IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v7y2018i1p4-d125209.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Model-Based Framework to Evaluate Alternative Wildfire Suppression Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Karin L. Riley

    (Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forestry Sciences Lab, U.S. Forest Service, Missoula, MT 59801, USA)

  • Matthew P. Thompson

    (Rocky Mountain Research Station, U.S. Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA)

  • Joe H. Scott

    (Pyrologix, Limited Liability Company (LLC), Missoula, MT 59802, USA)

  • Julie W. Gilbertson-Day

    (Pyrologix, Limited Liability Company (LLC), Missoula, MT 59802, USA)

Abstract

The complexity and demands of wildland firefighting in the western U.S. have increased over recent decades due to factors including the expansion of the wildland-urban interface, lengthening fire seasons associated with climate change, and changes in vegetation due to past fire suppression and timber harvest. In light of these changes, the use of more wildland fire on the landscape could reduce fuels and form barriers to the spread of future fires while performing forest restoration in some areas. However, the risks, costs and benefits of changing fire response strategy have not been quantified. Here, we identify gaps regarding the ability to simulate alternative wildfire suppression strategies, due to a number of factors including limited data collected on fireline construction, as well as synergies between firefighting resources and resource effectiveness. We present a fire management continuum: at one end lies full suppression of all fires under all circumstances, and at the opposite end lies no suppression of any fires regardless of location or time in season, with a wide array of managed fire options falling in between. Next, we demonstrate the proof-of-concept using a stochastic fire simulation model, FSim, to simulate two alternative fire suppression strategies close to opposite ends of this continuum for the Sierra National Forest of California: (1) business-as-usual, which equates to nearly full fire suppression; and (2) full suppression of human-caused fires and no suppression actions on lightning-caused fires. Results indicate that fire management strategy can substantially affect the number of large fires and landscape burn probabilities, both of which were shown to increase under the second scenario. However, temporal feedbacks are expected to play an important role: we show that increases in burned area substantially limit ignition potential and the extent of subsequent fires within the first five to ten years, especially under the second scenario. While subject to current data gaps and limitations in fire modeling, the methodology presented here can be used to simulate a number of alternative fire suppression strategies, including decisions to suppress or not suppress fires based on location, time of season or other factors. This method also provides basic inputs needed to estimate risks, costs and benefits of various alternative suppression strategies in future work. In future work, uncertainties resulting from current limitations in knowledge can be addressed using techniques such as scenario planning in order to provide land managers with a set of possible fire outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Karin L. Riley & Matthew P. Thompson & Joe H. Scott & Julie W. Gilbertson-Day, 2018. "A Model-Based Framework to Evaluate Alternative Wildfire Suppression Strategies," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:7:y:2018:i:1:p:4-:d:125209
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/7/1/4/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/7/1/4/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Max A. Moritz & Enric Batllori & Ross A. Bradstock & A. Malcolm Gill & John Handmer & Paul F. Hessburg & Justin Leonard & Sarah McCaffrey & Dennis C. Odion & Tania Schoennagel & Alexandra D. Syphard, 2014. "Learning to coexist with wildfire," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 58-66, November.
    2. Robyn S. Wilson & Patricia L. Winter & Lynn A. Maguire & Timothy Ascher, 2011. "Managing Wildfire Events: Risk‐Based Decision Making Among a Group of Federal Fire Managers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 805-818, May.
    3. Jessica R. Haas & David E. Calkin & Matthew P. Thompson, 2015. "Wildfire Risk Transmission in the Colorado Front Range, USA," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 226-240, February.
    4. Bruce Malamud & Donald Turcotte, 1999. "Self-Organized Criticality Applied to Natural Hazards," 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. 20(2), pages 93-116, November.
    5. Michael S. Hand & Matthew J. Wibbenmeyer & David E. Calkin & Matthew P. Thompson, 2015. "Risk Preferences, Probability Weighting, and Strategy Tradeoffs in Wildfire Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1876-1891, October.
    6. Lluís Brotons & Núria Aquilué & Miquel de Cáceres & Marie-Josée Fortin & Andrew Fall, 2013. "How Fire History, Fire Suppression Practices and Climate Change Affect Wildfire Regimes in Mediterranean Landscapes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-12, May.
    7. Matthew J. Wibbenmeyer & Michael S. Hand & David E. Calkin & Tyron J. Venn & Matthew P. Thompson, 2013. "Risk Preferences in Strategic Wildfire Decision Making: A Choice Experiment with U.S. Wildfire Managers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1021-1037, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Negar Elhami-Khorasani & Hamed Ebrahimian & Lawrence Buja & Susan L. Cutter & Branko Kosovic & Neil Lareau & Brian J. Meacham & Eric Rowell & Ertugrul Taciroglu & Matthew P. Thompson & Adam C. Watts, 2022. "Conceptualizing a probabilistic risk and loss assessment framework for wildfires," 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 1153-1169, November.

    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. Champ, Patricia A. & Meldrum, James R. & Brenkert-Smith, Hannah & Warziniack, Travis W. & Barth, Christopher M. & Falk, Lilia C. & Gomez, Jamie B., 2020. "Do actions speak louder than words? Comparing the effect of risk aversion on objective and self-reported mitigation measures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 301-313.
    2. Rossi, David & Kuusela, Olli-Pekka, 2020. "The influence of risk attitudes on suppression spending and on wildland fire program budgeting," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    3. Andrea Duane & Marc Castellnou & Lluís Brotons, 2021. "Towards a comprehensive look at global drivers of novel extreme wildfire events," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(3), pages 1-21, April.
    4. Eghbal Rashidi & Hugh Medal & Aaron Hoskins, 2018. "An attacker‐defender model for analyzing the vulnerability of initial attack in wildfire suppression," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(2), pages 120-134, March.
    5. Thomas Curt & Thibaut Frejaville, 2018. "Wildfire Policy in Mediterranean France: How Far is it Efficient and Sustainable?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 472-488, March.
    6. Hangjian Wu & Emmanouil Mentzakis & Marije Schaafsma, 2022. "Exploring Different Assumptions about Outcome-Related Risk Perceptions in Discrete Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(3), pages 531-572, March.
    7. Michael S. Hand & Matthew J. Wibbenmeyer & David E. Calkin & Matthew P. Thompson, 2015. "Risk Preferences, Probability Weighting, and Strategy Tradeoffs in Wildfire Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1876-1891, October.
    8. Susan D. Kocher & Van Butsic, 2017. "Governance of Land Use Planning to Reduce Fire Risk to Homes Mediterranean France and California," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Katuwal, Hari & Hand, Michael S. & Thompson, Matthew & Stonesifer, Crystal & Calkin, David, 2018. "Predict and Attack (or Don’t): An Econometric Approach to Large Wildfire Early Detection and Suppression Effectiveness," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274304, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. 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.
    11. Thomas Buchholz & John Gunn & Bruce Springsteen & Gregg Marland & Max Moritz & David Saah, 2022. "Probability-based accounting for carbon in forests to consider wildfire and other stochastic events: synchronizing science, policy, and carbon offsets," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Scheller, Robert & Kretchun, Alec & Hawbaker, Todd J. & Henne, Paul D., 2019. "A landscape model of variable social-ecological fire regimes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 401(C), pages 85-93.
    13. 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).
    14. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Burns, Matthew & Marini Govigli, Valentino, 2019. "Civil society engaged in wildfires: Mediterranean forest fire volunteer groupings," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 119-129.
    15. Marcos Rodrigues & Fermín Alcasena & Pere Gelabert & Cristina Vega‐García, 2020. "Geospatial Modeling of Containment Probability for Escaped Wildfires in a Mediterranean Region," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(9), pages 1762-1779, September.
    16. Van Butsic & Maggi Kelly & Max A. Moritz, 2015. "Land Use and Wildfire: A Review of Local Interactions and Teleconnections," Land, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, February.
    17. Wang, Ning & Zhao, Shiyue & Wang, Sutong, 2024. "A novel clustering-based resampling with cost-sensitive boosting method to model and map wildfire susceptibility," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Yanfeng Wang & Ping Huang, 2022. "Potential fire risks in South America under anthropogenic forcing hidden by the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    20. Elizabeth Canales & Jason S. Bergtold & Jeffery R. Williams, 2024. "Conservation intensification under risk: An assessment of adoption, additionality, and farmer preferences," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(1), pages 45-75, January.

    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:jresou:v:7:y:2018:i:1:p:4-:d:125209. 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.