Author
Listed:
- Thomas A. Bridges-Lyman
(Department of Economics, University of Nevada, Reno, 1664 N. Virginia St., Reno, NV 89557, USA)
- Jessi L. Brown
(Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 920 Valley Road, Reno, NV 89512, USA)
- Jeanne C. Chambers
(Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 920 Valley Road, Reno, NV 89512, USA)
- Lisa M. Ellsworth
(Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Sciences, Oregon State University, 104 Nash Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)
- Matthew C. Reeves
(Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 800 East Beckwith Avenue, Missoula, MT 59801, USA)
- Karen C. Short
(Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 5775 Highway 10 W, Missoula, MT 59808, USA)
- Eva K. Strand
(Department of Forest, Rangeland, and Fire Sciences, University of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive MS 1135, Moscow, ID 83844, USA)
- Michael H. Taylor
(Department of Economics and Extension, University of Nevada, Reno, 1664 N. Virginia St., Reno, NV 89557, USA)
Abstract
The concepts of resilience and resistance (R&R) have been used to improve wildland fuel treatment outcomes by identifying parts of the landscape that are more likely to respond well to treatment. This study examined how the economic benefits and costs of fuel treatments in sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) ecosystems varied with the resilience and resistance properties of the treatment site. Generalized ecological models were developed for the economic analysis of fuel treatments that integrated ecological succession, annual grass invasion, pinyon–juniper expansion, and wildfire to simulate ecosystem dynamics over time. The models incorporated resilience and resistance by varying model parameters related to each plant community’s ability to resist annual grass invasion and recover post-disturbance. Simulations produced estimates of the expected (ex ante) benefit–cost ratio for each treatment. The approach also considered the benefits associated with the system remaining in an ecologically favorable condition, allowing us to report a more holistic measure of the net economic benefits of fuel treatments. The results from the simulations indicated fuel treatment was economically efficient in late-successional sagebrush and early-successional juniper in mountain big sagebrush associations. For sagebrush associations where treatment was economically efficient, higher R&R status sites had higher benefit–cost ratios. The results suggested that treatment costs were more determinative of economic efficiency than treatment benefits.
Suggested Citation
Thomas A. Bridges-Lyman & Jessi L. Brown & Jeanne C. Chambers & Lisa M. Ellsworth & Matthew C. Reeves & Karen C. Short & Eva K. Strand & Michael H. Taylor, 2024.
"Evaluating the Economic Efficiency of Fuel Reduction Treatments in Sagebrush Ecosystems That Vary in Ecological Resilience and Invasion Resistance,"
Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-26, December.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:12:p:2131-:d:1539337
Download full text from publisher
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:13:y:2024:i:12:p:2131-:d:1539337. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.