Use of Hurricane Forecast Information by the Public

  • Slides: 28
Download presentation
Use of Hurricane Forecast Information by the Public Jay Baker Department of Geography Florida

Use of Hurricane Forecast Information by the Public Jay Baker Department of Geography Florida State University

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions •

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions • Asking open-ended questions about why people evacuate or don’t • Knowledge of watch and warning • Responses to hypothetical threat scenarios • Use of forecast graphics • Beliefs about forecast accuracy

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions •

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions • Asking open-ended questions about why people evacuate or don’t • Knowledge of watch and warning • Responses to hypothetical threat scenarios • Use of forecast graphics • Beliefs about forecast accuracy

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions •

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions • Asking open-ended questions about why people evacuate or don’t • Knowledge of watch and warning • Responses to hypothetical threat scenarios • Use of forecast graphics • Beliefs about forecast accuracy

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions •

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions • Asking open-ended questions about why people evacuate or don’t • Knowledge of watch and warning • Responses to hypothetical threat scenarios • Use of forecast graphics • Beliefs about forecast accuracy

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions •

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions • Asking open-ended questions about why people evacuate or don’t • Knowledge of watch and warning • Responses to hypothetical threat scenarios • Use of forecast graphics • Beliefs about forecast accuracy

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions •

Data • Asking people how important specific factors are in their evacuation decisions • Asking open-ended questions about why people evacuate or don’t • Knowledge of watch and warning • Responses to hypothetical threat scenarios • Use of forecast graphics • Beliefs about forecast accuracy

Asked in Frances How Important Specific Factors Were in Evacuation Decisions

Asked in Frances How Important Specific Factors Were in Evacuation Decisions

Asked in Frances How Important Specific Factors Were in Evacuation Decisions

Asked in Frances How Important Specific Factors Were in Evacuation Decisions

Open ended question: What made you decide to go someplace safer? • Severity of

Open ended question: What made you decide to go someplace safer? • Severity of the threat – Strength of the storm – Likelihood of being hit • Advice from officials • Information from media, others • Other

Mentioned NHC Watches or Warnings as a Reason for Evacuating Charley 4% Frances 3%

Mentioned NHC Watches or Warnings as a Reason for Evacuating Charley 4% Frances 3% Ivan 5% Jeanne 1%

Mentioned Advice from NWS/NHC as a Reason for Evacuating Charley 11% Frances 9% Jeanne

Mentioned Advice from NWS/NHC as a Reason for Evacuating Charley 11% Frances 9% Jeanne 10%

Aware of When Watches and Warning Are Issued (Post-Ivan, Morrow and Gladwin) LA AL

Aware of When Watches and Warning Are Issued (Post-Ivan, Morrow and Gladwin) LA AL MS NW FL FL Keys TOTAL Watch 63 63 64 60 70 62 Warning 40 35 43 40 41 40

Earlier Knowledge of Watch and Warning Definitions • Mississippi after Camille – Watch –

Earlier Knowledge of Watch and Warning Definitions • Mississippi after Camille – Watch – Warning 76% 71% • NW Florida after Eloise – Watch – Warning 87% 83%

Threat Factors are Confounded with One Another in Time • • Proximity Track Watch/Warning

Threat Factors are Confounded with One Another in Time • • Proximity Track Watch/Warning Probabilities Intensity Media Attention Evacuation Orders

Importance of Threat Factors in Responses to Hypothetical Hurricane Threats

Importance of Threat Factors in Responses to Hypothetical Hurricane Threats

The Forecast Track and Graphics (the Skinny Black Line)

The Forecast Track and Graphics (the Skinny Black Line)

Saw Graphic of Forecast Track 100 90 80 Percent 70 60 50 40 30

Saw Graphic of Forecast Track 100 90 80 Percent 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Cat 1 Cat 3 Inland of 3 Northern Coastal 88 95 93 Tampa Bay 97 94 91 Southwest Coastal 90 90 93 Northern Inland Central Inland Southern Inland 92 92 91

Type of Graphic Seen 100% 90% 80% Percent 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20%

Type of Graphic Seen 100% 90% 80% Percent 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Don’t Know Saw Both Saw Cone Saw Line (n=396) 5 35 48 13 (n=785) 4 42 41 13 (n=801) 7 38 43 13 (n=184) 12 42 39 7 (n=276) 12 38 31 19 (n=273) 13 37 36 14

Forecast Graphic Said to Be Very Important in Evacuation Decision 80 70 Percent 60

Forecast Graphic Said to Be Very Important in Evacuation Decision 80 70 Percent 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Cat 1 Cat 3 Inland of 3 Northern Coastal 57 63 66 Tampa Bay 68 66 59 Southwest Coastal 59 63 56 Northern Inland Central Inland Southern Inland 63 59 64

Evacuation in Charley by Type of Forcast Graphic Seen 50 45 40 Percent 35

Evacuation in Charley by Type of Forcast Graphic Seen 50 45 40 Percent 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Northern Coastal Saw Line 14 Saw Cone 10 Saw Both 10 Tampa Bay 39 41 44 SW Coastal 25 23 27 Northern Inland 8 21 9 Central Inland Southern Inland 14 34 11 32 17 32

Perceived Accuracy of NHC Forecasts • 24 -hr Position Error • 24 -hr Arrival

Perceived Accuracy of NHC Forecasts • 24 -hr Position Error • 24 -hr Arrival Time Error • 24 -hr Intensity Error • Florida Keys after Michelle • Texas and Louisiana after Lili • Eastern North Carolina after Isabel

Perceived 24 -Hour Landfall Position Error 50 45 40 Percent of Respondents 35 30

Perceived 24 -Hour Landfall Position Error 50 45 40 Percent of Respondents 35 30 Keys 25 20 15 10 5 0 10 50 100 200 Statute Miles >200 DK

Perceived 24 -Hr Landfall Arrival Time Error 35 30 Percent of Respondents 25 Keys

Perceived 24 -Hr Landfall Arrival Time Error 35 30 Percent of Respondents 25 Keys LA/TX NC 20 15 10 5 0 0. 5 1 3 6 12 Hours 18 > 18 DK

60 Perceived Bias in 24 - Hour Arrival Time Error Percent of Respondents 50

60 Perceived Bias in 24 - Hour Arrival Time Error Percent of Respondents 50 40 Keys LA/TX NC 30 20 10 0 Sooner Neither Later Comparison to Actual Arrival Time DK

Perceived 24 -Hour Intensity Forecast Error 35 30 Percent of Respondents 25 Keys LA/TX

Perceived 24 -Hour Intensity Forecast Error 35 30 Percent of Respondents 25 Keys LA/TX NC 20 15 10 5 0 2 5 10 20 MPH 50 > 50 DK

60 Perceived Bias in 24 -Hour Intensity Error Percent of Respondents 50 40 Keys

60 Perceived Bias in 24 -Hour Intensity Error Percent of Respondents 50 40 Keys LA/TX NC 30 20 10 0 Weaker Neither Stronger Compared to Actual Intensity DK

60 Perceived Accuracy of NHC Forecast vs. Local TV Percent of Respondents 50 40

60 Perceived Accuracy of NHC Forecast vs. Local TV Percent of Respondents 50 40 Keys LA/TX NC 30 20 10 0 NHC Same Local TV More Accurate Forecast DK