YELLOW EVACUATION WARNING (that's a new one!)

In 2023, my research team conducted an investigation into the language used in wildfire messages issued as Wireless Emergency Alerts. This paper, titled "Ember Alerts: Assessing wireless emergency alert messages in wildfires using the warning response model" (Kuligowski, Waugh, Sutton, and Cova) helped to highlight the inconsistent evacuation trigger language found throughout the U.S. for wildfire events.

Most prevalent, at just under 50%, was the use of evacuation warning and evacuation order, a practice found in California and followed in several other states. We also found the use of Levels - level 1, level 2, level 3 and the use of Ready, Set, Go presented as "status" - ready status, set status, go status. Interestingly, some jurisdictions combine the levels with statuses, such as "Level 2, Set Status", doubling up on the jargon.

Since the time of publication, I've also see the doubled up jargon with the additional use of color coding. It's like a trifecta of insider information, such as when you find a social media post in red that says "Level 3, Go status."

Having read a bit about the use of colors to communicate about threats and hazards, I found that red is commonly treated as "bad" in the U.S. culture and represents a status of extreme danger. In fact, when the NWS selected a magenta type of color to represent an emergency category for tornado and flood, it was found to be very confusing the message viewers who didn't understand what it meant.

Here's another view on colors. If we view red in a stop light pattern, it means "stop." Green represents "go" and yellow means "caution." However, this more commonly used color scheme (we see it every single time we drive on a road) is NOT the color scheme for hazards.

Red can mean "bad" AND "stop."

Yellow can mean "caution" and "prepare."

Green can mean "good" and "go."

But the trifecta mentioned above for the Level 3, Go status in red meant "go." I suppose that Level 1, Ready status would be green (don't go) and Level 2, Set status would be yellow (caution). Phew. That's a lot.

A 360-character WEA (top) and a 90-character WEA (bottom)

This brings us to today's WEA, which presents a brand new approach to evacuation messaging that wasn't included in the Ember Alerts paper.

Here we see the use of color combined with evacuation warning. In the 360-character message, we find a fairly complete message, where the words YELLOW EVACUATION WARNING, presented in CAPS, are defined in plain language at the bottom of the message. A yellow evacuation warning means to prepare for a possible evacuation. Missing from this message is the name of the type of hazard for which people should prepare and an element of time.

What becomes more confusing is the message issued for those poor people who can only receive a 90-character WEA. Their message says YELLOW EVACUATION WARNING and that's the end of the alert. There is no explanation about the threat, the location, the guidance, the time, or the message source. It is simply a jargon approach to to communicate. And, I'd venture a guess that it was confusing to people who didn't know what it meant, who it was from, and what they were to do in response to the message.

Investigating a bit further, I found that this community also issues RED EVACUATION ORDER messages. Red evacuation order messages are orders to leave immediately. Order messages are a bit more straight forward and researchers have found that people generally understand ORDER much better than WARNING when it is associated with evacuation.

But the use of colors... I do wonder what it contributes to public understanding of the threat and the risk. Does naming a color in an alert help? Do people associate the colors correctly? I honestly don't know if it helps in a long message, but in a short message like the one above, when so much information is already missing, I can't help but think that it would add some confusion.

If you're wondering what to do... the best research informed approach is to use plain language. Eliminate the operational and technical jargon that requires some additional knowledge to interpret the meaning of the message. Instead of adding a plain language definition to explain the jargon, leave it out to begin with.

Want to read more about wildfire message? Start with this article published in the NFPA Journal called Lost in Translation by Sutton, Walpole, and Olson. We lay out the problems and the solutions - no colors involved.