Official Statistics

UK Public Survey of Risk Perception, Resilience and Preparedness 2025: Headline Findings

Published 23 July 2025

Contact

General enquiries: Lorna Riddle: Email: preparedness.survey@cabinetoffice.gov.uk

Media enquiries: Cabinet Office Press office

User feedback survey: Smart Survey

Introduction

The UK Public Survey of Risk Perception, Resilience and Preparedness is a nationally representative survey of adults in the UK, carried out in order to understand what people think about different types of emergencies, and what steps – if any – they have taken to prepare for them. It is conducted to inform future public communications on preparing for emergencies. These are the headline findings from the first survey, conducted in 2025.

The 2025 survey was funded by the Cabinet Office and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The Behavioural Science and Insights Unit at the UK Health Security Agency assisted with survey design and quality assurance.

This publication provides the headline findings from the survey, which ran between 11th March to 8th April 2025. The sample size for the 2025 survey was 10,536 adults (age 18+).

Throughout this report we refer to emergencies and disasters. For the purposes of this survey, emergency/disaster was defined to respondents as ‘any large-scale incident that could have significant impacts on health, life, property, or environment.’ Respondents were encouraged to think in terms of events that could impact a number of people within an area, rather than an incident occurring to only one individual.

Alongside this publication, readers can access:

• This year’s questionnaire
• Data tables containing summary statistics for the UK overall, as well as for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
• The technical report for this survey
• Pre-release access list

The purpose of this data release is to present high-level findings, not detailed statistical analysis of this data. Further analysis will be carried out by the Behavioural Science and Insights Unit at the UK Health Security Agency with an additional report published on GOV.UK in due course.

Method overview

The UK Public Survey of Risk Perception, Resilience and Preparedness 2025 was conducted using a sample of 10,536 UK adults (age 18+) recruited from online panels. Recruiting from online panels has many advantages, including efficiency and the reduction of social desirability bias, but also some limitations, as certain demographics are not equally represented on panels as they are in the general UK population.

In order to ensure the sample recruited was as representative as possible of the population in each of the UK’s constituent nations, targets and quotas were set to ensure the characteristics of the sample match those of the adult population in each nation. First, the sample was designed to ensure each constituent nation of the UK had sufficient sample size for in-depth analysis of the data. As such targets were set for people in each nation, with the following numbers recruited:

• England: 6,727
• Wales: 1,054
• Scotland: 1,671
• Northern Ireland: 1,084

Quotas were then applied on each of the following demographics, by nation, to ensure the samples recruited was representative of the relevant population on these metrics:

• Age and gender
• Region
• Ethnicity
• Social grade
• Religion or religion brought up in (Northern Ireland only)^{[footnote 1]}

All percentages presented here have been weighted to be representative of the UK population and then rounded to the nearest whole number. As a result of rounding, the totals of more than one category added together (e.g. strongly agree and agree) reported in the text above charts may sometimes differ from the sum of their component percentagesby +/- 1 percentage point. Unweighted sample sizes are shown in figure and data notes referred to as ‘n =’.

More information on the sample and weightings can be found in the Technical Report.

At the beginning of the survey, respondents were informed as to the purpose of the data collection. At the end of the survey, they were provided with URL links to both official information on how to prepare for emergencies, and to support services.

Risk perception

Please be aware that all percentages reported below are rounded to the nearest whole number. As figures are rounded separately, totals may not add up to 100%, and the sum of multiple categories may differ from the percentages reported in the text above the charts by +/- 1 percentage point. If you wish to report additional totals that are not included in the text of this report, please use the counts in the data tables. We would advise against doing your own calculations using the percentages in the tables or figures, as due to rounding, the true sum of any two percentages may differ from the total obtained through adding the percentages together.

Anticipated changes to number of emergencies/disasters in the UK

The majority (66%) of survey respondents thought that the number of emergencies/disasters would increase in the next 10 years, with 19% saying the number would increase a lot and 47% saying the number would increase a little.

7% stated that the number of emergencies would decrease and 4% selected that they did not know.

Figure 1.1: Anticipated changes to the number of emergencies/disasters in the UK in the next 10 years (showing % who selected each option)(see table 1 (ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q1. Do you think the number of emergencies/disasters in the UK will increase or decrease, or stay roughly the same, in the next 10 years?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

Perceived likelihood of different types of emergencies/disasters

The majority (55%) of survey respondents thought that it was likely or very likely that a storm severe enough to cause disruption to transport or injuries would affect their local area in the next two years. 48% thought their area was likely or very likely to experience extreme cold weather (severe enough to cause health problems / disruption to local transport), 47% thought it was likely or very likely their area would experience a 12-hour power cut, and 42% thought it was likely or very likely that their area would experience extreme hot weather.

Figure 1.2: Perceived likelihood of different types of emergencies/disasters affecting respondents’ local area in the next two years (showing % who selected each option) (see table 2(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q2. How likely or unlikely do you think it is that your local area will be affected by the following in the next 2 years?
• Statements are ordered from highest to lowest based on the compound figure of likely and very likely.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the totals will not always add up to 100%.

Perceived impact of different types of emergencies/disasters

The majority (65%) of survey respondents believed that war would have a large or very large impact on them personally if it were to affect their local area, 55% believed that a large-scale human disease outbreak or pandemic would have a large or very large impact on them, and 52% believed a terrorist attack or cyber attack affecting critical infrastructure would have a large or very large impact on them.

Figure 1.3: Perceived personal impact of different types of emergencies/disasters if they did affect respondents’ local area (showing % who selected each option) (see table 20(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q3. If the following were to affect your local area, how much of an impact, if any, do you think this would have on you? These could be impacts to your health or impacts to your ability to conduct your normal activities.
• Statements are ordered from highest to lowest based on the compound figure of large impact and very large impact.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the totals will not always add up to 100%

Perceptions of preparedness and resilience

Perceptions related to preparedness actions

The majority (73%) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that there were effective actions that people can take to prepare for emergencies/disasters, whereas 7% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement.

The majority (69%) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that it was important to be prepared for emergencies/disasters that are unlikely to happen, whereas 8% disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement.

The majority (62%) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they were capable of taking action to prepare for emergencies/disasters that might affect their local area, whereas 12% disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement.

Figure 2.1 Level of agreement with each of the following statements (showing % who selected each option) (see table 38(ODT, 1,013KB))

“There are effective actions that people can take to prepare for emergencies/disasters”

“It is important to be prepared for emergencies/disasters that are unlikely to happen”

“I am capable of taking action to prepare for emergencies/disasters that might affect my local area”

Figure note:

• Source: Q4. How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

Perceptions related to preparedness at different levels of society

13% of survey respondents felt that their household was largely or totally prepared for an emergency/disaster and 32% reported feeling moderately prepared. This compares to 51% who felt they were slightly or not at all prepared for an emergency/disaster and 3% who said they did not know.  

Figure 2.2. How prepared respondents felt their households were for an emergency/disaster (showing % who selected each option) (see table 44(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q5. How prepared, if it all, do you feel your household is for an emergency/disaster? By ‘your household’ we mean one person living alone or a group of people (not necessarily related) living at your address who share cooking facilities with you and also share a living room or sitting room or dining area.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• While 4% (totally prepared) and 10% (largely prepared) in Figure 2.2 do not add up to 13%, this is due to rounding; 13% is the more accurate number to report when adding up the non-rounded values.

14% of survey respondents felt that the authorities that operate in their local area were largely or totally prepared for an emergency/disaster, and 30% felt authorities were moderately prepared. This compares to 46% who believed that the authorities were slightly or not at all prepared for an emergency/disaster and 10% who said they did not know.

Figure 2.3. How prepared survey respondents felt the authorities that operate in their local area were for an emergency/disaster (showing % who selected each option) (see table 45(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:  

• Source: Q6. How prepared, if at all, do you feel the authorities that operate in your local area are for an emergency/disaster? By authorities we mean your local council, emergency services and utility providers (water/gas/electric companies).
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• While 3% (totally prepared) and 10% (largely prepared) in Figure 2.3 do not add up to 14%, this is due to rounding; 14% is the more accurate number to report when adding up the non-rounded values.
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q6 add up to 99%

10% of respondents felt that their local community, defined as ‘people who live 15-20mins walk away from their house’, was largely or totally prepared for an emergency/disaster and 26% felt their community was moderately prepared. This compares to 54% who believed their local community was slightly or not at all prepared and 10% who said they did not know.

Figure 2.4. How prepared respondents felt that their local community was for an emergency/disaster (showing % who selected each option) (see table 46(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q7. How prepared, if at all, do you feel your local community is for an emergency/disaster? By local community we mean the people who live within a 15-20 minute walk of your house.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

15% of respondents felt that the UK as a whole was largely or totally prepared for an emergency and 30% felt the UK was moderately prepared. This compared to 51% who felt the UK as a whole was slightly or not at all prepared for an emergency/disaster and 5% who said they did not know.

Figure 2.5. How prepared respondents felt that the UK as a whole was for an emergency/disaster (showing % who selected each option) (see table 47(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q8. How prepared, if at all, do you feel the UK as a whole is for an emergency/disaster?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q8 add up to 101%

Perceptions around responsibility for preparing for emergencies/disasters

The majority (86%) of respondents said that the UK Government should have full or a large amount of responsibility for preparing for emergencies/disasters that could affect their local area. This compared to 79% who thought the emergency services should and 69% who said utilities providers should have full or a large amount of responsibility.

30% of respondents thought they themselves should have a full or large amount of responsibility for preparing for emergencies/disasters that could affect their local area. 

82% of survey respondents from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland thought that devolved governments should have full or a large amount of responsibility for preparing from emergencies/disasters.

Figure 2.6: How much responsibility respondents thought different people/organisations should have for preparing for emergencies/disasters (showing % who selected each option) (see table 48(ODT, 1,013KB))

*Option only shown to respondents who live in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland (see figure note below)

**Option only shown to respondents who live in England (see figure note below)

***Option only shown to respondents who live with at least one other person (see figure note below)

These options are presented at the bottom of chart because they cannot be directly compared with the other options which were seen by the full sample.

Figure note:

• Source: Q9. How much responsibility, if any, do you think each of the following should have for preparing for emergencies/disasters that could affect your local area?
• Data labels for 1% are not included due to limited space. Those responses selected by 1% of respondents are as follows:
  • Devolved government: A small amount of responsibility.
  • Emergency services: Don’t know.
  • UK Government: No responsibility.
  • UK Government: Don’t know.
• Some response options were only shown to certain respondents if they were applicable to their circumstances. This chart uses the following bases:
  • All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
  • Those who live in England (n=6,727).
  • Those who live in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland (n=3,809).
  • Those that have at least one other person living with them in their household (n=8,178).
• While, for example, 58% (UK government should have full responsibility) and 27% (UK government should have a large amount of responsibility) in Figure 2.6 do not add up to 86%, this is due to rounding; 86% is the more accurate number to report when adding up the non-rounded values. This is true of all other instances where percentages reported in the text differ from those in the chart by +/-1 percentage point. These will also not always add up to 100%.

Perceived household resilience

In the event of a power cut that also impacted their gas and water supply, 32% of survey respondents thought that they would only be able to meet the basic needs of themselves and their household for 1 day or less, before needing supplies or outside help. This compares to 39% who thought they could meet the basic needs of their household for 2-3 days and 10% who thought they could meet their basic needs for 6 days or more.

Figure 2.7: How long respondents thought they would be able to meet the basic needs of their household before needing supplies or outside help, in the event of a power cut that also impacted their gas and water supply (showing % who selected each option) (see table 64(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q10. Thinking about a power cut that also impacts your gas and water supply… For how long do you think you would be able to meet the basic needs of you and your household before needing supplies or outside help (such as food, water or medical support from friends/family or the authorities)?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q10 add up to 99%.

Information and communication

Information sources

19% of survey respondents recalled having seen or heard information or advice in the last 12 months about actions they could take to be more prepared for emergencies or disasters that might occur in the UK. This compares to 75% who said they had not seen or heard advice of this kind in the last 12 months and 6% who selected that they did not know.

Data note:

• Source: Q11. Have you seen or heard any information or advice in the last 12 months about actions you can take to be more prepared for emergencies or disasters that might occur in the UK? (Please think about content that is specific to the UK rather than anything you might have seen about emergencies or disasters abroad).
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

Of the respondents who reported they had seen or heard information or advice on emergency preparedness in the last 12 months, 39% reported the source being social media. 30% reported this being on a UK Government website and 29% reported having seen or heard it through traditional media, for example on TV, on the radio or by reading it in a newspaper.

Figure 3.1: Where respondents reported having seen information or advice on how to prepare for emergencies encountered it (showing % who selected each option) (see table 66)

*Option only shown to respondents who have seen / heard emergency information or advice in the last 12 months and who own a mobile phone

Figure note:

• Source: Q12. Where did you see or hear this information?
• Some response options were only shown to certain respondents if they were applicable to their circumstances. This chart uses the following bases:
  • Those who have seen / heard emergency information or advice in the last 12 months (n=2,086).
  • Those who have seen / heard emergency information or advice in the last 12 months and who own a mobile phone (n=2,076).

Of the respondents who reported having seen or heard information about or advice on how to prepare for emergencies in the last 12 months, 31% said this was about extreme cold weather or storms. 30% who saw information or advice reported that it was related to power cuts, 28% reported it being about flooding and 27% said it was about various types of emergencies.

Figure 3.2: The type of emergency the information or advice seen by respondents was about (showing % who selected each option) (see table 67(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q13. Thinking about the information you saw or heard on preparing for emergencies/disasters in the UK… What type of emergency/disaster was it about?
• Base: Those who have seen / heard emergency information or advice in the last 12 months (n=2,086).

The majority (63%) of survey respondents who had seen or heard information about or advice on how to prepare for emergencies in the last 12 months, and who recalled where they saw it, reported acting on the information or advice. This compares to 31% who stated they did not act on the information or advice and 6% who reported that they did not remember their response.

Data note:

• Source: Q14. Did you act on the information or advice? (Meaning did you change your plans or do something or buy something).
• Base: Those who recall where they had seen / heard emergency information or advice (n=2,055).

GOV.UK/Prepare

13% of respondents reported having visited the UK Government ‘Prepare’ website (GOV.UK/Prepare), 82% indicated they had not, and 4% reported not knowing if they had.

Data note:

• Source: Q15. Have you visited the UK Government ‘Prepare’ website (GOV.UK/Prepare)?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536)
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q15 add up to 99%.

Of the survey respondents who reported visiting the UK Government ‘Prepare’ website, 70% indicated that they acted on the information or advice on the website, 26% indicated they did not and 4% reported not remembering if they had.

Data note:

• Source: Q16. Did you act on any of the information or advice on the site? (Meaning did you do something or buy something).
• Base: Those who have visited GOV.UK/Prepare (n=1,362).

Emergency Alerts

The majority (63%) of survey respondents stated that they were aware of the UK Government Emergency Alerts service, 34% indicated they were not aware of the service, and 3% reported that they did not know.

Data note:

• Source: Q17. Are you aware of the UK Government’s Emergency Alerts service (text messages sent to all mobile phones in a specific location when there is a threat to life)?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

Among respondents who had use of a mobile phone, 29% reported that they had received a text message from the service for a real emergency, 65% stated that they had not received a text message from the UK Government Emergency Alerts service for a real emergency and 6% could not recall receiving one.

Data note:

• Source: Q18. In the last 12 months have you received a text message from the UK Government’s Emergency Alerts service (text messages sent to all mobile phones in a specific location when there is a threat to life) that was for a real emergency and not a TEST message?
• Base: Those who had a mobile phone (n=10,454).

Among survey respondents who said they did receive a text from the UK Government Emergency Alerts service for a real emergency, 53% reported acting on the advice, 38% reported that they did not act on the advice and 9% reported not being able to recall if they had.

Data note:

• Source: Q19. Did you act on the advice? (for example, evacuated an area or your home, or took shelter).
• Base: Those who have received an emergency alert service text (n=3,865).

Perceived knowledge and information needs

The majority (56%) of survey respondents considered themselves either not at all informed or somewhat uninformed about plans in the UK to deal with large-scale emergencies/disasters, whereas 22% described themselves as either somewhat or very well informed about these plans.

Figure 3.3 How informed respondents reported being about plans in place in the UK to deal with large-scale emergencies/disasters (showing % who selected each option) (see table 74(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q20. How much do you know about what plans are in place in the UK to deal with large-scale emergencies/disasters? I am…
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q20 add up to 99%.

The majority (84%) of respondents thought it was either very or somewhat important for the government to share information with the public about what plans are in place to deal with large-scale emergencies/disasters, whereas 4% thought it was either not important or not at all important for the government to share this information.

Figure 3.4: How important respondents thought it was for the government to share information with the public about large-scale emergency/disaster plans (showing % who selected each option) (see table 75(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q21. How important, if at all, do you think it is for the government to share information with the public about what plans are in place to deal with large-scale emergencies/disasters?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• While 52% (very important) and 31% (somewhat important) in Figure 3.4 do not add up to 84%, this is due to rounding; 84% is the more accurate number to report when adding up the non-rounded values.
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q21 add up to 99%.

The majority (84%) of survey respondents thought it was either very or somewhat important for the government to provide information on what they can do personally or within their household, to be more prepared for large-scale emergencies/disasters, whereas 5% thought it was either not important or not at all important for the government to provide them with this information.

Figure 3.5 How important respondents thought it was for the government to provide them with information on what they can do to be more prepared for large-scale emergencies/disasters (showing % who selected each option) (see table 76(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q22. How important do you think it is for the government to provide you with information on what you can do personally, or within your household, to be more prepared for large-scale emergencies/disasters?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• While 3% (not important) and 1% (not at all important) in Figure 3.5 do not add up to 5%, this is due to rounding. 5% is the more accurate number when adding up the non-rounded values.
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q22 add up to 99%

Preparedness actions and supplies

Emergency supplies people have at home and preparedness actions undertaken

When asked about emergency/disaster-related items or preparation, 47% of survey respondents reported having some essential items needed for a power cut stored in one place, for example torches, a radio or important phone numbers. 35% of respondents (who had a car) reported keeping some items in their car that they might need if they were stranded. 34% of respondents (who had a mobile phone) reported having emergency contacts or medical information recorded on their mobile phone. 10% of respondents reported having a meeting point agreed with family or friends in case of a situation where they are unable to contact others. 19% reported not having any of the items or undertaking any of the preparations listed in the question.

Figure 4.1 Emergency/disaster-related objects or information that respondents have (showing % who selected each option) (see table 77(ODT, 1,013KB))

*Option only shown to respondents who said they had a car (see figure note below)

**Option only shown to respondents who said they had a mobile phone (see figure note below)

Options with different base sizes are presented at the bottom of chart as they cannot be directly compared with options seen by the full sample.

Figure note:

• Source: Q23. Do you currently have any of the following?
• Some response options were only shown to certain respondents if they were applicable to their circumstances. This chart uses the following bases:
  • All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
  • Those who own a car (n=8,030).
  • Those who own a mobile phone (n=10,454).

The majority (60%) of survey respondents indicated that they were aware of how to turn off one or more of the water, electric or gas supply in their home, and 49% reported protecting one or more of their most important online accounts. 19% respondents reported being signed up for alerts or warnings, 17% reported being a member of a neighbourhood instant messaging group and 7% reported being a member of a community/volunteer group or social club that is active in emergency preparedness, response or recovery.

Figure 4.2: Statements respondents said applied to them (showing % who selected each option) (see table 78(ODT, 1,013KB))

I am currently…

Figure note:

• Source: Q24a. Please select as many of the following statements that apply to you. I am currently…
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

18% of survey respondents said they had completed a first aid course in the last 12 months and 17% reported having had at least one conversation with an adult living outside their household about preparing for an emergency. Out of the respondents who lived with children, 29% reported that they had spoken to their children in the last 12 months about what happens in an emergency or what they should do if they were involved in one.

Figure 4.3: Preparedness activities carried out by respondents in the last 12 months (showing % who selected each option) (see table 79(ODT, 1,013KB))

*Option only shown to respondents with children living in their household (see figure note below)

**Option only shown to respondents who live with at least one other person (see figure note below)

Options with different base sizes are presented at the bottom of chart as they cannot be directly compared with options seen by the full sample.

Figure note:

• Source: Q24b. Have you done any of the following, in the last 12 months?
• Some response options were only shown to certain respondents if they were applicable to their circumstances. This chart uses the following bases:
  • All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
  • Those with children living in their household (n=3,343).
  • Those who have at least one other person living with them in their household (n=8,178).

When asked about specific emergency-related items they might have at home, 77% of respondents reported having a smoke detector at home, 61% reported having some cash (£10 or more per person), 61% said they had spare batteries for a radio or torch and) and 59% said they had a carbon monoxide detector.

57% of respondents reported having a first aid kit or a selection of first aid items, 57% said they had supplies of essential medicine to last at least seven days, and 55% said they had a torch. 24% reported having a battery, solar or wind up FM radio (not including a car or mobile phone radio).

Figure 4.4: Emergency/disaster-related items respondents have at home (showing % who selected each option) (see table 80(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q25. Which of the following items (if any) do you have at home?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

Of those who said they have a smoke detector in their home, 65% reported having tested it in the last month to make sure it worked, whereas 33% indicated that they had not tested it in the last month and 2% said they could not remember if they had.

Data note:

• Source: Q25b. Have you tested any of the smoke detectors in your home to see if they are working, in the last month?
• Base: Those who reported having a smoke detector in their home (n=8,276).

On the topic of emergency supplies, the majority (67%) of survey respondents reported having hand sanitiser at home, 66% said they had non-perishable food (that did not require cooking) that would last their household approximately three days, and 48% reported having non-perishable food that would last approximately seven days.

Figure 4.5: Emergency supplies respondents have at home (showing % who selected each option) (see table 82(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q26. Which of the following items, if any, do you have at home?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

43% of survey respondents reported having no bottled/mineral water in their home, 14% reported having 1-2 litres and 43% reported having 3 litres or more of bottled/mineral water in their home. 14% reported having between 6 and 10 litres of bottled/mineral water in their home.

Figure 4.6: Amount of bottled/mineral water respondents report having in their home (showing % of responses that fall within each of the following litre ranges) (see table 83(ODT, 1,013KB))

NB: There were a small number of very large outliers for this question. It was not possible to verify the accuracy of these responses, but they were deemed plausible. As such, they have not been removed from the data set. The results have been presented as categories rather than the mean number of litres. Due to the possibility the question was misinterpreted by a small number of respondents or difficult to answer, this question will be reviewed in future survey development.

Figure note:

• Source: Q27. How many litres of bottled/mineral water, if any, do you have at home? If you are at home whilst filling in this survey you may be able to check how much you have, but if you are not at home please provide an estimate.
• These numerical ranges are compound figures showing the percentage of respondents who stated they have a number of litres of bottled within the given range.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q27 add up to 101%

Of the small number of respondents who indicated they had a baby under the age of 12 months who needed formula, 44% reported having more than 7 days’ worth of baby formula at home. 30% stated they had 6-7 days’ worth of baby formula at home and 5% reported having less than one day’s worth of baby formula at home. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size for this question.

Figure 4.7: Days’ worth of baby formula respondents with a baby aged less than 12 months reported having in their home (showing % of responses that fall within each of the following ranges) (see table 85(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q29. Approximately how many days’ worth of baby formula do you have at home?
• Base: Those with a baby under the age of 12 months who need formula (n=142).

Barriers to preparedness

27% of survey respondents stated they had been prevented from taking further steps to prepare for emergencies by not having enough money, 25% said they were prevented by not knowing what actions to take and 24% said it was due them not wanting products to go out of date and have to be thrown away. 21% of respondents stated they did not have enough space to store supplies and 18% said they did not want to think about emergencies due to finding it stressful or worrying. 15% said they felt they had taken all the steps they needed to, and 7% indicated that not having enough time was a barrier to undertaking further preparedness actions.

Figure 4.8: Factors that prevent respondents from taking further steps to prepare for an emergency/disaster (showing % who selected each option) (see table 86(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: Q30. Which, if any, of the following might prevent you from taking further steps to prepare for emergencies/disasters?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

Local and communities

Attitudes towards volunteering and community

The majority (71%) of survey respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that they would be willing to volunteer in some way to help their neighbourhood recover from an emergency/disaster, if safe to do so.

The majority (64%) of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that people in their neighbourhood would pull together in an emergency/disaster.

Figure 5.1: Level of agreement with each of the following statements (showing % who selected each option) (see table 87(ODT, 1,013KB))

“If safe to do so, I would be willing to volunteer in some way to help my neighbourhood recover from an emergency/disaster.”

“People in my neighbourhood would pull together in an emergency/disaster.”

Figure note:

• Source: Q31. How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

19% of survey respondents reported knowing of a community group in their area that works on preparing for, responding to, or recovering from emergencies, 70% said they did not know of any such groups and 11% reported not being sure.

Data note:

• Source: Q32. Do you know of any community groups in your area that work on preparing for, responding to or recovery from emergencies? By community groups, we mean people in your local area who come together through a shared interest, identity or work to enhance life in your community, such as faith, social support, or flood warden groups.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

Knowledge of local resilience structures

Across the UK, multi-agency partnerships that focus on ensuring local areas are prepared for emergencies and disasters were established under the Civil Contingencies Act (2004). In England and Wales these are called ‘Local Resilience Forums’ (LRFs), in Scotland they are called ‘Regional or Local Resilience Partnerships’ (RRPs/LRPs) and in Northern Ireland they are ‘Emergency Preparedness Groups’ (EPGs). The data for this item is presented separately below as respondents in each country were asked the question about the groups that were relevant to them.

14% of survey respondents in England and Wales reported knowing a great deal or a bit about LRFs. 18% of respondents in Scotland reported knowing a great deal or a bit about RRPs/LRPs and the same proportion of respondents in Northern Ireland (18%) reported knowing at great deal or a bit about EPGs.  The majority of survey respondents living in each country had not heard of these groups (73% England and Wales, 68% Scotland, 72% Northern Ireland).

Figure 5.2: How much respondents in England and Wales knew about Local Resilience Forums (showing % who selected each option) (see table 93(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure notes:

• Source: LRF. Local Resilience Forums (LRFs) are multi-agency partnerships that plan for emergencies that might affect your local area. They are made up of representatives from local public services, including the emergency services, health services, local authorities and other organisations. Before today, how much did you know about Local Resilience Forums?
• Base: Those who live in England or Wales (n=7,781).
• While 4% (knew a great deal) and 11% (knew a bit) in Figure 5.2 do not add up to 14%, this is due to rounding; 14% is the more accurate number to report when adding up the non-rounded values.
• Due to rounding, the percentages add up to 101%

Figure 5.3: How much respondents in Scotland knew about Regional and Local Resilience Partnerships (showing % who selected each option) (see table 94(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: RRP. Regional and Local Resilience Partnerships (RRPs/LRPs) are multi-agency partnerships that plan for emergencies that might affect your local area. They are made up of representatives from local public services, including the emergency services, health services, local authorities and other organisations. Before today, how much did you know about Regional and Local Resilience Partnerships?
• Base: Those who live in Scotland (n=1,671).

Figure 5.4: How much respondents in Northern Ireland knew about Emergency Preparedness Groups (showing % who selected each option) (see table 95(ODT, 1,013KB))

Additional support needs

People who have specific needs can register with their utilities providers for additional support such as priority in power cuts, bottled water in water outages and receiving bills in an accessible format. This is called a Priority Service Register in England, Scotland and Wales and a Customer Care Register in Northern Ireland.

43% of survey respondents reported that they were aware of Priority Service Registers/Customer Care Registers before the day of the survey, and 57% stated that they were not aware.

NB: Prior to answering the question, survey respondents were shown an information screen which contained a description of the service.

Data note:

• Source: Q33. Before today were you aware of this service?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

30% of survey respondents reported that they were on a Priority Service Register or Customer Care Register, 64% stated that they were not and 6% reported not knowing

Data note:

• Source: Q34. Are you, or is anyone in your household, registered with any utilities companies for additional priority support? This is called a Priority Service Register in England, Scotland and Wales and a Customer Care Register in Northern Ireland.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).

42% of survey respondents reported having a neighbour who they thought could need additional support from others during an emergency. 34% said they did not think they had any neighbours who could need this, 24% did not know if they had neighbours that could need support and 1% selected the option for ‘I do not have any neighbours’.

NB: Support examples provided in the question included giving or lending supplies, shopping for food, passing on updates or simply checking in on them to see if they are OK.

Data note:

• Source: Q35. Do you have any neighbours you think could need additional support from others during an emergency or disaster? This could include giving or lending supplies, shopping for food, passing on updates or simply checking in on them to see if they are OK.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q35 add up to 101%.

42% survey respondents reported providing a neighbour with additional support during a previous emergency, disaster or crisis (including the COVID-19 pandemic), 47% said they had not done this, 8% reported not knowing/remembering if they had, and 2% said that at that time they did not have any neighbours.

NB: Support examples provided in the question included giving or lending supplies, shopping for food, passing on updates or simply checking in on them to see if they are OK.

Data note:

• Source: Q36. In a previous emergency, disaster, or crisis (including the COVID-19 pandemic) have you provided any of your neighbours with additional support? This could include giving or lending supplies, shopping for food, passing on updates or simply checking in on them to see if they are OK.
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536).
• Due to rounding, the percentages for Q36 add up to 99%.

Respondent survey feedback

How informative respondents found this survey to be

The majority (97%) of survey respondents found The UK Public Survey of Risk Perception, Resilience and Preparedness 2025 to be either very or quite informative, whereas 3% found it to be not very or not at all informative.

Figure 6.1: How informative respondents found this survey to be (showing % that selected each option) (see table 100(ODT, 1,013KB))

Figure note:

• Source: INFORMATIVE. How informative, if at all, did you find this survey?
• Base: All respondents in UK sample (n=10,536)
• While 3% (not very informative) and 1% (not at all informative) in Figure 6.1 do not add up to 3%, this is due to rounding; 3% is the more accurate number to report when adding up the non-rounded values.
• Due to rounding, the percentages for this question add up to 101%

Development plan

Official statistics in development designation

Official statistics are regulated by the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR). OSR sets the standards of trustworthiness, quality and value in the Code of Practice for Statistics that all producers of official statistics should adhere to. 

This publication is an official statistic in development. Official statistics in development are official statistics that are undergoing a development; they may be new or existing statistics, and will be tested with users, in line with the standards of trustworthiness, quality, and value in the Code of Practice for Statistics.

Details of how we plan to develop these statistics are laid out below. We particularly welcome feedback from users on the survey items and presentation of the statistics set out in this release. The development of the statistics will be guided by feedback from users, while we also plan to address the areas listed below.

User engagement

We would like to understand whether these statistics are valuable to users, and if there are any improvements we should make to them for future releases. We are interested in views on the content and on the presentation of the statistics. 

Users can be involved in the development of this statistical series by completing this short survey. The survey is anonymous and we are not collecting any personal data as part of this exercise. The user feedback survey will close on 30th September 2025. We are keen to receive as many views on this as possible from individuals who plan to use, or have used, the statistics to inform their work or study. 

Any feedback provided will help inform the future design and development of this statistical release. Thank you for your input. 

We also plan to host discussion sessions with a selection of our primary users - national and local officials responsible for communicating with the public about risks and preparedness. 

The outcomes of this user feedback and its impact on the development of the statistics will be published in 2026.

Timeline for development

The Cabinet Office will undertake this first phase of development, including user engagement, between August and November 2025 before finalising the 2026 version of the UK Public Survey of Risk Perception, Resilience and Preparedness. The user feedback survey will close on 30th September 2025 and discussion sessions with primary users will be completed in the Autumn.

Areas of improvement under consideration

Based on the analysis conducted so far we are planning to develop these areas for the next statistical release to be published in 2026:

• We plan to explore why fewer people reporting having no qualifications were recruited to the survey than expected, to understand whether this was due to the wording of the question differing slightly from the census or the make up of the online panels. 
• In this initial wave of the survey, for weighting, the demographics most often used to produce nationally representative samples (age, gender, region, ethnicity and social-economic grade) were used. An ideal weighting scheme would only incorporate demographic variables correlated with the survey’s main outcome measures. Given this, we will use regression modelling to identify which of the demographic variables in the survey are significantly associated with the main outcome measures, and based on the results, consider whether the weighting scheme needs updating. 
• There were a small number of very large outliers for Q27 on how much bottled/mineral water respondents had at home, to which they were asked to answer by providing the number of litres. It was not possible to verify the accuracy of the largest responses, but they were deemed plausible - some people could have very large stores of bottled water, or they could have been interpreting this question to also include potable water tanks. Or there is the possibility they could have been answering in millilitres instead of litres. Due to the possibility the question was misinterpreted by a small number of respondents or difficult to answer, this question will be reviewed for the next survey. For this release the results were presented in categories rather than providing the mean. 
• Despite the small sample size for Q29 on infant formula supplies, the results would have potentially been more useful if a distinction had been made between ready-made formula and formula powder. We will also review the question wording to see if it can be made clearer (as there were also a small number of outliers for this question). 
• In Q29 on reported barriers to preparedness, 11% of respondents selected ‘none of these’, indicating that there might be other barriers we have not included. We will explore possibilities for amending the response options for this question. 

We will explore options for further statistical analysis with the UK Health Security Agency Behavioural Science and Insights Unit, including publishing additional findings that will be of interest to our users. This might include further statistical tests on the differences between demographic groups, and any other factors that could be found to be predictors of preparedness or related to perceptions of resilience.

1. The quotas used in this survey ensure that the sample recruited reflects the population of each constituent country, with a focus on those demographics which are most likely to have an association with peoples’ attitudes. Northern Ireland differs from the rest of the United Kingdom in that being Protestant or Catholic, whether by personal religiosity or by heritage, is strongly correlated with a number of other social and political attitudes, a result of the region’s distinctive history. ↩