Kelly Wallace , Hannah Brenkert-Smith , Patricia A. Champ , James R. Meldrum , Grant Webster , Christine Taniguchi , Julia B. Goolsby , Colleen Donovan , Carolyn Wagner , Christopher M. Barth , Josh Kuehn , Suzanne Wittenbrink
{"title":"野火风险信息来源和燃料处理的可接受性在美国西部选定WUI社区附近","authors":"Kelly Wallace , Hannah Brenkert-Smith , Patricia A. Champ , James R. Meldrum , Grant Webster , Christine Taniguchi , Julia B. Goolsby , Colleen Donovan , Carolyn Wagner , Christopher M. Barth , Josh Kuehn , Suzanne Wittenbrink","doi":"10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Fuels treatments intended to reduce fuel loads and improve forest health on public lands offer one way to reduce wildfire hazards in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), where the natural and built environments meet. However, for fuels treatment implementation to be successful, it must comply with regulatory and scientific standards and be supported by local communities, as lack of acceptance can lead to alterations, delays, or abandonment. To foster support, public land managers can engage directly with residents in communities near treatment areas through various communication channels or engage indirectly through trusted local partners. This research uses paired household survey and observed parcel-level wildfire risk assessment data to investigate wildfire risk information sources' role in the acceptability of fuels treatment approaches on public lands near select WUI communities in the Western United States. We find that information deemed useful from sources is often positively correlated with acceptability, while information deemed not useful is sometimes negatively correlated. Local sources of information tend to be widely received, perceived as useful, and have positive correlations with acceptability, while nonlocal sources vary in their receipt, perceived usefulness, and correlations with acceptability. Public land managers, particularly those from national organizations, may benefit from leveraging and aligning messaging with trusted local partners. Developing fuels treatment plans that consider existing local sentiments may facilitate public trust in managers and acceptability of treatments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12451,"journal":{"name":"Forest Policy and Economics","volume":"176 ","pages":"Article 103537"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wildfire risk information sources and the acceptability of fuels treatments near select WUI communities in the Western United States\",\"authors\":\"Kelly Wallace , Hannah Brenkert-Smith , Patricia A. Champ , James R. Meldrum , Grant Webster , Christine Taniguchi , Julia B. Goolsby , Colleen Donovan , Carolyn Wagner , Christopher M. Barth , Josh Kuehn , Suzanne Wittenbrink\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103537\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Fuels treatments intended to reduce fuel loads and improve forest health on public lands offer one way to reduce wildfire hazards in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), where the natural and built environments meet. However, for fuels treatment implementation to be successful, it must comply with regulatory and scientific standards and be supported by local communities, as lack of acceptance can lead to alterations, delays, or abandonment. To foster support, public land managers can engage directly with residents in communities near treatment areas through various communication channels or engage indirectly through trusted local partners. This research uses paired household survey and observed parcel-level wildfire risk assessment data to investigate wildfire risk information sources' role in the acceptability of fuels treatment approaches on public lands near select WUI communities in the Western United States. We find that information deemed useful from sources is often positively correlated with acceptability, while information deemed not useful is sometimes negatively correlated. Local sources of information tend to be widely received, perceived as useful, and have positive correlations with acceptability, while nonlocal sources vary in their receipt, perceived usefulness, and correlations with acceptability. Public land managers, particularly those from national organizations, may benefit from leveraging and aligning messaging with trusted local partners. Developing fuels treatment plans that consider existing local sentiments may facilitate public trust in managers and acceptability of treatments.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"volume\":\"176 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103537\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forest Policy and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934125001169\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest Policy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934125001169","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Wildfire risk information sources and the acceptability of fuels treatments near select WUI communities in the Western United States
Fuels treatments intended to reduce fuel loads and improve forest health on public lands offer one way to reduce wildfire hazards in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), where the natural and built environments meet. However, for fuels treatment implementation to be successful, it must comply with regulatory and scientific standards and be supported by local communities, as lack of acceptance can lead to alterations, delays, or abandonment. To foster support, public land managers can engage directly with residents in communities near treatment areas through various communication channels or engage indirectly through trusted local partners. This research uses paired household survey and observed parcel-level wildfire risk assessment data to investigate wildfire risk information sources' role in the acceptability of fuels treatment approaches on public lands near select WUI communities in the Western United States. We find that information deemed useful from sources is often positively correlated with acceptability, while information deemed not useful is sometimes negatively correlated. Local sources of information tend to be widely received, perceived as useful, and have positive correlations with acceptability, while nonlocal sources vary in their receipt, perceived usefulness, and correlations with acceptability. Public land managers, particularly those from national organizations, may benefit from leveraging and aligning messaging with trusted local partners. Developing fuels treatment plans that consider existing local sentiments may facilitate public trust in managers and acceptability of treatments.
期刊介绍:
Forest Policy and Economics is a leading scientific journal that publishes peer-reviewed policy and economics research relating to forests, forested landscapes, forest-related industries, and other forest-relevant land uses. It also welcomes contributions from other social sciences and humanities perspectives that make clear theoretical, conceptual and methodological contributions to the existing state-of-the-art literature on forests and related land use systems. These disciplines include, but are not limited to, sociology, anthropology, human geography, history, jurisprudence, planning, development studies, and psychology research on forests. Forest Policy and Economics is global in scope and publishes multiple article types of high scientific standard. Acceptance for publication is subject to a double-blind peer-review process.