IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v20y2023i4p276-294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Decision Framework for Evaluating the Rocky Mountain Area Wildfire Dispatching System in Colorado

Author

Listed:
  • Erin J. Belval

    (Rocky Mountain Research Station, Human Dimensions Science Program, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado 80526)

  • Matthew P. Thompson

    (Rocky Mountain Research Station, Human Dimensions Science Program, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Fort Collins, Colorado 80526)

Abstract

In recent years, the state of Colorado has experienced extreme wildfire events that have degraded forest and watershed health and devastated human communities. With expanding human development and a changing climate, wildfire activity is likely to increase, and wildfire management agencies will be challenged to sustain landscapes and the ecosystem services they provide. A critical element of the United States’ federal-, state-, and local-level multiagency wildfire response is the interagency dispatching system, which facilitates the ordering, mobilization, and tracking of firefighting resources to and from wildfire incidents—a role that is likely to increase in both importance and workload in the future. Given increasing demands, it is worth considering ways to improve efficiencies, capacity, and capability within the current Colorado dispatching system. With this, the Rocky Mountain Coordinating Group (RMCG) and the Rocky Mountain Area Fire Executive Council (RMA-FEC) sought to reorganize the dispatching system, beginning with exploration of changes to dispatching zone boundaries and the number and location of dispatching centers throughout the state. Here we describe a multiyear research–management partnership with the RMCG and RMA-FEC to apply a structured decision-making process to guide this reorganization effort. We highlight the steps used in a participatory process that involved local decision makers and included iteratively revising and clarifying the problem statement, developing objectives and translating them into measurable attributes, building a multiobjective optimization model to generate and compare alternatives, and communicating a recommended alternative that was ultimately adopted. To conclude, we discuss insights from our experience and highlight opportunities for similar work to support efficient wildfire management elsewhere in the United States.

Suggested Citation

  • Erin J. Belval & Matthew P. Thompson, 2023. "A Decision Framework for Evaluating the Rocky Mountain Area Wildfire Dispatching System in Colorado," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 276-294, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:276-294
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2022.0047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.2022.0047
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2022.0047?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    2. James I. MacLellan & David L. Martell, 1996. "Basing Airtankers for Forest Fire Control in Ontario," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 677-686, October.
    3. James Brazill-Boast & Moira Williams & Beth Rickwood & Thalie Partridge & Grant Bywater & Bronwyn Cumbo & Ian Shannon & William J M Probert & Julie Ravallion & Hugh Possingham & Richard F Maloney, 2018. "A large-scale application of project prioritization to threatened species investment by a government agency," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, August.
    4. Ralph L. Keeney & Robin S. Gregory, 2005. "Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-11, February.
    5. Ralph L. Keeney, 2004. "Making Better Decision Makers," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 193-204, December.
    6. Mona Abdo & Isabella Ward & Katelyn O’Dell & Bonne Ford & Jeffrey R. Pierce & Emily V. Fischer & James L. Crooks, 2019. "Impact of Wildfire Smoke on Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Colorado, 2007–2015," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-16, October.
    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. Kelly F. Robinson & Erin Baker & Elizabeth Ewing & Victoria Hemming & Melissa A. Kenney & Michael C. Runge, 2023. "Decision Analysis to Advance Environmental Sustainability," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 243-251, December.
    2. Fangzhi Wang & Hua Liao & Richard S.J. Tol & Changjing, "undated". "Endogenous preference for non-market goods in carbon abatement decision," Working Paper Series 0224, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.

    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. Auriel M. V. Fournier & R. Randy Wilson & Jeffrey S. Gleason & Evan M. Adams & Janell M. Brush & Robert J. Cooper & Stephen J. DeMaso & Melanie J. L. Driscoll & Peter C. Frederick & Patrick G. R. Jodi, 2023. "Structured Decision Making to Prioritize Regional Bird Monitoring Needs," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 207-217, May.
    2. Cairns, George & Goodwin, Paul & Wright, George, 2016. "A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1050-1062.
    3. Timothy L. McDaniels & Stephanie E. Chang & David Hawkins & Gerard Chew & Holly Longstaff, 2015. "Towards disaster-resilient cities: an approach for setting priorities in infrastructure mitigation efforts," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 252-263, June.
    4. Mark W. Maier, 2019. "Architecting a portfolio of systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 335-347, July.
    5. Elena Bakhanova & Jaime A. Garcia & William L. Raffe & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "Gamification Framework for Participatory Modeling: A Proposal," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1167-1182, October.
    6. Roberto Ley-Borrás, 2015. "Deciding on the Decision Situation to Analyze: The Critical First Step of a Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 46-58, March.
    7. Siebert, Johannes Ulrich & Kunz, Reinhard E. & Rolf, Philipp, 2021. "Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 264-282.
    8. Yang, Guo-liang & Rousseau, Ronald & Yang, Li-ying & Liu, Wen-bin, 2014. "A study on directional returns to scale," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 628-641.
    9. Rodrigo A. Estévez & Carlos Veloso & Gabriel Jerez & Stefan Gelcich, 2020. "A participatory decision making framework for artisanal fisheries collaborative governance: Insights from management committees in Chile," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(2), pages 144-160, May.
    10. Dimopoulou, Maria & Giannikos, Ioannis, 2004. "Towards an integrated framework for forest fire control," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(2), pages 476-486, January.
    11. Cleemput, Irina & Devriese, Stephan & Kohn, Laurence & Westhovens, René, 2018. "A multi-criteria decision approach for ranking unmet needs in healthcare," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(8), pages 878-884.
    12. Liu, Shuang & Proctor, Wendy & Cook, David, 2010. "Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2374-2382, October.
    13. Stefano Capolongo & Leopoldo Sdino & Marta Dell’Ovo & Rossella Moioli & Stefano Della Torre, 2019. "How to Assess Urban Regeneration Proposals by Considering Conflicting Values," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-15, July.
    14. Ralph L. Keeney, 2007. "Modeling Values for Anti‐Terrorism Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 585-596, June.
    15. Mendes, André Bergsten & e Alvelos, Filipe Pereira, 2023. "Iterated local search for the placement of wildland fire suppression resources," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(3), pages 887-900.
    16. Robert G. Dyson & Frances A. O’Brien & Devan B. Shah, 2021. "Soft OR and Practice: The Contribution of the Founders of Operations Research," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 727-738, May.
    17. Fred A. Johnson & Mitchell J. Eaton & James H. Williams & Gitte H. Jensen & Jesper Madsen, 2015. "Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-20, June.
    18. Angelis, Aris & Kanavos, Panos, 2017. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating new medicines in Health Technology Assessment and beyond: The Advance Value Framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 137-156.
    19. Failing, L. & Gregory, R. & Harstone, M., 2007. "Integrating science and local knowledge in environmental risk management: A decision-focused approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 47-60, October.
    20. Gasparini, Gaia & Brunelli, Matteo & Chiriac, Marius Dan, 2022. "Multi-period portfolio decision analysis: A case study in the infrastructure management sector," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(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:inm:ordeca:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:276-294. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.