Fact sheet
Community of Oshawa (CMA), Ontario
In 2014, information on the emergency preparedness of people living in the Census Metropolitan AreaNote 1 of Oshawa 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 Oshawa, 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
- Winter storms (including blizzards, ice storms and extreme cold) (94%), extended power outages lasting 24 hours or longer (84%) and industrial or transportation accidents (63%) were named by residents of Oshawa as the most likely events to occur within their community.
- Residents most commonly anticipated turning to television news as an initial source for help and information if they were faced with an act of terrorism or terrorist threat (43%), an industrial or transportation accident (36%) or in the event of a contamination or shortage of water or food (27%). Radio news was the anticipated source of information for a weather-related emergency or natural disaster (33%) (Table 1.1).
- Residents also stated that hospitals, clinics, doctors and other medical professionals were the most commonly anticipated sources of initial help and information in the event of an outbreak of a serious or life-threatening disease (43%), while police would be their first source of help in the event of rioting or civil unrest (40%Note E: Use with caution). In the event of an extended power outage, residents would commonly first turn to their utility company (28%).
Prior lifetime experience with a major emergency or disasterNote 5
- Nearly six in ten (59%) Oshawa residents have faced a major emergency or disaster in Canada in a community they were living in at the time of the event, a large majority (71%) of whom reported experiencing severe disruptions to their daily activities as a result of the event.
- Extended power outages lasting 24 hours or longer (65%) and winter storms which include blizzards and ice storms (38%) were the most commonly experienced emergencies or disasters by residents.
- The most common types of disruption to daily activities endured by residents who had experienced major emergencies or disasters included the inability to use electrical appliances (91%) and the inability to heat or cool their home (73%). In addition, approximately six in ten residents reported that they were unable to prepare hot meals at home (62%) and had to boil drinking water or use bottled water (59%). More severe disruptions experienced were home evacuations experienced by about one-quarter (26%Note E: Use with caution) of people faced with an emergency, as well as the inability to communicate outside of the home (17%Note E: Use with caution) or use roads or transportation within the community (15%Note E: Use with caution).
- The majority (91%) of Oshawa residents who experienced an emergency or disaster were able to resume their daily activities within one week of the event; two-thirds (67%) were able to resume their daily activities in two days or less.
- Almost half (47%) of residents who had experienced an emergency or disaster received help during or immediately following the event, most commonly from a family member (50%).
- Just over one-quarter (27%) of residents of Oshawa 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.
Emergency planning, precautionary and fire safety behaviours
- Seven out of ten (71%) people residing in Oshawa lived in households that were engaged in at least two emergency planning activities,Note 6 almost one-half (45%) lived in households with three or four such activities (Table 1.2). Almost one in ten (8%Note E: Use with caution) people lived in a household that had not participated in any emergency planning activities.
- About half (51%) lived in a household with at least two precautionary measuresNote 7 taken in case of an emergency, but less than one-quarter (22%) lived in a household with three or four such measures. One in ten (10%) people lived in a household with no precautionary measures in place.
- The vast majority (99%) of residents reported living in a household with a working smoke detector, and seven out of ten (71%) reported living in a household with a working fire extinguisher (Table 1.3). A large majority (89%) of Oshawa’s residents stated that they had a working carbon monoxide detector in their household, significantly higher than the national proportion (60%). As a result, the majority (63%) of residents in Oshawa stated that they had implemented all three fire safety measures within their households, significantly more than in Ontario (53%) and Canada’s 10 provinces overall (42%).Note 8
- While Oshawa residents were more likely to have all three fire safety measures in place than those in Ontario and Canada, they were less prepared in other ways. Oshawa residents were more likely than Canadians overall to have a wind-up or battery-operated radio (65% versus 58%), but they were less likely to have a back-up generator (13% versus 23%) or a household emergency supply kit (38% versus 47%).
Social networks and sense of belonging
- Close to half (48%) of Oshawa residents had a strong sense of belongingNote 9 to their community.
- The vast majority (91%) of residents described the neighbourhood they lived in as a place where neighbours generally help each other.Note 10 Of those who did not describe their neighbourhood this way, most (78%) still described it as a place where neighbours would help each other in an emergency.Note 11
- Many individuals in Oshawa 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 (69%), for help if physically injured (66%) as well as in case of a home evacuation (61%). About three in ten (29%) residents had a large support network if financial help was needed. However, one in ten (10%) reported that they had no one to turn to for financial help.Note 12
- High levels of sense of belonging, self-efficacy, neighbourhood trust and social support, as well involvement in political activities, 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 | 33 |
News- Television | 28 |
News- Internet | 25 |
Extended power outages | |
Utility company | 28 |
News- Radio | 25 |
Family | 15Note E: Use with caution |
Outbreak of serious or life-threatening disease | |
Hospital, clinic, doctor or other medical professional | 43 |
News- Television | 29 |
News- Radio | 25 |
Industrial or transportation accident | |
News- Television | 36 |
News- Radio | 33 |
News- Internet | 21 |
Contamination or shortage of water or foodTable 1.1, Note 1 | |
News- Television | 27 |
Local government | 24 |
News- Radio | 20 |
Act of terrorism or terrorist threat | |
News- Television | 43 |
News- Radio | 35 |
Police/law enforcement | 24Note E: Use with caution |
Rioting or civil unrest | |
Police/law enforcement | 40Note E: Use with caution |
News- Radio | 29Note E: Use with caution |
News- Television | 25Note 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 | Oshawa | Ontario | Canada |
---|---|---|---|
percent | |||
Number of emergency planning activities | |||
None | 8Note E: Use with caution | 8 | 8 |
1 activity | 19 | 16 | 17 |
2 activities | 26 | 25 | 25 |
3 activities | 28 | 28 | 27 |
4 activities | 17 | 21 | 19 |
Number of precautionary measures | |||
None | 10Table 1.2, Note *** | 15 | 16 |
1 measure | 36Table 1.2, Note *** | 28 | 27 |
2 measures | 29 | 29 | 28 |
3 measures | 17 | 20 | 20 |
4 measures | 5Note E: Use with cautionTable 1.2, Note ** | 6 | 7 |
Number of fire safety measuresTable 1.2, Note 1 | |||
None | Note F: too unreliable to be published | Note F: too unreliable to be published | 1 |
1 measure | 3Note E: Use with cautionTable 1.2, Note *** | 7 | 14 |
2 measures | 31Table 1.2, Note ** | 35 | 38 |
3 measures | 63Table 1.2, Note *** | 53 | 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: | Oshawa | Ontario | Canada |
---|---|---|---|
percent | |||
Emergency planning activities | |||
Emergency exit plan | 64 | 63 | 60 |
Exit plan has been practised/reviewed in last 12 monthsTable 1.3, Note 1 | 48 | 47 | 46 |
Designated meeting place for household membersTable 1.3, Note 2 | 33 | 30 | 33 |
Contact plan for household membersTable 1.3, Note 2 | 57 | 57 | 55 |
Household emergency supply kit | 38Table 1.3, Note *** | 47 | 47 |
Vehicle emergency supply kitTable 1.3, Note 3 | 61 | 62 | 59 |
Extra copies of important documents | 51 | 56 | 53 |
List of emergency contact numbers | 74Table 1.3, Note ** | 71 | 69 |
Plan for meeting special health needsTable 1.3, Note 4 | 68 | 61 | 62 |
Precautionary measures | |||
Wind-up or battery-operated radio | 65Table 1.3, Note ** | 59 | 58 |
Alternate heat source | 47 | 46 | 48 |
Back-up generator | 13Table 1.3, Note *** | 20 | 23 |
Alternate water source | 43 | 44 | 43 |
OtherTable 1.3, Note 5 | 18 | 22 | 21 |
Fire safety measures | |||
Working smoke detector | 99 | 99 | 98 |
Working carbon monoxide detector | 89Table 1.3, Note *** | 80 | 60 |
Working fire extinguisher | 71Table 1.3, Note * | 64 | 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 † | 48 | 24 | 66 |
No | 38Note E: Use with caution | 16Note E: Use with caution | 50Table 1.4, Note * |
High level of civic engagementTable 1.4, Note 2 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 47 | 24 | 66 |
No | 43 | 20Note E: Use with caution | 57 |
High level of social supportTable 1.4, Note 3 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 56 | 29Note E: Use with caution | 78 |
No | 43 | 20 | 59Table 1.4, Note * |
Strong sense of belonging to communityTable 1.4, Note 4 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 46 | 23 | 71 |
No | 46 | 22Note E: Use with caution | 57Table 1.4, Note * |
High neighbourhood trustTable 1.4, Note 5 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 57 | 36 | 73 |
No | 41Table 1.4, Note * | 16Table 1.4, Note * | 59Table 1.4, Note * |
High level of self-efficacyTable 1.4, Note 6 | |||
YesTable 1.4, Note † | 53 | 24 | 67 |
No | 40Table 1.4, Note * | 22Note E: Use with caution | 61 |
E use with caution
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey of Emergency Preparedness and Resilience in Canada, 2014. |
Notes
E use with caution
- Date modified: