 |
| USFS |
Please remember that the point of your submitted questions is to "hone in" on specialized topics, ideas, or concepts that we might be able to apply to improved wildfire management. Therefore, think about posing some of your questions as the potential for application to real-world settings, policy, or tools designed to improve the management of wildfire risk. If you prefer to discuss how the article influenced your conception of wildfire risk, policy, or practice, that is great. Pose those thoughts as questions that the article prompted you to think about.
If you have particular issues, challenges, or scenarios that you would like to explore given your experience or interest, please state those in your comments. The class could discuss your particular example and use it as a way to develop our shared capacity.
Remember that your comments and questions are due by noon on Monday before class. This provides enough time for our discussion leads to synthesize questions.
Wibbenmeyer & Robertson:
ReplyDeleteI could be missing something but seems like a major takeaway from this paper is that high wildfire hazard areas are very heterogenous and contain a lot of high-value properties and low-value properties. So, is it even useful to measure distributions at this scale or would we have to look closer (like at the community or neighborhood level) to learn something about differential vulnerability?
Second question: assessed property values might be one value of wealth. But what happens when someone has owned their home for a very long time and the assessed value far exceeds whatever they paid for it (and what it might be insured for?) Is there some way to account for this?
Paveglio 2021:
What makes someone a good “chess player”? What skills, knowledge, relationships does a person need to have in order to be effective? This is addressed at the end of the article but I’m curious to discuss in more detail what avenues there are (at Universities or elsewhere), or what ideas people have, about how to develop these skills.
McCaffrey 2015:
There is a short section on place attachment but I’m curious to discuss in more detail: What are the dimensions of place attachment, how do we assess it, and why is it important? What if people have low place attachment?
Wibbenmeyer & Robertson 2022:
ReplyDeleteThe data analyzed and generated in this study is not publicly available. As we discussed in our first class meeting, hazard mapping data is sensitive due to its ties to government funding projects and the distribution of aid to select homeowners or communities.
On a smaller scale, consider structure assessments. Fire personnel classify homes as defensible or not defensible in advance of a wildfire and do not share this information with homeowners or the public.
Do you think data like this should be kept confidential so as not to ruffle feathers? Would publicizing the data have any beneficial outcomes?
Paveglio 2021:
The checkers to chess analogy allows for the complexity of wildfire management to be accounted for, highlighting the differences between individual actors or entities (“pieces”) and how they move differently within a local context (“game”).
Who is moving the pieces? To me, it seems that each entity (federal government, homeowner, private timber company, etc.) is playing to advance their own goals. Therefore, “winning” would look different to each piece involved. Although the fire adaptation coordinator is mentioned as being a dynamic chess player in the analogy, they seem to be more like another piece with their own goals to further.
What unites the pieces?
- Fire occurrence being inevitable?
- That fire is the (historical) opponent?
- The coordinator moving them in conjunction to adapt?
What is the end goal?
- Coexistence or adaptation?
- Winning? Holding our own?
- Community development?
McCaffrey 2015:
Do you think public response to wildfires has changed over the 10 years since this synthesis was published? Currently, where do you think more social science research is warranted?
Wibbenmeyer and Robertson 2022:
ReplyDelete-Since “The data generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available for legal/ethical reasons”, how can we ensure this data was created/collected properly and accurately represents the population if we cannot access it? On the flip side, how can we ensure data sovereignty remains paramount when conducting studies such as this one that involve sensitive or underrepresented communities?
McCaffrey 2015:
-Given: "The other main focus of early fire social science research was on assessing the social acceptability of fuel management on public lands in the USA, primarily in relation to prescribed fire and thinning practices.... the public has a fairly sophisticated understanding of fire’s ecological role and that acceptance for both prescribed fire and thinning is quite high, with more than 80 % of respondents across numerous studies expressing conditional or full acceptance for use of each practice... the two variables most consistently associated with acceptance were familiarity with the practice and trust in those implementing it...", how can we build this trust? Particularly in areas previously affected by catastrophic wildfire that may have drastically altered the public's opinion on wildfire and fuels management (or mismanagement), how can we better build this trust to ensure adequate cooperation, trust, and support moving forward?
Paveglio 2021:
-What classifies “winning” in this context? Who is controlling the overall game or piece movement? Dependent upon the answers to this question, the idea of winning could be different for each person involved, rather than a straightforward win in normal chess. Also, depending on the “rules” in this fire game context, how might the one creating or explaining the rules influence the future of the game and how others play it?
McCaffrey- This article really made me thing about psychology. How and why do people think and make decisions in a specific way? Thinking about heuristics got me wondering, are there other implications of homeowners decisions to or when to evacuate that we can explore? What else is unspoken happening behind this decision? Can ties be made between this risk perception and education? Or perhaps other concepts? Are there social norms or status quos / egos involved in these decisions? Basically, just why? Social dynamics are fascinating!!
ReplyDeleteWibbenmeyer and Robertson- I was shocked at first to learn that the norm of environmental injustice such as with waste facilities does not exactly translate to that of wildfire risk. Will this change over time? Does a switch flip post fire? To what extent were reservations/Natives taken into account on these referenced papers and statistics?
Paveglio- I really liked the chess and checkers analogies. Something that stood out to me is even though we have all of this training, knowledge, experience, etc, every time wildfires roll around we are very reactive. This chess analogy is interesting to me because of how calculated and premeditated the moves are. Our "board" in constantly changing/evolving. How do we manage the wildfire crisis? Is there a way to rewrite the game? How can we be this prepared and confidently move the pieces in real life?
McCaffrey 2015 - In order to promote trust and involvement, how might outreach programs strike a balance between scientific information and conventional or community-based knowledge?
ReplyDeleteMcCaffrey's reading emphasizes the importance of integrating local context and values into outreach effort, however, I think that idea could be expanded in the reading. Under the "Local Context" section McCaffrey suggest that doing so would help to pinpoint particular local obstacles, make use of personal networks for information exchange, and guarantee the programs are customized to the region's environment and sociocultural features.
Paveglio 2021 - How can fragmented communities with divergent goals come together to successfully implement collective action?
Paveglio (2021) argues that social fragmentation, caused by diverse land management approaches and different values and priorities, can affect collective wildfire adaptation. In order to implement large-scale fire adaptation techniques, it might happen that the groups involved have different goals and priorities, how can we ensure that these groups find common ground to generate successful and effective wildfire adaptation strategies? Would a third-party mediator be enough?
Wibbenmeyer & Robertson 2022 - How can policymakers make sure that lower-income communities benefit from wildfire mitigation efforts?
According to the reading, wealthier communities are most likely to receive more attention and funding for fire adaptation than low-income communities, such as Native Americans and senior citizens. Would offering financial assistance based on income levels be seen as unfair for wealthier communities or would it be supported by these groups?
1) How could the adoption of 'stay and defend' practices influence wildfire risk perceptions and decision-making heuristics in the United States? How might the uptake of this practice vary among population types?
ReplyDelete2) Considering the diverse characteristics of communities in wildfire hazard zones, how might the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and other similar tools be re-imagined to better assist localized (or individualistic) risk and resilience factors? Could we be utilizing these datasets more efficiently?
3) What changes or investments at the federal and state levels are necessary to better support 'chess playing' strategies at the local level?
I noticed that the McCaffrey paper reinforced what we talked about last week, specifically pointing to page 87 in the 4th paragraph, “there is a general level of consistency in key dynamics that shape how people respond to wildfire.” I agree that lumping everyone in a specific area under the same assumption is problematic, it just drives the question again of how do we get the entire country on a common footing when we’re still trying to get land managers, politicians, and local leaders on the same page?
ReplyDeleteThe Paveglio write up used a chess analogy to point out that social science is pivotal to mitigating change and the world of fires, and how just like chess it’s a long game with mini moving parts and future moves are based on current decisions. I agree that taking the cultural and historical and sociological concepts of a particular area is pivotal to bringing change. The problem is going to be funding, unless we can get more volunteers on board. But even then it’s costly in time so this paper makes me wonder if we could possibly do a state database or regional database of some sort where any citizen living in those areas could report any issues that they’re seeing or share any advice or research papers that they’ve read. Maybe something similar to what the EPA instilled for when a project is done? They allow a town-hall meeting approach but online…. And is there something like that that already exists but on a much smaller scale?
I agree with the Wibbenmeyer papers conclusion, calling for a more targeted approach to spreading the financial burden out to all the stakeholders. Because in my experience, broad sweeping legislation rarely works out well for everyone, especially when in these high stakes areas there is such a large gap in financial resources. I’m not familiar with this particular topic, but I’m curious if anyone is working on a model to address this.
McCaffrey:
ReplyDeleteMcCaffrey discusses a study that focuses on how interpersonal networks affect individual decision-making. Communities who were successfully mitigating fire risk in their neighborhoods attributed their success to "cooperative neighbors". At what scale of community is this effective for? How can diversity affect this? Can this be related back to the fires in LA?
Paveglio:
What would the role of the regional coordinate for fire adaptive initiatives among a diverse population look like? How would the regional coordinator effectively improve fire adaptive strategies?
Wibbenmeyer:
Homes near wooded areas and natural recreation tend to follow similar upward trends in value. Could the costs of these homes be inflated due to the natural amenities nearby? What if the home had been owned for a long time and the owner had passed the house down, was this taken into account when the individuals were being surveyed?
McCaffrey:
ReplyDelete(1) The authors discuss the fact that individuals in a community will turn to information sources they are most familiar with. In this era of misinformation, how can we ensure the public is getting the most accurate information? What if the source of the information is from an agency that the community has not fostered trust in?
(2) How can an individual defend their property during a wildfire, other than attempting to extinguish or create fuel breaks?
Wibbenmeyer:
(3) Why are they looking at residential property values? These are variable, my parents bought their house 15 years ago for ~$400,000 and it is now worth almost $1 million. There has been no change in the home itself or my parent's occupation/income. If anything, the most recent difference is they are now both retired. Near the end of the paper, the authors explain that the majority of "average middle class" household's wealth is in their home. If it is based on the value of the home an assumption could be made about income that may be inaccurate.
McCaffrey 2015
ReplyDeleteWhat has the influenced “preparedness” to take on its many forms within a country as well as across distinct countries (i.e. USA v. Australia)? For instance, being prepared for mass evacuations in the USA or defending your home in Australia.
Paveglio 2021
I found the analogy of checkers to chess to be powerful as I find it to encapsulate wildfire risk and management. I like how each stakeholder had their own piece based on ranking and power. It represents differences in positions among society and it needs to be considered when it comes to information and public engagement as some hold more of a presence than others. Furthermore, just like a chess game there are numerous distinct moves that can be made as the game has a very dynamic nature. This represents the many factors and impacts of one wildfire compared to another, each has its own pieces. Therefore, I wonder how the different chess pieces (people) involved as well as distinct wildfires drive change in social science and wildfire adaptation.
Wibbenmeyer and Robertson 2022
Are agencies more likely to perform responsive post-fire projects in higher income communities rather than lower income communities solely due to population density? Are there enough resources to do less densely populated areas? Furthermore, property values appear to change drastically every few years, how relevant was the data they found?