Fact sheet
Community of Nanaimo (CA), British Columbia
In 2014, information on the emergency preparedness of people living in the Census AgglomerationNote 1 of Nanaimo was collected through the Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada (SEPR).Note 2 This fact sheet presents information on the risk awareness and level of emergency preparedness of the residents of Nanaimo, which could help improve the understanding of community resilience in the event of an emergency.Note 3Note 4
Risk awareness and anticipated sources of help in an emergency or disaster
- Earthquakes (88%), wildfires (67%) and extended power outages lasting 24 hours or longer (62%) were named by residents of Nanaimo as the events most likely to occur in their community.
- Residents most commonly reported that they would anticipate turning to a hospital, clinic, doctor or other medical professional in the event of an outbreak of a serious or life-threatening disease (58%), to their utility company in the event of an extended power outage (55%), and to local government in the event of a contamination or shortage of water or food (40%) (Table 1.1).
- Residents also stated that they would anticipate turning to news on the radio if they faced a weather-related emergency or natural disaster (39%) or an industrial or transportation accident (24%Note E: Use with caution). In addition to police or law enforcement (25%Note E: Use with caution), news on the radio (25%Note E: Use with caution) was also the most commonly anticipated source of initial help and information in the event of rioting or civil unrest. In the event of an act of terrorism or terrorist threat, residents commonly anticipated turning to news on the Internet (29%Note E: Use with caution).
Prior lifetime experience with a major emergency or disasterNote 5
- One in five (21%) Nanaimo residents have faced a major emergency or disaster in Canada in a community they were living in at the time of the event, with six in ten (58%) reporting that they had experienced severe disruptions to their daily activities as a result of the event.
- The most common types of disruption to daily activities endured by residents who had experienced major emergencies or disasters included an inability to use electrical appliances at home (51%Note E: Use with caution), missing an appointment or planned activity (45%Note E: Use with caution) and missing work or school (42%Note E: Use with caution). A more severe disruption experienced was an inability to use roads or transportation in the community (31%Note E: Use with caution).
- Most (83%) residents who experienced an emergency or disaster were able to resume their daily activities within one week of the event; one in three (32%Note E: Use with caution) of whom were able to resume activities within three to five days.
- Seven in ten (71%) residents who had experienced an emergency or disaster received help during or immediately following the event.
- Three in ten (31%Note E: Use with caution) residents of Nanaimo who experienced a major emergency or disaster in Canada in a community where they were living at the time of the event and which was significant enough to disrupt their regular daily routine also endured a loss of property or financial impact.Note 6
Emergency planning, precautionary and fire safety behaviours
- Eight in ten (79%) people residing in Nanaimo lived in households that were engaged in at least two emergency planning activities,Note 7 and more than half (55%) lived in households with three or four such activities (Table 1.2).
- Nearly two-thirds (63%) lived in a household with at least two precautionary measuresNote 8 taken in case of an emergency, and one-third (32%) lived in a household with three or four such measures. More than one in ten (13%Note E: Use with caution) people lived in a household with no precautionary measures in place.
- Almost all (96%) residents reported living in a household with a working smoke detector, and nearly three-quarters (73%) reported living in a household with a working fire extinguisher (Table 1.3). Nearly one-half (48%) of residents stated that they had a working carbon monoxide detector in their household. Four in ten (39%) residents of Nanaimo stated that they had implemented all three fire safety measures in their household.
- For the most part, the number of emergency planning activities, fire safety and precautionary measures taken by residents of Nanaimo did not differ significantly from residents in British Columbia and Canada’s 10 provinces overall.Note 9
- There were a few significant differences in the types of activities and measures in place by residents of Nanaimo when compared to residents of Canada in general, with Nanaimo residents almost always being more prepared. For example, Nanaimo residents were more likely to have a working fire extinguisher (73%), an emergency exit plan (71%), a household emergency supply kit (61%), an alternate water source (52%) and a working carbon monoxide detector (48%) than Canadians overall.
Social networks and sense of belonging
- Over half (55%) of residents of Nanaimo had a strong sense of belongingNote 10 to their community.Note 11
- Close to nine in ten (87%) residents described the neighbourhood they lived in as a place where neighbours generally help each other.Note 12 Of those who did not describe their neighbourhood this way, most (86%) still described it as a place where neighbours would help each other in an emergency.Note 13
- Many individuals had a large network of support in the event of an emergency or disaster, with more than five people to turn to for emotional support (58%),Note 14 for help if physically injured (48%)Note 15 and in the event of a home evacuation (48%).Note 16 One-quarter (24%) of residents had a large support network if financial help was needed, and more than one in ten (13%) residents reported that they had no one to turn to for financial help.Note 17
- High levels of social support, self-efficacy and neighbourhood trust were sometimes associated with a higher level of emergency preparedness (Table 1.4).
Data tables
Most common sources of initial help and information by type of emergency or disaster | percent |
---|---|
Weather-related emergency or natural disaster | |
News- Radio | 39 |
News- Television | 15 |
Family | 14Note E: Use with caution |
Extended power outagesTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
Utility company | 55 |
News- Radio | 13Note E: Use with caution |
Outbreak of serious or life-threatening disease | |
Hospital, clinic, doctor or other medical professional | 58 |
News- Radio | 16Note E: Use with caution |
News- Internet | 15Note E: Use with caution |
Industrial or transportation accidentTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
News- Radio | 24Note E: Use with caution |
News- Television | 19Note E: Use with caution |
News- Internet | 19Note E: Use with caution |
Contamination or shortage of water or foodTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
Local government | 40 |
News- Radio | 20Note E: Use with caution |
News- Internet | 14Note E: Use with caution |
Act of terrorism or terrorist threatTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
News- Internet | 29Note E: Use with caution |
News- Radio | 27Note E: Use with caution |
News- Television | 25Note E: Use with caution |
Rioting or civil unrest | |
News- Radio | 25Note E: Use with caution |
Police/law enforcement | 25Note E: Use with caution |
News- Television | 24Note E: Use with caution |
E use with caution
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Number of planning activities, fire safety and precautionary measures taken by residents | Nanaimo | British Columbia | Canada |
---|---|---|---|
percent | |||
Number of emergency planning activities | |||
None | Note F: too unreliable to be published | 6 | 8 |
1 activity | 13 | 15 | 17 |
2 activities | 24 | 22 | 25 |
3 activities | 30 | 29 | 27 |
4 activities | 25 | 25 | 19 |
Number of precautionary measures | |||
None | 13Note E: Use with caution | 13 | 16 |
1 measure | 21Table 1.2, Note ** | 24 | 27 |
2 measures | 31 | 27 | 28 |
3 measures | 25 | 23 | 20 |
4 measures | 7Note E: Use with caution | 8 | 7 |
Number of fire safety measuresTable 1.2, Note 1Table 1.2, Note 2 | |||
None | Note F: too unreliable to be published | 1Note E: Use with caution | 1 |
1 measure | 15Note E: Use with caution | 14 | 14 |
2 measures | 41 | 40 | 38 |
3 measures | 39 | 38 | 42 |
E use with caution F too unreliable to be published
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Residents whose households were involved in the following: | Nanaimo | British Columbia | Canada |
---|---|---|---|
percent | |||
Emergency planning activities | |||
Emergency exit plan | 71Table 1.3, Note ** | 71 | 60 |
Exit plan has been practised/reviewed in last 12 monthsTable 1.3, Note 1 | 47 | 49 | 46 |
Designated meeting place for household membersTable 1.3, Note 2 | 38 | 38 | 33 |
Contact plan for household membersTable 1.3, Note 2 | 53 | 54 | 55 |
Household emergency supply kit | 61Table 1.3, Note ** | 55 | 47 |
Vehicle emergency supply kitTable 1.3, Note 3 | 58 | 58 | 59 |
Extra copies of important documents | 51 | 55 | 53 |
List of emergency contact numbers | 69 | 68 | 69 |
Plan for meeting special health needsTable 1.3, Note 4 | 55 | 61 | 62 |
Precautionary measures | |||
Wind-up or battery-operated radio | 62 | 59 | 58 |
Alternate heat source | 54 | 55 | 48 |
Back-up generator | 21 | 22 | 23 |
Alternate water source | 52Table 1.3, Note ** | 48 | 43 |
OtherTable 1.3, Note 5 | 22 | 21 | 21 |
Fire safety measures | |||
Working smoke detector | 96 | 95 | 98 |
Working carbon monoxide detectorTable 1.3, Note 6 | 48Table 1.3, Note ** | 52 | 60 |
Working fire extinguisher | 73Table 1.3, Note ** | 69 | 66 |
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Social and political involvement | Percentage of residents who had high or moderately high levels of... | ||
---|---|---|---|
Planning activities | Precautionary measures | Fire safety measures | |
percent | |||
Engagement in political activitiesTable 1.4, Note 1 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 56 | 33 | 40 |
NoTable 1.4, Note 7 | 56Note E: Use with caution | Note F: too unreliable to be published | Note F: too unreliable to be published |
High level of civic engagementTable 1.4, Note 2 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 57 | 35 | 40 |
No | 55 | 31Note E: Use with caution | 39Note E: Use with caution |
High level of social supportTable 1.4, Note 3 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 72 | 49Note E: Use with caution | 42Note E: Use with caution |
No | 53Table 1.4, Note * | 29Table 1.4, Note * | 37 |
Strong sense of belonging to communityTable 1.4, Note 4 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 58 | 37 | 42 |
No | 56 | 29Note E: Use with caution | 35 |
High neighbourhood trustTable 1.4, Note 5 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 60 | 34 | 46 |
No | 57 | 35 | 32Table 1.4, Note * |
High level of self-efficacyTable 1.4, Note 6 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 61 | 35 | 47 |
No | 53 | 33 | 30Table 1.4, Note * |
E use with caution F too unreliable to be published
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Notes
E use with caution
- Date modified: