New Zealand prides itself on being one of the most seismically prepared nations in the world. Earthquake risk is built into building codes, household conversations and brokers’ day‑to‑day advice. Yet while the country has adapted to living on a fault line, one of its most spectacular national parks has just delivered a stark reminder that fire, not shaking ground, may be the next defining stress test for insurers and their clients.
On 8 November a fast‑moving blaze erupted in Tongariro National Park, forcing the evacuation of trampers and residents and burning for nearly three days across the Central Plateau. The fire scorched roughly 3,000 hectares of alpine scrub, tussock grassland, wetland and forest, blackening a vast swathe of New Zealand’s oldest national park and damaging key tracks and facilities, including sections of the Tongariro Alpine Crossing and Mangatepopo Track.
Official loss and claims figures are still emerging, but for the insurance sector the warning signal is already clear: Tongariro is not a one‑off. It is a vivid illustration of a risk profile that is changing faster than many risk programmes and conversations with clients.
James Knight (main picture), head of APAC, view of risk advisory at Aon New Zealand, argues that the country’s mental model of natural hazards is still catching up with the data. For years, earthquakes, storms and floods have dominated risk planning and insurance discussions. Wildfire has felt like a secondary peril.
Yet Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) records over 4,000 wildfires a year – about 12 a day – and a growing proportion of these are significant events in shoulder seasons that are now hotter and drier. Most are human‑induced, from campfires and discarded cigarettes to infrastructure sparks. In Tongariro’s case, the ignition source is still under investigation, but is thought to have started near a highway, underscoring how everyday activity can light a large‑scale event.
Knight pointed out that New Zealand tends not to react decisively to an emerging peril until it has lived through something unignorable. “It’s often only once we directly experience a destructive natural hazard event that we start to notice and take action,” he said.
When it comes to earthquakes and, more recently, severe flooding, that shift has already happened. “Today, many Kiwis are well aware and prepared for earthquakes and more recently, floods because we’ve seen the impact they can have on our lives, property and infrastructure,” said Knight.
Wildfire, by contrast, remains under‑examined in many risk registers and renewal meetings. That, Knight suggests, is no longer tenable.
If New Zealand is a step behind in wildfire awareness, Australia is the case study in what happens when a country is forced to catch up. After Black Saturday, Black Summer and decades of bushfire losses, Australian communities – and their insurers – have developed a robust preparedness culture in exposed areas.
Australia’s experience shows that resilience is built from the ground up, through specific, verifiable actions: keeping flammable vegetation away from structures, avoiding storage of combustibles under decks, sealing roofs against ember attack, and using fire‑resistant materials in highly exposed zones. These measures, once seen as optional, are now increasingly embedded in building practice and, critically, in financial incentives. Through the Resilient Building Council and partners, resilience ratings are being linked to banking and insurance benefits, turning risk‑reducing investments into something that can move a premium, not just a conscience.
For New Zealand brokers, that precedent matters. It suggests that wildfire resilience is not just a technical conversation for councils and FENZ; it is a pricing and product conversation that the market can help lead. Brokers are uniquely placed to translate Australian learnings into New Zealand‑specific advice – and to push for recognition of resilience measures in underwriting.
Wildfire needs to be treated like earthquakes in one crucial respect: as a risk people actively prepare for, not a remote possibility. “The question shouldn’t be ‘will I ever experience a wildfire?’; it should be, ‘am I prepared if one happens?’” Knight said.
For brokers, that reframing has concrete implications:
Tongariro joins Lake Ōhau, Pigeon Valley and the Port Hills in a growing list of serious fires. Clients in or near vegetated, hilly or rural‑urban fringe areas should be walked through wildfire as a realistic scenario, not a tail risk.
That means asking clients about vegetation management, fuel loads, building envelopes, external storage and access for emergency services – and documenting these factors alongside flood or quake resilience.
Knight urged property owners to start with FENZ’s “Check It’s Alright” wildfire risk tool, then update emergency plans and walk through them with their broker as part of annual reviews. These are entry points for a broader conversation about coverage adequacy, deductibles, and business interruption.
As more New Zealanders move into fire‑prone locations, brokers can press developers, lenders and insurers to recognise wildfire‑resistant design and materials, mirroring the evolution seen across the Tasman.
“Wildfires may still feel like a rare occurrence in New Zealand, but recent events like the Tonagariro and South Island fires are an important reminder that we have a direct threat to our land, homes and communities," said Knight. For a sector accustomed to thinking in terms of long‑tail earthquake risk, the message from Tongariro is that fire is no longer an outlier.
Earthquakes taught New Zealand that preparedness is not optional; it is part of living here. Knight said wildfire is now demanding the same mindset. The question for brokers is whether they will treat Tongariro as a warning shot – or the missed opportunity that came before the next, more costly blaze.
