Abstract
Wildland-urban interface (WUI) communities across the globe face an escalating threat from catastrophic wildfires, placing unprecedented operational demands on emergency management agencies and law enforcement. This study presents a comparative empirical evaluation of civilian evacuation compliance and community resilience dynamics during major wildfire events in California (United States) and southeastern Australia (New South Wales and Victoria). Utilizing a mixed-methods design incorporating cross-sectional survey data (N = 1,240) and semi-structured stakeholder interviews (N = 36) with emergency responders and police officials, the investigation evaluates how distinct governance models—coercive, law-enforcement-mandated evacuations in California versus the community-oriented "shared responsibility" paradigm in Australia—influence evacuation timing, risk perception, and public safety outcomes. Structural equation modeling reveals that while perceived legal authority and police patrols drive compliance velocity in California, procedural justice and trust in decentralized rural fire services serve as stronger predictors of early departure in Australia. In both cohorts, household pet logistics, structural defense intentions, and conflicting official alerts constituted primary impediments to timely egress. The findings demonstrate that heavy reliance on mandatory enforcement without antecedent community engagement yields compliance friction and logistical bottlenecks. We outline operational frameworks for law enforcement and public safety administrators to harmonize tactical evacuation protocols with community resilience-building initiatives.
