responded to that question. Not all participants in the survey gave
an answer to every question, therefore the number of participants who answered each
question is included in each table/graph and is considered 100% in order to calculate
percentages for each option within a question.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
5
3.2
INFORMED ABOUT VOLCANIC RISK
Q1A. Before you started this survey, which of the following best describes how
informed you were about the risk of volcanic eruptions in Auckland? (Tick only one)
The Auckland region is from Wellsford in the north to Pukekohe in the south
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Volcanic risk knowledge
Analysis: The majority of respondents reported knowing about volcanoes existing in the
Auckland region. Only 0.3% reported not knowing that volcanoes existed. Only 10.3% of
respondents reported that they knew that there was a risk of future volcanic activity and that
they knew a lot about what do in an eruption. 56.4% of respondents reported knowing there
was a risk of future volcanic activity but knew little about what to do in the event of an
eruption. This suggests that while most people are aware of the volcanic risk in Auckland,
only a small proportion know a lot about what to do in an eruption.
6
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q1A Other (Please specify)
Number answered
59 (1.6%)
Before you started this survey, which of
the following best describes how informed
you were about the risk of volcanic
eruptions in Auckland?
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N=59)
Know there is a risk of eruption
20
33.8%
Risk of eruption is extremely small
9
15.2%
7
11.9%
5
8.5%
5
8.5%
Don't care
4
6.8%
Civil Defence team member or volunteer
3
5.1%
It’s Media hype
2
3.4%
In an eruption we would be dead!
2
3.4%
What's a volcano?
2
3.4%
Eruption is possible but probably unlikely in my
lifetime
Expect to be given a warning
Know there is a risk of future volcanic activity but
not what to do in the event
Analysis: 59 respondents specified their answers in the ‘Other’ option. Of those 59
respondents, 33.8% reported they know there is a risk of a volcanic eruption and 15.2%
reported that the risk of an eruption is extremely small. 11.9% reported that an eruption is
possible but probably unlikely in their lifetime.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
7
Q1B. In the last two years, have you sought information on the risk of volcanic
eruptions in Auckland? (Tick only one)
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Analysis: 84.1% of respondents have not sought information on risk of volcanic eruptions.
15.0% of respondents reported they had and only 0.8% reported they did not know. This
indicates that information about volcanic risk may need to be ‘pushed’ or sent out to
residents of Auckland, rather than relying on the population to voluntarily seek educational
material on volcanic risk.
8
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q1C. Where did you go to find out about the risk of volcanic eruptions in Auckland?
(Tick all that apply)
Number answered
502 (59.5% of those who answered ‘Yes’ to Q1B). Participants
chose multiple options, with a total of 1217 responses.
Analysis: The most commonly reported source of information about volcanic risk was through
an online search, e.g., Google. Only 21.2% of respondents used a specific website, e.g.,
GNS Science. Very few respondents reported using smartphone apps, contacting specific
agencies or using social media to get information on volcanic risk. This indicates that general
online searches could be routinely checked by responsible agencies to ensure that correct
information will be found by the public on volcanic risk in Auckland.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
9
Q1C Other (Please specify)
Number answered
226 (26.8% of those who answered ‘Yes” to Q1B)
Where did you go to find out about
the risk of volcanic eruptions in
Auckland?
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 226)
Museum
123
54.4
CDEM
30
13.3
Geologist
21
9.3
University lecture
9
4.0
At my course
3
1.3
At work
3
1.3
Citizens Advice Bureau
3
1.3
Phone book
3
1.3
General interest
3
1.3
Friends
3
1.3
GNS science talk
2
0.9
Dr Bruce Hayward lecture
2
0.9
Volcano movie
2
0.9
Library
2
0.9
District Health Board (DHB)
2
0.9
Engineer
1
0.4
Geological books
1
0.4
Geological Society member
1
0.4
Facebook
1
0.4
Auckland Geoclub and DEVORA
1
0.4
Earthquake App
1
0.4
The Bible
1
0.4
School visit to Rangitoto
1
0.4
GeoNet
1
0.4
MOTAT
1
0.4
Newspaper
1
0.4
Scouts
1
0.4
Probus
1
0.4
Volcanoes of Auckland book
1
0.4
Wikipedia
1
0.4
Analysis: 123 panellists (54.4%) in ‘Other’ reported they had sought information from a
museum. Other commonly reported sources included CDEM (13.3% – 30 panellists), a
Geologist (9.3% – 21 panellists) and a University lecture (4.0% – 9 panellists).
10
GNS Science Report 2015/39
3.3
PREPAREDNESS
2A. Currently, how prepared do you think you are to cope with a volcanic eruption in
Auckland? (Tick only one)
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Analysis: Very few respondents (2.9%) feel that they are very prepared to cope with a
volcanic eruption in Auckland. As over 50% of the respondents believe that are not at all
prepared, or are partially prepared, the wider population of Auckland may need to improve
their level of preparedness for a volcanic eruption.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
11
Q2B. In general, how ready is your household to cope with a major disaster? Which of
the following statements apply to you? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5589(100.0%)
Analysis: 62.5% of respondents reported having the necessary emergency items to survive a
disaster. Many respondents reported having either a good understanding of the types of
disasters that could occur in Auckland (48.0%) or an understanding of what the effects would
be if a disaster struck their area (41.2%). Very few respondents reported attending meetings
and community groups about emergency planning (2.0%). These results indicate that there is
room for improvement to increase household preparedness in Auckland.
12
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q2B Other (Please specify)
Number answered
188 (3.4%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 188)
Partially prepared/food/radio/water/tools
56
29.8
Prepared
23
12.2
Civil Defence/GeoNet phone app/alerts
21
11.2
Not prepared
19
10.1
Water only
14
7.4
Have some knowledge
13
6.9
Gas for cooking
9
4.8
Have alternative accommodation
6
3.2
Have transport available
5
2.6
Have meeting place
4
2.1
Have Emergency Plan
4
2.1
Have cash
3
1.6
Food only
2
1.1
Water and food
2
1.1
A Power Generator
2
1.1
Evacuate immediately
2
1.1
Don't care
2
1.1
I would definitely PRAY!!!
1
0.5
Analysis: 188 respondents specified their answers. 29.8% of those reported they are partially
prepared with some food/radio/water/tools. 11.2% reported having the Civil Defence/GeoNet
phone app.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
13
Q2C. What should authorities do to help you be better prepared for a volcanic
eruption? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Analysis: 69.9% of respondents reported authorities should provide public warnings in the
event of an emergency and 64.7% reported that more information should be provided about
how authorities will warn the public. A high number reported authorities need to inform the
public about how to prepare for a volcanic eruption (59.9%), and a similarly high number
reported that authorities need to provide on-going advice through the media (57.2%). In
comparison, 29.7% of respondents reported that authorities should use signage and
information boards to inform the public and 29.3% stated that on-going advice and
information should be provided at public education events. These data suggest potential
priorities for authorities to focus on to help preparedness, from the public’s perspective.
14
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q2C. Other (Please specify)
Number answered
371 (7.4%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N= 371)
49
13.2
School/Tertiary education
39
10.5
Pamphlet/flyers/mailout
26
7.0
Advice at library/museum/council
25
6.7
More than at present
22
5.9
20
5.4
Better CD phone app
17
4.5
Evacuation information
17
4.6
Phone/mobile alerts
13
3.5
It's up to individuals to prepare
13
3.5
Twitter/Facebook
12
3.2
Website for more info
9
2.4
More escape routes
9
2.4
Nothing more
8
2.2
7
1.9
Wait till eruption then inform
7
1.9
This is scaremongering
6
1.6
Practice
6
1.6
6
1.6
TV drama education program
5
1.3
Siren warning
5
1.3
‘How to’ fridge magnet
4
1.1
Nothing more
4
1.1
Advice tailored to specific groups
4
1.1
Early detection/prediction systems
3
0.8
3
0.8
3
0.8
3
0.8
More public education –posters/flyers/
newspaper/council/radio/billboards/
buses/email/malls/tv
Give households a basic survival kit – free
or cheap
Neighbourhood volunteers to assist
disabled/foreign
Emergency service/lifelines pre-event
planning
Use businesses/community groups to
spread information
CDEM for info
Indication of the probability of volcanic
activity
GNS Science Report 2015/39
15
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N= 371)
3
0.8
Neighbourhood support
3
0.8
Get community groups involved
3
0.8
3
0.8
CDEM open days
3
0.8
Don’t care
2
0.5
All of the above
2
0.5
Alarm sirens for different emergencies
1
0.3
New information highlighted
1
0.3
Draw Blue lines on the street
1
0.3
Door to door campaign
1
0.3
Info pack for new residents
1
0.3
Provide free water containers
1
0.3
Publicise CD social media channels
1
0.3
Integration of local networks for emergency
preparedness
Volcanic eruption awareness week where
media helps spread the message
Analysis: The specified responses varied. 13.2% (49 of 371 responses) suggested public
education through the use of posters, flyers, newspaper, council, etc. 7.0% (26) suggested
the use of pamphlets, posters and mailouts. 10.5% (39 responses) suggested school and
tertiary education, 6.7% (25) advice at the library/museum and 5.4% (20) suggested giving
households basic survival kits as ways to help preparedness for a volcanic eruption.
16
GNS Science Report 2015/39
3.4
VOLCANO KNOWLEDGE
Q3A. Which of the following statements about the size of Auckland’s Volcanic Field do
you think is true?
A volcanic field is a group of small volcanic cones, lave flows, or craters.
The Auckland region is from Wellsford in the north to Pukekohe in the south.
(Correct answer is ‘Less than 10% of the size of the Auckland region’) (Tick one only)
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Analysis: Only 5.1% answered correctly that the size of Auckland Volcanic Field is less than
10% the size of Auckland region. 22.3% think the size is about 26–50% of the size of
Auckland region. Similarly 21.6% reported the field is about 51–75% the size of Auckland
region.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
17
Q3A. Other (Please specify)
Number answered
31 (0.5%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 31)
360 km2
4
12.9
NZ wide and surrounding
1
3.2
54+ volcanoes in Auckland
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
Ask council
1
3.2
48 cones or so
1
3.2
Can’t remember
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
I think the risk is so small that it is negligible
1
3.2
Includes under the sea areas
1
3.2
More than 300 sq. km
1
3.2
1
3.2
Only alarmists care
1
3.2
Pretty well dead
1
3.2
Actually in my view extends south to about
Raglan
All of Auckland would be vulnerable to an
eruption!
Don’t know the % do know that Auckland
itself is made up of volcanoes; at least 59;
including cones and craters and islands
Dormant with lots of hot laver deep below
the surface with can be triggered by earth
quake; more often than not quite a delayed
reaction years as the plates move forcing
the lava to move
Extinct
I am not able to guess but we do have 7–10
volcanoes I think
I don't know about the size % but I think
there are around 60 cones in the Auckland
area
I don't know and can’t see how this would
help me in the event of volcanic activity
I have absolutely no idea about 'the
Auckland region' to f…..g Wellsford; I live
on the isthmus. You know; the bit with all
the volcanoes
I have no ability to visualise the size of this
area
I know Auckland has 49 volcanoes what I
don’t know is the % size of total volcanoes
Mostly around the city centre but spreading
out a bit too?
18
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Sorry percentages go over my head
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 31)
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
1
3.2
We have records and understanding about
the volcanic field within Auckland City
Region; but our field extends out into the
Gulf and I am not aware that this area has
been adequately mapped
What a daft question; if one appeared I'd
leave Auckland
What is the definition of Auckland Region?
Do you mean Greater Auckland; the
Provence; or ??
Who cares
Analysis: 31 respondents specified their answers. In most instances people stated the
(incorrect) number of volcanoes in the region and could not guess the size.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
19
Q3B. Approximately, when do you think the last volcanic eruption happened in the
Auckland region? (Tick one only) (Correct answer is ‘~600 years ago’)
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Analysis: Majority of respondents are aware that the last volcanic eruption was recent (on a
geological timescale), with 44.7% of respondents correctly reporting the last volcanic
eruption was between 501–1,000 years ago and 30.8% of respondents reporting the last
eruption was 101–500 years ago.
20
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q3C. Approximately, when do you think the next volcanic eruption in the Auckland
region is likely to happen? (Tick one only) (Correct answer ‘An eruption could occur at
anytime’)
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Analysis: Although many of the respondents reported that the last volcanic eruption was
between 501–1,000 years ago, the answers in this question suggests most respondents do
not believe an eruption will occur in their lifetime. Interestingly, 26.0% stated that there will be
no future eruptions in Auckland. 24.5% stated an eruption is likely to occur within the next
101–500 years and 20.2% stated an eruption could happen within the next 100 years. Very
few respondents stated correctly that an eruption could occur at any time. Increased
preparedness and taking action in response to warnings is linked to an understanding of the
risk of a hazardous event (including when the next event may happen). Therefore, this result
indicates that education of Aucklanders that an eruption could take place at any time needs
to occur to help increase preparedness and response.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
21
Q3D. Approximately, how large do you think the next volcanic eruption in Auckland
will be? (Tick one only)
Number answered
5514 (98.7%)
Analysis: 14.5% of respondents correctly reported that an area of about 6km from the centre
of the eruption would be devastated. About a third of participants thought that the next
eruption would devastate an area larger than this, and less than 2% stated that it would be
smaller than this. 36.9% of respondents reported that the size of the next eruption would
depend on the size of the volcano. This result indicates that education of the potential sizes
of future eruptions in Auckland would be beneficial.
22
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q3D Other (Please specify)
Number answered
75 (1.3%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 75)
Impossible to predict
18
24.0
Depend on size of eruption
13
17.3
Depends on the type of eruption
11
14.7
Depends on the location of the volcano
7
9.3
How can we judge that?
2
2.7
White island is the safety valve
1
1.3
About 2KM from its centre
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
Anyone’s guess but probably quite small
1
1.3
Ask council. They know everything
1
1.3
Could be any size
1
1.3
The bigger problem would be gas
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
It's not clear how you are measuring area
1
1.3
Depends which way the wind is blowing
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
An eruption could devastate an area up to
at least 25 km from the vent; but it could
depend on wind direction; magnitude of the
eruption; etc.
An immediate area would be affected; but
the air around the volcano would become
ash filled so the eruption would affect the
airspace around Auckland and beyond if it
were a large eruption
Another daft question. I wouldn't be waiting
around to find out.
Any volcanic activity would be considered
large and major headlines by Aucklanders
Lava possibly up to 25km and smoke could
fill the air and kill plants and people
Depending on the size of the volcano some
areas would be devastated but some would
only be inconvenienced
Depends on how you define devastate; is <
500mm of ash?
Size; wind; acid rain; airport port rail
highways all buggered. no fuel or shops etc.
A lot of Auckland would be devastated; but
not all of it
It would destroy Auckland Council
GNS Science Report 2015/39
23
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 75)
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
1
1.3
It could be any size
1
1.3
Ash fall only small
1
1.3
I believe the central north island region is
more of a threat eruption wise than
Auckland
Scaremongering
If you mean damaged buildings; collapsed
roads then about 25 km
Immediate eruption damage would be
small; building collapse due to ash would be
extensive; i.e. effecting Hamilton and
Coromandel
Analysis: 75 panellists replied to ‘Other’ and the majority of the specified responses stated
that different variables such as the size of the eruption, type of the eruption and the location
of the volcano would determine the size (or devastation) of the next volcanic eruption. 18
respondents (24.0% out of the 75 who supplied a comment to this question) reported that the
size of a future eruption is impossible to predict.
24
GNS Science Report 2015/39
3.5
WARNINGS
Q4A. If there was a volcanic eruption in the Auckland region, how much official
warning time would you expect to receive from authorities? (Tick one only)
Number answered
4720 (84.5%)
Analysis: 70% of respondents expect an official warning time of 2–3 days or less leading up
to a volcanic eruption.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
25
Q4A Other (Please specify)
Number answered
203 (3.6%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 203)
59
29.1
50
24.6
As soon as possible
34
16.7
As much warning as possible!
29
14.3
Cannot warn
8
4.0
It can vary dramatically
4
2.0
All of the above
2
1.0
12–48 hours
1
0.5
24 hours
1
0.5
5hrs to 4 weeks
1
0.5
At least 2–3 months
1
0.5
2 to 6 days before eruption
1
0.5
Anything from no time to a few weeks
1
0.5
Could erupt without notice
1
0.5
2–4 weeks’ notice
1
0.5
1
0.5
1
0.5
Impossible to say
1
0.5
Between 12hrs and three days
1
0.5
Minutes
1
0.5
1 week to 1 month
1
0.5
Months
1
0.5
Few hours to a few weeks
1
0.5
2 days
1
0.5
Depends on eruption
When the scientists get any advance
warning.
I do not understand the question do you
want to know if I think you will advise me or
how much time I would like?
I think it would be obvious to everyone
immediately
Analysis: 59 (29.1% of the 203 that supplied a comment under ‘other’) participants reported
that the warning time would depend on the eruption, and 50 (24.6%) think it would depend on
receiving an advanced warning from scientists. Other answers provide ranges of warning
lead time, and include from hours through to months.
26
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q4B. Approximately, how much warning time do you think you would need to prepare
your household for an evacuation for an extended period of time e.g. greater than
three days? (Tick one only)
Number answered
5535 (99.0%)
Analysis: 77.0% of panellists reported needing one day or less of warning to prepare their
household for an extended evacuation, with 44.7% only needing up to 5 hours warning time.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
27
Q4B Other (Please specify)
Number answered
54 (1.0%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 54)
Depends on our location
13
24.1
Depends on eruption
12
22.2
Depends on where I would be evacuated to
4
7.4
Rest home
3
5.5
As long as possible
3
5.5
24 hours
2
3.7
Immediate
2
3.7
Less than 1 hour
2
3.7
1 week – or more
1
1.9
13–24 hours minimum
1
1.9
2–3 days to get the horses away
1
1.9
1 to 2 weeks
1
1.9
As early as possible
1
1.9
At least a few days
1
1.9
Disabled can’t evacuate
1
1.9
Depends on how much time we have
1
1.9
Everyone will be dead
1
1.9
1
1.9
1
1.9
I think we are outside the volcanic field
1
1.9
I would not leave
1
1.9
What sort of planning are you talking
about?
I live on Waiheke; not sure where we could
evacuate to
Analysis: Similar to previous specified answers, respondents reported different variables as
factors in how much warning time they would need, such as, their location at the time,
characteristics of the eruption, and where they would be evacuated to.
28
GNS Science Report 2015/39
3.6
ERUPTION KNOWLEDGE
Q5A. A potential volcanic eruption in Auckland has been signalled by a few days of
earthquakes beforehand. These are mostly ‘unfelt’ by people and only picked up by
monitoring instruments. 2Which of the following would make you confident that an
eruption will happen? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5589 (100.0%)
Analysis: Most panellists reported that evacuation order from authorities and if scientists or
authorities say an eruption will happen would make them confident an eruption would occur.
This indicates a high level of trust in authorities and scientists by the public. 3.1% reported
needing to see or feel physical evidence for themselves.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
29
Q5A. Other (Please specify)
Number answered
58 (1.1%)
Number of
responses
Column N %
Scientists/authorities not journalists
26
44.1
When I can see it
7
11.9
When I felt the quakes
5
8.5
GeoNet
2
3.4
1
1.7
1
1.7
1
1.7
1
1.7
1
1.7
If the birds in the trees stop singing
1
1.7
It is animals who pick it up first
1
1.7
My instincts and animals reactions
1
1.7
Signs of animal distress
1
1.7
Wildlife heading south
1
1.7
Any of the above
1
1.7
Ask Councillors
1
1.7
The Holy Spirit
1
1.7
Cell phone info
1
1.7
1
1.7
My son coming to get me :)
1
1.7
WILL NOT HAPPEN
1
1.7
Sirens??
1
1.7
Who cares
1
1.7
I will install an app for measuring seismic
activity
(N=59)
I'm paying attention to 4 lunar & 2 solar
eclipses on this set of high Jewish
holidays...signs in the Heavens!
Animals acting erratically. Extreme change
in the weather. Subconscious thoughts of a
calamity.
I would look for signals from animals and
birds. They will run away to escape the
disaster
If some animals and birds begin to behave
in an unusual manner
You ask us for opinions without us really
having any info to base an opinion on
Analysis: 26 respondents (44.1% of the 59 participants who provided comments in the ‘other’
option to this question) reported they would be confident that an eruption was about to occur
if it was reported by scientists and/or authorities – not by journalists. Other responses
included changes in bird and animal behaviour (8 people, or 0.1% of all 5589 participants), or
GeoNet (2 people, or 3.4% of 59)
30
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q5B. You have since been advised that an eruption is imminent; which of the
following do you expect authorities to provide? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5346 (95.6%)
Analysis: Information about what people should do in the event of an eruption was most
commonly stated (by 86.6% of panellists) as information expected to be provided by
authorities in the event of an eruption. 74.3% reported that authorities are expected to
provide information on the risk to the Auckland Region and 71% expected information on
eruption timings. Most participants also expected information on accommodation and
transport options for evacuees.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
31
Q5B Other (Please specify)
Number answered
285 (5.1%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 285)
58
20.4
54
18.9
41
14.4
16
5.6
15
5.3
11
3.8
10
2.9
9
3.2
8
2.8
6
2.1
6
2.1
6
2.1
Food and shelter
5
1.8
Marine/train modes of evacuation
3
1.1
Constant updating of information
2
0.7
Call centre giving out advice
2
0.7
2
0.7
2
0.7
2
0.7
2
0.7
2
0.7
2
0.7
Security of supermarkets and fuel outlets
1
0.4
Equipment e.g. gasmasks
1
0.4
Advice on evacuation/where to go/what to
take
Medical assistance; including necessary
medication
Assistance to evacuate and support
disabled/elderly/others
Ensure evacuation traffic runs smoothly
during evacuation
Nothing
Financial assistance/food/water/
accommodation/property damage
Food/water/accommodation/communication
services
Extra policing/security
Depends on circumstances/health/time of
eruption/location
Advice for pets/farm animals
Information/quick action/payouts from
Insurers
Government assistance/support short and
long term
Info on what to do after the eruptions and
resume normal life
All of the above
Access to funds at bank accounts; access
to food and water.
Access to medical stations and cash for
food etc.
Advice on what to do
Communication hub/network to help people
keep in touch
32
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 285)
1
0.4
1
0.4
1
0.4
1
0.4
1
0.4
Better information to ERG members
1
0.4
Info on what to do NOW.
1
0.4
1
0.4
1
0.4
Evacuation centres
1
0.4
Warning sirens sounded in all areas
1
0.4
Stay out of my way
1
0.4
Support from the Defence force
1
0.4
1
0.4
Tax break; rates relief
1
0.4
Limit the spread of misinformation
1
0.4
1
0.4
A comprehensive CD plan in place
1
0.4
A nice harbour
1
0.4
General advice
Infrastructure repair details; support staff
and services brought in from other regions
Do not make local communities dependent
on the authorities
Have folk head off to their baches and be
allowed to have that time away on holiday
pay
Ensure AT system operates and additional
resources as reqd.
Information about alternative
accommodation
This should be central; not local
government
Support to communicate with and locate
family members
Live on Waiheke – evacuation might be
complicated
Analysis: 20.4% of the 285 panellists that answered ‘Other’ reported that if an eruption was
imminent, authorities should provide information on evacuation/where to go and what to take.
18.9% reported that authorities should provide medical assistance. 14.4% reported that
authorities should provide assistance for elderly and disabled. Other responses included
financial assistance, food, water, accommodation and communication services, extra policing
and advice for pet owners.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
33
3.7
ERUPTION ACTIONS AND EVACUATION
Participants were presented with a series of hypothetical situations (Question 6A, B
and C). They were asked to imagine the situation as described in the question and
answer according to how they think they would react.
You hear reports on the TV and radio that there have been a series of small
earthquakes under Auckland detected by seismic equipment. While they haven’t
actually been felt by residents, scientists say they could possibly be the lead-up to a
volcanic eruption somewhere in the Auckland region. If that was the case, there may
only be a few days or weeks’ notice before an eruption could happen.
Q6A. You have since been advised that an eruption is imminent, which of the
following would you do? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5441 (97.4%)
Analysis: Most panellists reported that they would get supplies and make preparations
(92.1%) and look for more information and keep an eye on things (85.6%). Information
seeking with friends, family and neighbours was high (42.6%), and 25.6% of panellists
reported they would evacuate to somewhere outside the Auckland region.
34
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q6A. Other (Please specify)
Number answered
143 (2.6%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N=143)
Be prepared to evacuate
49
34.3
Arrange accommodation outside area
16
11.2
10
7.0
Depends on eruption location/size
7
4.9
Nothing
6
4.2
Look for information/official reports
4
2.8
Pack my vehicle
4
2.8
Need timely warnings
3
2.1
Consult science experts
3
2.1
Medical staff – would go to hospital
3
2.1
Secure my property
3
2.1
I would need help
3
2.1
Make sure pets are safe
3
2.1
Consider evacuating pets
2
1.4
Check evacuation route options
2
1.4
Tank water quality would be our concern
2
1.4
I would pray
2
1.4
Wait for Civil Defence advice
2
1.4
Panic
2
1.4
Wait and see
2
1.4
1
0.7
Depends on what information we are given
1
0.7
I would want to know the full risk
1
0.7
Outside the affected area
1
0.7
Buy a caravan
1
0.7
Check weather forecast for wind direction
1
0.7
Check insurance policy
1
0.7
Talk about it on Facebook
1
0.7
Understood school emergency plan
1
0.7
I'd be scared
1
0.7
I would need to stay as essential service provider
1
0.7
Have a getaway kit
1
0.7
Move my business out of Auckland
1
0.7
Check on/help/evacuate elderly neighbours/
family
I live on Waiheke so evacuation is less easy i.e.
by boat
GNS Science Report 2015/39
35
Analysis: When an eruption was imminent 34.3% of the 143 respondents answering ‘Other’
stated specifically that they would prepare to evacuate, 11.2% would arrange
accommodation outside of Auckland, and 7% would check on neighbours and family. Some
respondents reported that their response actions would depend on the eruption location and
size (7 people, or 4.9%).
Q6B. To continue the scenario, authorities later say they have a good idea of the
broad area in which the volcano might come up. It will be about 8km from your house.
They say people within 5km of the area need to evacuate. Which of the following
would you do? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5450 (97.5%)
Analysis: The majority of panellists reported that they would get supplies and make
preparations (61.0%), and look for more information and keep an eye on things (60.5%).
Only 0.3% stated they would have already evacuated. It is interesting that the results for
making preparations, looking for information, and evacuating to outside of the region
decreased in comparison to the previous question. This may be caused by participants
choosing fewer response actions from the list. However, the percentage of respondents who
stated that they would evacuate to somewhere else within the Auckland region increased
from 3.0% to 10.8% following the evacuation order within 5km of the eruption centre.
36
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q6B. Other (Please specify)
Number answered
136 (2.5%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N=136)
Prepare to evacuate
60
44.1
Arrange accommodation outside Auckland
10
7.4
Depends on eruption/location
8
5.9
Check/help/evacuate elderly neighbours/family
7
5.1
Offer assistance
7
5.1
6
4.4
Nothing
5
3.6
Help at hospital
4
3.0
Check with work
3
2.2
Arrange with my employer to work remotely
3
2.2
Contact authorities and offer assistance
3
2.2
Stay – I am a service provider
2
1.5
Keep praying
2
1.5
I would need help
2
1.5
Check evacuation route options
2
1.5
Check official information
2
1.5
Secure house
2
1.5
Take pictures
1
0.7
Activate emergency plan at work
1
0.7
Check weather forecasts
1
0.7
Depends on information given
1
0.7
Nothing
1
0.7
I don't care
1
0.7
Check accuracy of information
1
0.7
I'd make an emergency plan
1
0.7
Arrange for accommodation for pets outside
Auckland
Analysis: Of the 136 respondents to the ‘Other’ option, 44.1% (60) reported that they would
prepare to evacuate. 7.4% would arrange accommodation outside of Auckland, 5.1% would
check on neighbours and family and 5.9% reported that what they would do would depend
on the eruption location.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
37
Q6C. New information emerges, and it is now thought that the volcano will come up
approximately 3km from your house. You hear on the radio that everyone in your
neighbourhood should evacuate. Which of the following would you do?
(Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 31.3% of panellists reported they would get supplies and make preparations, and
23.4% would try to get information from authorities. In regards to where participants stated
that they would evacuate to, 17.6% reported they would leave their home for somewhere
outside of Auckland, and 12.5% would leave their home for somewhere in the Auckland
Region. These results should be used with caution for planning purposes, as the survey
options of where participants would evacuate to were not exclusive – that is, many
participants chose other response options, instead of specifying their target location. 17.3%
stated that they would leave as soon as possible.
38
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q6C Other (Please specify)
Number answered
67 (1.1%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 67)
Evacuate
26
38.8
Assist/evacuate elderly/disabled
8
11.9
Nothing
7
10.4
Depends on eruption/location
4
6.0
Consider evacuation route options
3
4.5
Consult officials/scientists
3
4.5
Make sure it is official information
3
4.5
Check with my employer
2
3.0
Take animals
2
3.0
Help at Auckland hospital
2
3.0
I would need help
2
3.0
Secure house
1
1.5
Volunteers – would stay and help
1
1.5
Take pictures
1
1.5
Find accommodation outside Auckland
1
1.5
Pray
1
1.5
Analysis: 38.8% of the 67 panellists who chose the ‘Other’ option reported they would simply
evacuate but did not indicate where. 11.9% reported they would help elderly/disabled people
to evacuate, but again they did not specify where they would evacuate to, and 10.4%
reported that they would do nothing.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
39
Q7A. If you had to evacuate your household to a safe place within the Auckland
region, which of the following things would affect your ability to evacuate?
(Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5579 (99.8%)
Analysis: An equal number of respondents (32.1%) reported that having pets, and finding
accommodation would affect their ability to evacuate. The dislocation of family and friends
(24.4%), and finances (23.2%) were also significant factors affecting people’s ability to
evacuate.
40
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q7A Other (Please specify)
Number answered
226 (4.2%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 226)
Gridlocked roads
50
22.1%
Animals/pets/livestock
29
12.8%
Neighbours/disabled needing help
24
10.6%
Emergency worker
18
8.0%
Nothing
16
7.1%
Lack of accommodation
14
6.2%
I live on an island
12
5.3%
Job/study location at time
11
4.9%
Children/family
9
4.0%
Security of my property
8
3.5%
Depends on eruption/location
7
3.1%
Petrol available
6
2.7%
I would need help/transport
6
2.7%
Medical needs
4
1.8%
Finances/available cash
3
1.3%
Stay to offer help
3
1.3%
Age
2
0.9%
Lack of information
2
0.9%
Lack of evacuation routes
2
0.9%
Not leaving
2
0.9%
Adequate food as my son has allergies
1
0.4%
Ability to inform family of my evacuation
1
0.4%
Education – I am a student
1
0.4%
Pray
1
0.4%
Panic
1
0.4%
Not being adequately prepared
1
0.4%
Enough information
1
0.4%
Analysis: 22.1% of the 226 panellists who supplied a comment to this question reported that
gridlocked roads would affect their ability to evacuate. 12.8% (29) specified that pets,
animals and livestock would hinder their evacuation and 10.6% (24) would need to help
neighbours or the disabled.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
41
Q7B. If you were told to evacuate what would your household do? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 93.4% responded that their household (including those with a household of one)
would all evacuate at the same time. Only 4.7% responded that one or more would stay
behind temporarily and 0.7% responded one or more wouldn’t go at all.
42
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q7B Other (Please specify)
Number answered
137 (2.5%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 137)
26
19.0
21
15.3
19
13.9
16
11.6
Service provider so will stay
12
8.7
Reliant on rest home/carers
5
3.6
Need to take animals
5
3.6
See if neighbours/disabled needed help
4
2.9
Responsible for Care Home
4
2.9
Depends on urgency/time/week
4
2.9
Depends on eruption/area affected
4
2.9
Depends on work
2
1.5
Depends if information is credible
2
1.5
Depends on medical needs/disability
2
1.5
Pray
2
1.5
Stay and secure home
1
0.7
Depends on transport/finances
1
0.7
Try and make a plan
1
0.7
Go to a council building
1
0.7
Secure my home
1
0.7
Ask for help
1
0.7
Depends on how much warning we had
1
0.7
Volunteer to assist
1
0.7
Nothing
1
0.7
Evacuate with family/relatives/dependents
Depends on where family/household
members were at the time
Flatting so all do their own thing
Look after/evacuate with
pets/animals/livestock
Analysis: 19.0% of the 137 respondents who supplied comments specified that they would
evacuate with family/relatives/dependents. 19 participants (13.9%) stated that their
household would respond separately due to flatting arrangements. 8.7% (12) of respondents
reported that they would stay as they were service providers.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
43
Q7C. If your household had to evacuate, which of the following best describes what
you would do? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 62.7% of panellists would take one car from their household when evacuating and
33.7% would take more than one car, while 4.2 % reported they would rely on authorities to
provide transport. Other evacuation methods included bicycle (6.5%), on foot (4.7%), going
with a friend/neighbour (3.7%), boat/yacht (3.5%), or motorcycle (1.9%)
44
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q7C. Other (Please specify)
Number answered
190 (3.3%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 190)
Depends on situation and traffic/petrol
38
20.0
Motorhome
33
17.4
17
8.9
Ferry
17
8.9
Live on island
8
4.2
Car pool with my family
7
3.7
Not leaving
5
2.6
Car and bikes
5
2.6
Car and caravan
5
2.6
Buses/trains
5
2.6
Car
5
1.6
Yacht/water taxi/kayak
4
2.1
Public transport
4
2.1
Go to airport
3
1.6
3
1.6
Walk
3
1.6
Disabled – would need help
2
1.1
Bus/walk to ferry
2
1.1
Follow instructions on where to go
2
1.1
4x4quad bike
2
1.1
Drive then walk
2
1.1
Don’t know
2
1.1
Bike
2
1.1
Pray
1
0.5
Car and horse trailer
1
0.5
Ferry to our car in Auckland
1
0.5
Move overseas
1
0.5
Panic
1
0.5
Electric cargo bicycle
1
0.5
Car and trailer
1
0.5
Mobility scooter
1
0.5
Organise a moving truck
1
0.5
Depends on road closures
1
0.5
Depends on whether we need to assist
others
Rely on transport provided by authorities
(e.g. boats)
GNS Science Report 2015/39
45
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N = 190)
Depends on the timing of evacuation
1
0.5
Seek advice on evacuation routes
1
0.5
Truck
1
0.5
Use the 4WD vehicle
1
0.5
4wd with bicycle and motorbike
1
0.5
Analysis: 20% of the 190 respondents who supplied comments reported evacuation would
depend on the situation/traffic and petrol, and 8.9% reported it would depend on whether
they needed to assist others. Other means of evacuation included using a motorhome
(17.4%), ferry (8.9%), car and bikes (2.6%), buses and trains (2.6%) or yacht/water
taxi/kayak (2.1%). Five (2.6% of 190) respondents stated that they would not leave.
46
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q8Ai. If an eruption occurred in the Auckland region, how disruptive would the
following be to you? You need to evacuate your household to temporary
accommodation outside of the Auckland region. (Tick one only)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 44.7% reported evacuation to outside of the Auckland region would be extremely
disruptive, 50.3% reported that evacuation would be disruptive to some extent and 3.9%
reported an evacuation would not be disruptive at all. Overall, 95% of respondents stated
that evacuating to an area outside of the Auckland region would be potentially disruptive.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
47
Q8Aii. If an eruption occurred in the Auckland region, how disruptive would the
following be to you? You need to evacuate your household to temporary
accommodation within the Auckland region. (Tick one only)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 27.7% of respondents reported an evacuation to accommodation within the
Auckland region would be extremely disruptive, 66.8% reported that evacuation would be
disruptive to some extent and 3.6% reported it would be not disruptive at all.
48
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q8Aiii. If an eruption occurred in the Auckland region, how disruptive would the
following be to you? You are able to stay at home but there are significant supply
problems and restrictions to things like electricity and water. (Tick one only)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 30.9% of respondents reported that restrictions to electricity and water would be
extremely disruptive, 66.2% stated it would be disruptive to some extent and 2.0% reported
any restrictions would not be disruptive at all.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
49
Q8Aiv. If an eruption occurred in the Auckland region, how disruptive would the
following be to you? You are able to stay at home but most of Auckland’s built
infrastructure is unavailable for you to use e.g. roads or public buildings.
(Tick one only)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 30.7% of respondents reported that it would be extremely disruptive if roads and
public buildings were affected, 64.0% reported that it would be disruptive to some extent and
3.7% reported that it would not be disruptive at all.
50
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q8Av. If an eruption occurred in the Auckland region, how disruptive would the
following be to you? Your workplace or school has been affected, you need to make
alternative arrangements, or not work or study at all. (Tick one only)
Number answered
5589 (100%)
Analysis: 22.5% of the respondents in this scenario reported that it would be extremely
disruptive if their workplace or place of education was affected, 47.6% reported that it would
be disruptive to some extent, while 15.1% reported it would not be disruptive at all and 13.7%
stated that this question was not applicable.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
51
Q9E. Which of the following people make up your household? (Tick all that apply)
Number answered
5556 (99.4%)
Analysis: 62.0% of respondents reported living with a partner/spouse, and 19.4% reported
living alone. 34.4% of respondent households had children under 16 years of age.
52
GNS Science Report 2015/39
Q9E. Someone else (Please specify)
Number answered
126 (2.8%)
Number of
responses
% of responses
(N=126)
Pets/animals/livestock
47
37.3
Boarder
11
8.7
Children and partners
11
8.7
Foreign student
8
6.3
Parents
8
6.3
Adult child
7
5.6
Guests
5
4.0
Grandchild
5
4.0
Rest home patients
4
3.2
Adult flatmates
3
2.4
Extended family
3
2.4
Flatmates
3
2.4
Friend
3
2.4
Disabled person
2
1.6
Tenants
2
1.6
Grandparent
1
0.8
Daughter and Granddaughter
1
0.8
Parents and adult offspring
1
0.8
Au pair
1
0.8
Analysis: Respondents also specified pets/animals and livestock as well as grandchildren/
grandparents/parents, foreign students or adult children in their household make up.
Other comments made by participants:

More information is wanted and should be delivered/available in many different ways,
e.g., pamphlets, videos, T.V. programs, school education, flyers, posters.

Panellists consider Auckland to be unprepared for the consequences of a volcanic
eruption and unprepared for a mass evacuation.

Panellists consider themselves unprepared and while some will prepare themselves,
others need help, encouragement, and resources.

Some panellists are unconvinced or were unaware that an eruption could occur.
Panellists want to have accurate, timely information and updates from scientists/authorities.
GNS Science Report 2015/39
53
This page is intentionally left blank.
4.0
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors greatly acknowledge funding support from DEVORA research programme (a
funding collaboration between GNS Science, EQC and Auckland Council). We would like to
acknowledge the assistance from Auckland Council for their input and review of the survey
content and design. We thank the two anonymous reviewers for their excellent input and
review of this report. We would also like to acknowledge all research organisations involved
in this study: GNS Science, University of Canterbury, Massey University and University of
Auckland.
5.0
REFERENCES
MCDEM (2008). Exercise Ruaumoko '08 final exercise report. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of
Civil Defence and Emergency Management.
Needham, A. J., Lindsay, J. M., Smith, I. E. M., Augustinus, P., Shane, P. A. (2011). Sequential
eruption of alkaline and sub-alkaline magmas from a small monogenetic volcano in the
Auckland Volcanic Field, New Zealand. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research,
201(1–4), 126–142. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2010.07.017
GNS Science Report 2015/39
55
This page is intentionally left blank.
APPENDICES
This page is intentionally left blank.
A1.0
APPENDIX 1 DEMOGRAPHICS
All respondents
Percentages
(N=5589)
% (N=5589)
Female
3410
61.0%
Male
2153
38.5%
26
0.5%
15–24
138
2.5%
25–34
486
8.7%
35–44
1073
19.2%
45–54
1175
21.0%
55–64
1139
20.4%
65–74
1136
20.3%
75+
334
6.0%
I prefer not to say
108
1.9%
European
4972
89.0%
Maori
131
2.3%
Pacific Peoples
79
1.4%
Asian
300
5.4%
African
48
0.9%
Other
2
0.0%
I prefer not to say
57
1.0%
Albert-Eden
492
8.8%
Devonport-Takapuna
354
6.3%
5
0.1%
232
4.2%
8
0.1%
Henderson-Massey
336
6.0%
Hibiscus and Bays
398
7.1%
Howick
358
6.4%
Kaipatiki
377
6.7%
Mangere-Otahuhu
140
2.5%
Gender
Prefer not to say
Age
Ethnicity
Middle Eastern, Latin American,
Local Board
Elsewhere in New Zealand
Franklin
Great Barrier
GNS Science Report 2015/39
59
All respondents
Percentages
(N=5589)
% (N=5589)
Manurewa
148
2.6%
Maungakiekie-Tamaki
298
5.3%
Orakei
368
6.6%
Otara-Papatoetoe
103
1.8%
1
0.0%
Papakura
104
1.9%
Puketapapa
154
2.8%
Rodney
356
6.4%
Upper Harbour
171
3.1%
Waiheke
90
1.6%
Waitakere
3
0.1%
Waitakere Ranges
301
5.4%
Waitemata
486
8.7%
Whau
303
5.4%
3
0.1%
5589
100.0%
Outside of New Zealand
I prefer not to say
Total
60
GNS Science Report 2015/39