We examined the effect of large wildfires on economic growth and volatility in the western United States. We matched wildfire data with quarterly employment and earnings growth data to assess the specific effect of wildfire on employment and wage growth in western US counties.
As a result of the increasing environmental and social costs of wildfire, fire management agencies face ever-growing complexity in their management decisions and interactions with the public.
Managing natural processes at the landscape scale to promote forest health is important, especially in the case of wildfire, where the ability of a landowner to protect his or her individual parcel is constrained by conditions on neighboring ownerships.
Although fire managers, policymakers, and communities are benefiting from better understanding of suppression costs, property losses, and community impacts of large fires, no generalizable empirical research has quantified the specific effect of large wildfires on local employment and wages.
The purpose of this report is to shed light on fire suppression spending as a starting point for understanding the economic impacts of large fires.
As part of a Joint Fire Science Program project, a team of social scientists reviewed existing fire social science literature to develop a targeted synthesis of scientific knowledge on the following questions: 1. What is the public’s understanding of fire’s role in the ecosystem? 2. Who are trusted sources of information about fire? 3.
Science demonstrates that low-intensity surface fires were historically a critical ecological process in as much as 60% of North American landscapes. When applied appropriately in fire-dependent ecosystems, prescribed fire maintains forest health and function, provides habitat for wildlife populations, enhances soil and water conservation, and promotes public health and safety.
Though the need for prescribed fire is widely recognised, its use remains subject to a range of operational and social constraints. Research has focussed on identifying these constraints, yet past efforts have focussed disproportionately on single agencies and geographic regions.
This article identifies four types of nonindustrial private forest owners with different motivations for managing forestland in Oregon's fire-prone areas and different suitabilities for wildfire risk reduction policy approaches: “Commodity managers” (27% of owners, 40% of ownership area) are motivated to harvest and sell timber for income, to protect assets, and to perpetuate a family legacy of
In mixed-ownership landscapes, fuels conditions on private lands have implications for fire risk on public lands and vice versa. The success of efforts to mitigate fire risk depends on the extent, efficacy, and coordination of treatments on nearby ownerships. Understanding factors in forest owners’ decisions to address the risk of wildland fire is therefore important.