This research involved 13 end-user participants whose roles involve the use of the VAL system, or managing and responding to impacts from a volcanic crisis. They are from a range of
organisations including the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM), regional and district CDEM, civil aviation, insurance, and the Department of Conservation (DoC). The roles, organisations, and industries that use the VAL system impact the factors involved in the relationship, including their perceived purpose and satisfaction with the current system (discussed above), their awareness of it and emphasis placed on it, how they use the system, and their opinions of the content and structure (discussed in section 4.4). The relationship between end-users and the current VAL system, including these factors, is Theme 2, and is depicted in Figure 4.2. Thematic maps such as Figure 4.2 are an important aspect of indicating relationships in qualitative research. An example of a relationship in Figure 4.2 is that an end-user’s satisfaction with the current VAL system (the node on the far left) is
Chapter 4 An exploratory investigation of New Zealand’s VAL system
106
system, the end-user’s awareness of the system, the infrequency of volcanic crises in New Zealand, and the VAL system itself (e.g., the information it contains).
Establishing how the VAL system is used and the users’ needs for scientific information within the VAL system enables a clearer picture of what end-users perceptions are based on. This is an important element of constructing effective scientific information for communication to end-users. Understanding the relationship between end-users and the current VAL system is a key theme contributing towards an improvement in the way future VAL systems can benefit end-users.
Figure 4.2. A model depicting the relationship between end-users and New Zealand’s current VAL system.
4.3.1 Awareness and emphasis on VALs
Almost all participants, regardless of their role, were not familiar with the details of the current VAL system. Some end-users did not realise there was a separate system for reawakening volcanoes, and many were unsure of the overall number and meanings of levels (and therefore at what level to put action plans in place). There was a misperception (amongst a minority) that the VAL system was aligned with the 1–5 tiers of CDEM response, and confusion apparent with other volcanic warning systems, such as for lahars, and the ACC. The lack of awareness of the VAL system was attributed by participants to the infrequency of volcanic crises, especially compared to more frequent hazards in New Zealand such as flooding, and topical hazards over recent years such as tsunami and earthquakes. Additionally, the low emphasis on the system by many end-users is likely to be influenced by the high importance placed on person-to- person communication with scientists. It is thought that should volcanic activity increase in the end-user’s region/district or relating to a specific industry, direct communication will provide far more useful information. This indicates that irrespective of the content of future VAL systems and supplementary information, the act of person-to-person communication should be retained and scientists remain readily available, both during a crisis and quiescence. End- user attributes are also a likely influence on their awareness of the VAL tool, including their role, frequency of contact directly with the scientists, experience with volcanic crises, and qualifications and training.
Within the VAL system, more emphasis is placed on levels relating to unrest than eruption by end-users.
“A system that’s basically saying this is how to interpret the [unrest] signs has… far more interest and meaning for people. Once stuff is actually coming out the top or out the side or wherever it’s going to come, you’re not using the Alert Level in any sort of meaningful way to communicate to the public... They’ve seen what’s happening and they’re dealing with it” (EU7).
While this emphasis should be kept in mind for future VAL systems, this reasoning is potentially fuelled by a lack of experience of the use of VALs during long-term eruption situations in which the eruption levels of the VAL system may be useful.
The method of communication of the VAL within VABs may also influence the end-users’ awareness and emphasis on the system. One end-user pointed out the lack of emphasis placed
Chapter 4 An exploratory investigation of New Zealand’s VAL system
108
on VABs containing VAL information. The participant stated that they would look at the VAL, and if it had not changed (therefore “reconfirming” the current level), they often would not read the rest of the VAB. While scientists place emphasis on supplementary information providing details on an increase in activity (within a single VAL), end-users may not be reading this information and are placing heightened emphasis on the VAL. This encourages the
addition of another level indicating heightened unrest to differentiate from the lower levels of unrest commonly observed at some of New Zealand’s volcanoes.
This general lack of awareness and emphasis on the VAL system may have influenced the end- users’ responses to their overall satisfaction with the current VAL system. It is recognised that issues with the VAL system may have arisen only during a crisis. The low level of awareness of the content of the VAL system is also a likely influence on the end-users’ use of the system, potentially causing it to be used inappropriately.
4.3.2 End-user actions influenced by the VAL system
The VAL system is used by end-users to understand the current state (and threat) of activity, on which to base their decisions and actions. The majority of end-users of New Zealand’s VAL system do not have detailed contingency plans for volcanic events. Some organisations have planned response actions influenced by the level of volcanic activity, irrespective of the alert level. However a small proportion of actions have been arranged to coincide with specific changes in the VAL. Most of these are fairly generic actions, such as “seek scientific advice”, “review plans” or “assemble community leaders” and are flexible arrangements. Other actions associated with VALs are more clear-cut, for example those used by the civil aviation industry.
As described in section 4.2.2, NZVs are used by the civil aviation industry in New Zealand to describe areas of restricted flying due to volcanic hazards, and are determined using the VAL as an “important trigger” (Lechner, 2009). When notified of a change in VAL by GNS Science, or on the detection of volcanic ash by satellite or pilot reports and confirmed by GNS Science, the Meteorological Service of New Zealand Ltd (MetService) request Airways Corporation of New Zealand Ltd (Airways) to issue the appropriate Notice to Airmen (NOTAM), containing NZV information, which is received by the civil aviation industry.
While it is recognised by the aviation industry that a reawakening volcano moving from VAL 0 to 1 does not necessarily signal “imminent volcanic activity”, the protocols used by the aviation industry are based on the frequently active side of the current VAL system in New Zealand
(Lechner, 2012). NZVs are prepared for five of New Zealand’s more active volcanoes, and the template for future volcanic unrest and eruption episodes for all other volcanoes (including reawakening volcanoes) is also based on the frequently active VAL system. This template was used during Exercise Ruaumoko in 2008 at Auckland Volcanic Field (classified as a reawakening volcano). The CAA created a NZV based on their estimate of where the vent was likely to emerge – a difficult task on a multi-vent volcanic field. The CAA participant in this research reported that the NZV fairly accurately matched the final vent location in the exercise, and that the overall process worked “really, really well”.
Concern has been expressed by scientist participants over whether the tying of response actions to VALs is appropriate. The danger of this is seen to be that end-user actions may not be appropriate at the same intensity of activity prompting a VAL change. Instead, it is thought that end-users should carefully consider the actions they need to take, including lead-in times, and only then look for appropriate levels of volcanic activity which might signal this point, whilst keeping the plans flexible. As the current VAL system is predominantly not used in a predictive sense (at least by the scientists), the level is not raised until the phenomena
described in that level have actually occurred. Maintaining flexibility to allow pre-event actions to take place is likely to be beneficial for end-users. The inclusion of response advice from scientists in future VAL systems was suggested by a number of participants (discussed further in section 4.6.4), which would impact end-users’ actions. This may cause the association between the end-users’ actions and the VAL system to be too inflexible and result in inappropriate responses in some situations.
The use of the VAL system by end-users does have an influence on scientific decision-making. This is discussed further in section 4.5.7.1.
The relationship between end-users and the VAL system is an important element of the review of the current VAL system, as well as establishing effective scientific information
communication overall. By obtaining input from a range of end-users from many industries and organisations in this research, their opinions on how the content and structure can be improved are incorporated into the review below. Many aspects of the VAL review highlight factors that further influence the end-users’ use of the VAL system. In particular, influencing factors associated with the structure include the number of levels overall, the number of levels which relate to unrest vs. eruption, and its use as a linear, equal-interval scale, as these
Chapter 4 An exploratory investigation of New Zealand’s VAL system
110
content that influence end-user actions include whether the system is predictive or not, and whether it contains response advice. Section 4.6.3 describes the potential for incorporation of forecasting information into the future VAL system, and section 4.6.4 describes response advice inclusion.
Having established the relationship between end-users and the VAL system in this section, the next section involves an investigation of the content and structure of the VAL table itself.