Explore the vast range of titles available.

Wildfire and the threat it poses to society represents an example of the complex, dynamic relationship between social and ecological systems. Increasingly, wildfire adaptation is posited as a pathway to shift the approach to fire from a suppression paradigm that seeks to control fire to a paradigm that focuses on “living with” and “adapting to” wildfire. In this study, we seek insights into what it means to adapt to wildfire from a range of stakeholders whose efforts contribute to the management of wildfire. Study participants provided insights into the meaning, relevance, and use of the concept of fire adaptation as it relates to their wildfire-related activities. A key finding of this investigation suggests that social scale is of key importance in the conceptualization and understanding of adaptation for participating stakeholders. Indeed, where you stand in terms of understandings of fire adaptation depends in large part on where you sit.

In a choice experiment study, willingness to pay for a public good estimated from hypothetical choices was three times as large as willingness to pay estimated from choices requiring actual payment. This hypothetical bias was related to the stated level of certainty of respondents. We develop protocols to measure respondent certainty in the context of a choice experiment, and to calibrate hypothetical choices using these certainty measures. While both the measurement of respondent certainty and the use of certainty measures to calibrate responses are complicated by the multiple-choice nature of choice experiments, calibration successfully mitigated hypothetical bias in this application.

Negative imagery of destruction may induce or inhibit action to reduce risks from climate-exacerbated hazards, such as wildfires. This has generated conflicting assumptions among experts who communicate with homeowners: half of surveyed wildfire practitioners perceive a lack of expert agreement about the effect of negative imagery (a burning house) on homeowner behavior, yet most believe negative imagery is more engaging. We tested whether this expectation matched homeowner response in the United States. In an online experiment, homeowners who viewed negative imagery reported more negative emotions but the same behavioral intentions compared to those who viewed status-quo landscape photos. In a pre-registered field experiment, homeowners who received a postcard showing negative imagery were equally likely, overall, to visit a wildfire risk webpage as those whose postcard showed a status quo photo. However, the negative imagery decreased webpage visits as homeowners’ wildfire risk increased. These results illustrate the importance of testing assumptions to encourage behavioral adaptation to climate change.

Parcel-level risk (PLR) describes how wildfire risk varies from home to home based on characteristics that relate to likely fire behavior, the susceptibility of homes to fire, and the ability of firefighters to safely access properties. Here, we describe the WiRē Rapid Assessment (RA), a parcel-level rapid wildfire risk assessment tool designed to evaluate PLR with a small set of measures for all homes in a community. We investigate the relationship between 2019 WiRē RA data collected in the Columbine Lake community in Grand County, Colorado, and whether assessed homes were destroyed in the 2020 East Troublesome Fire. We find that the overall parcel-level risk scores, as well as many individual attributes, relate to the chance that a home was destroyed. We also find strong evidence of risk spillovers across neighboring properties. The results demonstrate that even coarsely measured RA data capture meaningful differences in wildfire risk across a community. The findings also demonstrate the importance of accounting for multiple aspects of PLR, including both hazards and susceptibility, when assessing the risk of wildfire to homes and communities. Finally, the results underscore that relatively small actions by residents before a fire can influence wildfire outcomes.

Open space lands, national forests in particular, are usually treated as homogeneous entities in hedonic price studies. Failure to account for the heterogeneous nature of public open spaces may result in inappropriate inferences about the benefits of proximate location to such lands. In this study the hedonic price method is used to estimate the marginal values for proximity to the Pike National Forest. The results indicate that specifying the forest as homogeneous overstates the benefits for homes within two miles relative to specifying the forest based on land use characteristics, because the significant negative effect from noise-intensive activities is omitted.

Donation payment mechanisms are well suited forsome contingent valuation studies. In aneffort to better understand the discrepancythat has been consistently found between actualand hypothetical donations, we investigate anapproach to estimating actual willingness todonate using contingent donations with afollow-up question in which respondents ratethe level of certainty about their response tothe contingent donation question. The approachallows us to estimate the magnitude of thehypothetical bias and identify the respondentsresponsible for the bias. Identification ofthe respondents responsible for thehypothetical bias is the first step towarddeveloping an understanding of the causes andpossible remedies. In this study we find thatmost of the respondents (80%) to thecontingent donation question provide a responseconsistent with how we predict they wouldrespond in an actual donation situation. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Three causes have been identified for the spiraling cost of wildfire suppression in the United States: climate change, fuel accumulation from past wildfire suppression, and development in fire-prone areas. Because little is likely to be performed to halt the effects of climate on wildfire risk, and because fuel-management budgets cannot keep pace with fuel accumulation let alone reverse it, changing the behaviors of existing and potential homeowners in fire-prone areas is the most promising approach to decreasing the cost of suppressing wildfires in the wildland–urban interface and increasing the odds of homes surviving wildfire events. Wildfire education efforts encourage homeowners to manage their property to decrease wildfire risk. Such programs may be more effective with a better understanding of the factors related to homeowners’ decisions to undertake wildfire risk–reduction actions. In this study, we measured whether homeowners had implemented 12 wildfire risk–mitigation measures in 2 Colorado Front Range counties. We found that wildfire information received from local volunteer fire departments and county wildfire specialists, as well as talking with neighbors about wildfire, were positively associated with higher levels of mitigation. Firsthand experience in the form of preparing for or undertaking an evacuation was also associated with a higher level of mitigation. Finally, homeowners who perceived higher levels of wildfire risk on their property had undertaken higher levels of wildfire-risk mitigation on their property.

Rapidly scaling up the use of prescribed fire is being promoted as an important pathway for reducing the growing damages of wildfire events in the United States, including limiting the health impacts from smoke emissions. However, we do not currently have the science needed to understand how the health impacts associated with prescribed fire smoke in the present compare to wildfire smoke exposure in the future. In particular, we lack an understanding of how the potential long-term public health benefits of prescribed fire on future wildfire smoke and health impacts compare to prescribed fire’s short-term effects on human health. Answering the question ‘How do we learn to sustainably coexist with wildfire?’ requires a new research agenda investigating the magnitudes and distribution of the health benefits and costs associated with prescribed burning. We suggest three areas for a new research agenda: (1) improved understanding of the health costs of prescribed fire; (2) quantification of the expected health benefits of prescribed fire through possible decreased future wildfire smoke emissions; and (3) better knowledge on the distributional impacts of prescribed fire smoke. We conclude that we need to first learn to sustainably coexist with prescribed fire in order to sustainably coexist with wildfire.

Private actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change may have benefits to both the individual and society. In some cases, an individual may be motivated by appeals that highlight benefits to others, rather than to oneself. We test whether such prosocial framing influences information-seeking behavior to address wildfire risk among homeowners. In a field experiment across ten communities in western Colorado, property owners (n = 2977) received a postcard from their local fire department highlighting the impact of risk mitigation to either “your property” (private benefits) or “our community” (social benefits). The postcard directed recipients to visit a personalized webpage on wildfire risk. Overall, 10.5% of property owners visited their personalized risk webpage. There was little difference in webpage visitation between those who received the social (11.3%) rather than the private (9.7%) benefits message (χ2 = 1.74, p = 0.19). However, response may depend on a property owner’s relationship to the community. Those who reside within the community (as opposed to out-of-town owners) or who were in an evacuation zone during a recent wildfire were more likely to visit their webpages after receiving the social benefits message. How homeowners view their contributions to shared risk and whether simple changes in messaging influence prosocial behavior can inform efforts to address climate-exacerbated hazards.

Private landowners are important actors in landscape-level wildfire risk management. Accordingly, wildfire programs and policy encourage wildland–urban interface homeowners to engage with local organizations to properly mitigate wildfire risk on their parcels. We investigate whether parcel-level wildfire risk assessment data, commonly used to inform community-level planning and resource allocation, can be used to “nudge” homeowners to engage further with a regional wildfire organization. We sent 4564 households in western Colorado a letter that included varying combinations of risk information about their community, their parcels, and their neighbors’ parcels, and we measured follow-up visits to a personalized “Web site”. We find that the effect of providing parcel-specific information depends on baseline conditions: Informing homeowners about their property’s wildfire risk increases information-seeking among homeowners of the highest-risk parcels by about 5 percentage points and reduces information-seeking among homeowners of lower-risk parcels by about 6 percentage points. Parcel-specific information also increases the overall response in the lowest risk communities by more than 10 percentage points. Further, we find evidence of a 6-percentage point increase in response rate associated with receiving a social comparison treatment that signals neighboring properties as being either low or moderate risk on average. These results, especially considered against the 13 percent overall average response rate, offer causal evidence that providing parcel-specific wildfire risk information can influence behavior. As such, we demonstrate the effectiveness of simple outreach in engaging wildland–urban interface homeowners with wildfire risk professionals in ways that leverage existing data.