IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i12p2172-d1301364.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wildfire Risk Assessment for Strategic Forest Management in the Southern United States: A Bayesian Network Modeling Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Sandhya Nepal

    (Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 200 WT Weaver Blvd, Asheville, NC 28804, USA)

  • Lars Y. Pomara

    (Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 200 WT Weaver Blvd, Asheville, NC 28804, USA)

  • Nicholas P. Gould

    (Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 200 WT Weaver Blvd, Asheville, NC 28804, USA)

  • Danny C. Lee

    (Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 4700 Old Kington Pike, Knoxville, TN 37919, USA)

Abstract

Wildfire occurrences have increased and are projected to continue increasing globally. Strategic, evidence-based planning with diverse stakeholders, making use of diverse ecological and social data, is crucial for confronting and mitigating the associated risks. Prescribed fire, when planned and executed carefully, is a key management tool in this effort. Assessing where prescribed fire can be a particularly effective forest management tool can help prioritize efforts, reduce wildfire risk, and support fire-resilient lands and communities. We collaborated with expert stakeholders to develop a Bayesian network model that integrated a large variety of biophysical, socioecological, and socioeconomic spatial information for the Southeastern United States to quantify where risk is high and where prescribed fire would be efficient in mitigating risk. The model first estimated wildfire risk based on landscape-scale interactions among the likelihoods of fire occurrence and severity and the people and resources potentially exposed—accounting for socioeconomic vulnerabilities as well as key ecosystem services. The model then quantified the potential for risk reduction through prescribed fire, given the existing fuel load, climate, and other landscape conditions. The resulting expected risk estimates show high risk concentrated in the coastal plain and interior highland subregions of the Southern US, but there was considerable variation among risks to different ecosystem services and populations, including potential exposure to smoke emissions. The capacity to reduce risk through fuel reductions was spatially correlated with risk; where these diverged, the difference was largely explained by fuel load. We suggest that both risk and the capacity for risk reduction are important in identifying priorities for management interventions. The model serves as a decision support tool for stakeholders to coordinate large-landscape adaptive management initiatives in the Southern US. The model is flexible with regard to both empirical and expert-driven parameterizations and can be updated as new knowledge and data emerge. The resulting spatial information can help connect active management options to forest management goals and make management more efficient through targeted investments in priority landscapes.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandhya Nepal & Lars Y. Pomara & Nicholas P. Gould & Danny C. Lee, 2023. "Wildfire Risk Assessment for Strategic Forest Management in the Southern United States: A Bayesian Network Modeling Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-25, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:12:p:2172-:d:1301364
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/12/2172/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/12/2172/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan A. Ager & Jeffrey D. Kline & A. Paige Fischer, 2015. "Coupling the Biophysical and Social Dimensions of Wildfire Risk to Improve Wildfire Mitigation Planning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(8), pages 1393-1406, 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. Antony S. Cheng & Lisa Dale, 2020. "Achieving Adaptive Governance of Forest Wildfire Risk Using Competitive Grants: Insights From the Colorado Wildfire Risk Reduction Grant Program," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 657-686, September.
    2. Margherita Carlucci & Ilaria Zambon & Andrea Colantoni & Luca Salvati, 2019. "Socioeconomic Development, Demographic Dynamics and Forest Fires in Italy, 1961–2017: A Time-Series Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Kline, Jeffrey D. & Houston, Laurie L. & Gray, Andrew N. & Monleon, Vicente, 2021. "Evaluating empirical evidence for housing development effects on the management of remaining private-owned forest in the U.S," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    4. Alex W. Dye & John B. Kim & Andrew McEvoy & Fang Fang & Karin L. Riley, 2021. "Evaluating rural Pacific Northwest towns for wildfire evacuation vulnerability," 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. 107(1), pages 911-935, May.
    5. Jaime de Diego & Antonio Rúa & Mercedes Fernández, 2021. "Vulnerability Variables and Their Effect on Wildfires in Galicia (Spain). A Panel Data Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Alan A. Ager & Palaiologos Palaiologou & Cody R. Evers & Michelle A. Day & Ana M. G. Barros, 2018. "Assessing Transboundary Wildfire Exposure in the Southwestern United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(10), pages 2105-2127, October.

    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:12:y:2023:i:12:p:2172-:d:1301364. 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.