IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i12p2151-d987271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Consequential Role of Aesthetics in Forest Fuels Reduction Propensities: Diverse Landowners’ Attitudes and Responses to Project Types, Risks, Costs, and Habitat Benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Robert G. Ribe

    (Institute for a Sustainable Environment and Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA)

  • Max Nielsen-Pincus

    (Department of Environmental Sciences and Management, Portland State University, Portland, OR 97201, USA)

  • Bart R. Johnson

    (Institute for a Sustainable Environment and Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA)

  • Chris Enright

    (Institute for a Sustainable Environment and Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA)

  • David Hulse

    (Institute for a Sustainable Environment and Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA)

Abstract

Private landowners in the southern Willamette Valley of Oregon, USA were surveyed. The survey queried probabilities of implementing specific fuels reduction projects in extensive areas of specific forest types on their property. The projects were described in relation to the beginning and target forest types, the actions required, costs, and long-term maintenance. Forest types were first rated for scenic beauty and informed levels of wildfire risk reduction, scarce habitat production, and associated property rights risks. Propensities to perform each fuels reduction project were then obtained. These were adversely affected by disbelief in heightened wildfire risks or climate change, higher project costs, feelings of hopeless vulnerability to wildfire, and low aesthetic affections for target forests. Propensities were enhanced by aesthetic affection for target forests, belief in the efficaciousness of fuels reduction, previous experience with wildfire evacuation, and higher incomes. All landowners favored thinning of young conifer forests, but some were averse to thinning of mature conifer forests. Anthropocentric landowners, mainly farmers, foresters, and some small holders, tended to favor conventional thinnings toward commercially valuable conifer forests and avoided long-term habitat maintenance. Nature-centric landowners, mainly some rural residents and wealthy estate owners, leaned more toward long term habitat goals and oak forests.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert G. Ribe & Max Nielsen-Pincus & Bart R. Johnson & Chris Enright & David Hulse, 2022. "The Consequential Role of Aesthetics in Forest Fuels Reduction Propensities: Diverse Landowners’ Attitudes and Responses to Project Types, Risks, Costs, and Habitat Benefits," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-38, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:12:p:2151-:d:987271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/12/2151/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/12/2151/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meldrum, James & Brenkert-Smith, Hannah & Champ, Patricia & Gomez, Jamie & Falk, Lilia & Barth, Christopher, 2019. "Interactions between Resident Risk Perceptions and Wildfire Risk Mitigation: Evidence from Simultaneous Equations Modeling," MPRA Paper 100852, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Hannah Brenkert‐Smith & Katherine L. Dickinson & Patricia A. Champ & Nicholas Flores, 2013. "Social Amplification of Wildfire Risk: The Role of Social Interactions and Information Sources," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 800-817, May.
    3. Paveglio, Travis B. & Stasiewicz, Amanda M. & Edgeley, Catrin M., 2021. "Understanding support for regulatory approaches to wildfire management and performance of property mitigations on private lands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Giuseppina Spano & Mario Elia & Onofrio Cappelluti & Giuseppe Colangelo & Vincenzo Giannico & Marina D’Este & Raffaele Lafortezza & Giovanni Sanesi, 2021. "Is Experience the Best Teacher? Knowledge, Perceptions, and Awareness of Wildfire Risk," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-12, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tianzhuo Liu & Huifang Jiao, 2018. "Insights into the Effects of Cognitive Factors and Risk Attitudes on Fire Risk Mitigation Behavior," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 1213-1232, December.
    2. Hilary Byerly Flint & Paul Cada & Patricia A. Champ & Jamie Gomez & Danny Margoles & James R. Meldrum & Hannah Brenkert-Smith, 2022. "You vs. us: framing adaptation behavior in terms of private or social benefits," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Katherine L. Dickinson & Hannah Brenkert-Smith & Greg Madonia & Nicholas E. Flores, 2020. "Risk interdependency, social norms, and wildfire mitigation: a choice experiment," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(1), pages 1327-1354, August.
    4. Kim, Yeon-Su & Rodrigues, Marcos & Robinne, François-Nicolas, 2021. "Economic drivers of global fire activity: A critical review using the DPSIR framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    5. aus dem Moore, Nils & Brehm, Johannes & Breidenbach, Philipp & Ghosh, Arijit & Gruhl, Henri, 2022. "Flood risk perception after indirect flooding experience: Null results in the German housing market," Ruhr Economic Papers 976, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    6. Yu‐Ru Lin & Drew Margolin & Xidao Wen, 2017. "Tracking and Analyzing Individual Distress Following Terrorist Attacks Using Social Media Streams," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(8), pages 1580-1605, August.
    7. Wang, Yuhan & Lewis, David J., 2024. "Wildfires and climate change have lowered the economic value of western U.S. forests by altering risk expectations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    8. Ji Yun Lee & Fangjiao Ma & Yue Li, 2022. "Understanding homeowner proactive actions for managing wildfire risks," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 114(2), pages 1525-1547, November.
    9. Kramer, H. Anu & Butsic, Van & Mockrin, Miranda H. & Ramirez-Reyes, Carlos & Alexandre, Patricia M. & Radeloff, Volker C., 2021. "Post-wildfire rebuilding and new development in California indicates minimal adaptation to fire risk," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    10. Christopher D. Wirz & Michael A. Xenos & Dominique Brossard & Dietram Scheufele & Jennifer H. Chung & Luisa Massarani, 2018. "Rethinking Social Amplification of Risk: Social Media and Zika in Three Languages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2599-2624, December.
    11. Qiangsheng Hu & Xiaorong He & Hongbing Zhu & Peihong Yang, 2023. "Understanding Residents’ Intention to Adapt to Climate Change in Urban Destinations—A Case Study of Chang-Zhu-Tan Urban Agglomeration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-16, August.
    12. Patricia A Champ & Hannah Brenkert‐Smith, 2016. "Is Seeing Believing? Perceptions of Wildfire Risk Over Time," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 816-830, April.
    13. De Rosis, Sabina & Lopreite, Milena & Puliga, Michelangelo & Vainieri, Milena, 2023. "Analyzing the emotional impact of COVID-19 with Twitter data: Lessons from a B-VAR analysis on Italy," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PB).
    14. Dingde Xu & Wenfeng Zhou & Xin Deng & Zhixing Ma & Zhuolin Yong & Cheng Qin, 2020. "Information credibility, disaster risk perception and evacuation willingness of rural households in China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 103(3), pages 2865-2882, September.
    15. Ashish K. Rathore & Arpan K. Kar & P. Vigneswara Ilavarasan, 2017. "Social Media Analytics: Literature Review and Directions for Future Research," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 229-249, December.
    16. Philip Bubeck & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Jonas Laudan & Jeroen C.J.H. Aerts & Annegret H. Thieken, 2018. "Insights into Flood‐Coping Appraisals of Protection Motivation Theory: Empirical Evidence from Germany and France," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(6), pages 1239-1257, June.
    17. Abolfazl Jaafari & Omid Rahmati & Eric K. Zenner & Davood Mafi-Gholami, 2022. "Anthropogenic activities amplify wildfire occurrence in the Zagros eco-region of western Iran," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 114(1), pages 457-473, October.
    18. Shahir Masri & Erica Anne Shenoi & Dana Rose Garfin & Jun Wu, 2023. "Assessing Perception of Wildfires and Related Impacts among Adult Residents of Southern California," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-15, January.
    19. James R. Meldrum & Patricia A. Champ & Hannah Brenkert‐Smith & Travis Warziniack & Christopher M. Barth & Lilia C. Falk, 2015. "Understanding Gaps Between the Risk Perceptions of Wildland–Urban Interface (WUI) Residents and Wildfire Professionals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(9), pages 1746-1761, September.
    20. Paveglio, Travis B. & Stasiewicz, Amanda M. & Edgeley, Catrin M., 2021. "Understanding support for regulatory approaches to wildfire management and performance of property mitigations on private lands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:12:p:2151-:d:987271. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.