 |
| istockphoto.com |
Please enter at least three discussion questions based upon the assigned readings for this week. The structure of your questions and comments is up to you. For instance, 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. Explore particular issues, challenges, or scenarios that you are facing or might face in the future given your career goals. Consider how other stakeholders at risk from fire might approach or perceive of these same topics. Or pose questions as someone who wants to learn more about a way the wildfire management system works.
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.
I look forward to talking with you on Wednesday.
Cowan 2023
ReplyDeleteStudies found that some who perceive a high level of risk see mitigation measures as “pointless” in the face of wildfire. I would like to know what experiences and knowledge shaped this perception. Do you think that success stories are the best way to counteract this idea? Are there other ways that you think are better?
Ghasemi 2020
In what ways do you believe agencies can encourage homeowners to facilitate mitigation measures while maintaining the public’s confidence in them regarding their effectiveness in wildfire control? It would be great to see confidence and mitigation measures excel rather than mitigation measures increases as confidence decreases.
Flint 2022
This paper made me think about the USFS posters of the past. Many of them have what I believe to be powerful illustrations. One poster that stands out to me is the 1964 “Yours to Enjoy Not to Destroy” that depicts a healthy forest scene with wildlife and a camp in the background while just below, is an image that shows a forest after a fire. Then there is a saying by Smokey the Bear at the bottom. I see this as an example of both negative and positive images that initiate change through their own means, but by being put together I think they appeal to both views. Are images like this best to consider when driving wildfire mitigation?
Ghasemi, et al.
ReplyDeleteLook at Appendix B, C, and D. What item do you believe carries the most weight? Does your thought align with its statistical weight?
Cowan
What measures/actions can be taken to the variables with a negative relationship to having a positive relationship? Is there a time where having the negative relationship is actually beneficial?
Flint
To what extent do personally you relate the negative imagery with fear mongering (referred to as fear appeal in this article)? What other approaches do you suggest to emphasize the potential for catastrophe? Do you feel the importance of this message could be as adequately emphasized without the fear appeal/negative imagery?
Cowan and Kennedy 2023:
ReplyDeleteThe results section isolates determinants for mitigation effort, but in reality action (or inaction) is based on the entire stack of determinants held by an individual. What occurs when an individual has a mixed set of determinants both in favor of and against mitigation? Does anyone have an example of this?
Flint et al. 2022:
In marketing communications, special care is taken to prevent a consumer from developing negative memory associations that tie a product or message back to its sender, often a company. Not only was the flames photo deemed ineffective at generating engagement, but it could also have negative impacts on the "brand" of the local FD in the minds of community members. If the organization you work for send a community fire postcard in alignment with its "brand," what would it look like?
I am also interested in discussing this article in the context of generating support for prescribed fire treatments. It has to be confusing for the public to be confronted with negative, fear-based imagery of wildfires and then to turn around and be asked by an agency or local forest to support "good fire". Can mixed messaging be effective?
Ghasemi et al. 2020:
The article found that when agency values and individual values align, a waterfall of positive effects occurs (individual trust in agency, perceived effectiveness of treatment, and adoption of directives increase). When individual values do not align, do you think a negative feedback loop occurs? What methods can be used to prompt homeowner wildfire mitigation in this case?
Cowan:
ReplyDeleteThe article states, "Notably, no articles included in this study conducted a comparison of
multiple countries, choosing instead to focus on one or more case studies
within a single nation." Would looking at single case studies within a single nation be more beneficial? Or would it be more helpful to include multiple instances that spanned different countries? What insight might comparing events in different countries provide?
Flint:
Flint's paper was really interesting and I liked the different outlets they used to reach the communities at risk. Did the researchers factor in age to this experiment? Are people who are older and have more experience less likely to pick the "Flames" photo? Are new homeowners in the WUI more likely to? How can age and experience affect these results?
Ghasemi:
The author discusses the importance the "emotional connection" has to homeowners, How might these results be affected by comparing individuals who have families and who don't? Would single individuals have a lower emotional connection to the home or area?
1. Is there a threshold of value alignment that agencies must meet with civic populations to establish operational trust? If so, how is this threshold determined, and how do variations in internal agency values influence trust-building and compliance efforts?
ReplyDelete2. How might communication managers and fire professionals effectively convey wildfire risk to populations that have not yet directly experienced a wildfire? What strategies—such as experiential learning, scenario-based messaging, or community engagement—are most effective in bridging the gap between awareness and action? Beyond direct personal experience, what alternative approaches have demonstrated similar success rates in motivating mitigation behaviors?
3) What strategies can fire practitioners use to mitigate fear control responses among populations?
Flint 2022:
ReplyDeleteThis paper seemed to suggest that some people‘s response to striking dramatic imagery could actually initiate a “head in the sand” reaction versus the call to action that was intended. I would have like to have seen a piece in the survey that asked about anxiety in the individuals that were surveyed. I’m wondering if mental health played into why some people perceived the messages as too threatening and scary and why some took it as a way to be proactive. Also, would it be better to leave terms like “climate change” off the models and the pamphlets?
Ghasemi 2020:
After reading this paper, I have a couple of questions one what are these homeowners are perceiving as agency incompetency, that was an addressed in the paper and think that that could’ve been really insightful. it’s also curious that they said The study focused on the homeowner’s intentions to adopt more of the fire wise strategies, but in the long-term did, they actually follow through with those behaviors/intentions?
Cowan 2023:
It was nice that they were able to categorize several disconnects that happens between homes owners and the WUI professionals but they didn’t say or possibly investigate how these factors all worked together to give the residents their views. Like if the homes were bought in a costly area but fast forward to the owner now being a retiree but but is now on a fixed income, how is that financial (or even possibly physical) change now driving their opinions/decision?
Ghasemi:
ReplyDeleteRegarding the negative correlation between the trust that homeowners with limited fire experience have in agencies' ability to manage wildfire events and their intentions to adopt Firewise measures: are there efforts by public land management agencies to communicate the limits of firefighting capacity? How is (or could) this message be conveyed, and by whom? And/or has peoples' confidence in agency ability to fight wildfires potentially diminished since the data for this study was collected in 2006?
Flint et al.:
Making sure I understand the methodology for the field experiment: the post cards were the same except for the image (e.g. property-level risk data was not included on the post card, only on the web page), but the authors also identify relationships between property risk level, post card imagery, and likelihood of visiting the web page. Meaning that they assume people already have a sense of their property risk before receiving the post card, and this knowledge interacts with the postcard imagery to determine if they open the web page. Can we make the assumption that people already have a sense of their property risk from 0 to 1000? Couldn't there be reasons beside the post card imagery that homeowners with higher-risk properties are less likely to visit the personalized risk webpages (e.g. they already know more about risk and mitigation than people with lower-risk properties)?
Cowan:
I also wondered whether a comparison of multiple countries would even be worthwhile, given the unique individual and local factors influencing residential mitigation. Another question: the authors mention that people experiencing homelessness have been excluded from this research. What exactly would it mean to study the experience of homeless residents for wildfire mitigation? I'm not sure what the research questions would be or how a study would be designed.
Cowan – The reading mentions the following: "Financial capacity was reported as a limiting factor for residents by several studies." It is understandable that financial capacity influences mitigation efforts, both from this reading and from previous classes. How can income disparities be addressed by decision-makers without overstepping or generating a sense of inequality between lower-income and higher-income residents?
ReplyDeleteGhasemi – The study focuses on homeowner behavior in Southern California. I am curious whether regional differences, such as cultural attitudes, environmental conditions, and agency management approaches, affect the "emotional connection" discussed by the author. Does emotional connection vary depending on the region where the study is performed, or is it entirely dependent on the individual and unaffected by their surroundings?
Flint – The Field Experiment section was really intriguing. It showed that homeowners with higher wildfire risk were less likely to visit the risk webpage. Is knowing that they live in a higher wildfire risk area the reason they didn’t do so? Did exposing themselves to the consequences of wildfire make them feel powerless to act? Or is there another reason that explains their behavior?
Flint: Given that there is a disconnect between wildfire practitioners and residents when it comes to types of imagery that work best as a motivator to take action, what is the best way to reach individuals? They even provided a specialized code that would show mitigation information for their home. I know people do not want to be told what to do, and if this method is having an opposite effect than anticipated what should be done instead?
ReplyDeleteGhasemi: From the information gathered through such a study of interrelations and interactions among key drivers of action in a single case study, how would you use it in a broad applicability for other regions?
Cowan & Kennedy: Since there were only 4 electronic data bases used, how can we ensure that we do not miss valuable articles? Is this something we will always have to contend with since many of these databases do not overlap?
Flint et al. 2022: Seeing that one of the key findings in this paper was essentially that high risk = avoidance while moderate risk = action (in reference to homeowners of high risk avoiding associated action on their properties due to feelings of overwhelm or helplessness after being exposed to negative imagery, while those of low to moderate risk utilizing said imagery as motivation to act ), how can we instead help channel these strong emotions into collective action that would then benefit both homeowners and their associated neighborhoods, communities, etc?
ReplyDeleteCowan and Kennedy 2023: What might be a key factor in why more studies did not only account for a larger geographical area but also not a comparison between countries in terms of mitigation practices? (Keeping in mind legalities, differences in firefighting efforts, home etc.)
Ghasemi et al. 2020: Those who have fought fire in the WUI or have done extensive defensive space treatments in the WUI for wildland fire purposes may find the results of this paper relatively obvious /second-nature due to their experience. How can we ensure these results build past basic foundation-laying and influence actual practice?