Collaborative Research: Prescribed Burning Decisions and Risk-Risk Tradeoffs

Wildfires and their environmental and social impacts are growing in the US and around the world. Prescribed (Rx) burning can be an effective management technique to reduce vegetation and reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires. Despite its potential benefits, the annual extent of Rx burning has stayed the same or decreased across much of the country in recent years.

This is due in part to the fact that Rx burning entails its own risks, including smoke exposure and the possibility of a planned fire escaping control. Making Rx burning decisions requires making informed tradeoffs between these risks and the risks associated with uncontrolled wildfires. To inform these decisions, this project assesses two key questions.

First, how do decisions by those who implement Rx burning and by residents in nearby communities shape potential Rx burning impacts? To answer this question, the research team takes measurements near a large number of Rx burn sites over time, capturing information such as how much smoke residents near Rx burns are exposed to and whether experience with Rx burning influences support for this management approach.

Second, how do perceived risk-risk tradeoffs influence support for expanded Rx burning to mitigate wildfire risk among wildland-urban interface (WUI) and non-WUI residents? To answer this question, the researchers survey residents in WUI and non-WUI areas to understand risk perceptions and policy support. Understanding these tradeoffs is critical to shaping risk management policy.

Prescribed (Rx) burning entails carefully planned fires lit under controlled conditions to manage fuels that can spur catastrophic fires and WUI community disasters. The US National Cohesive Wildland Management Strategy identifies Rx burning as a cost-effective solution, but its use has remained limited, particularly in the American West. Managing wildfire and other climate-related hazards involves weighing risk-risk tradeoffs in order to develop effective, balanced strategies that protect communities and the environment.

This interdisciplinary project uses a mixed-methods approach to advance knowledge on decision making under risk in the context of natural hazard management. The researchers develop a novel conceptual model that adapts the concept of risk-risk tradeoffs to the context of Rx burning decisions. This conceptual model guides the interdisciplinary research design to address two key research questions: 1) How do decisions by implementers and residents shape Rx burning impacts for WUI communities in proximity to Rx burn sites?

To answer this question, the team generates and analyzes a first-of-its-kind dataset integrating measurements of environmental conditions, smoke emissions, built environment (housing) characteristics, air quality, exposure, health, and perceived experience measures near Rx burn sites over multiple years. 2) How do perceived risk-risk tradeoffs influence support for expanded Rx burning to mitigate wildfire risk among WUI and non-WUI residents? The team implements a large survey-based choice experiment to elicit risk-risk tradeoffs and assess Rx burning support, analyzing data to understand how different risk attributes and individual characteristics shape risk perceptions and policy support.

The research team is engaging with stakeholders, including policy-makers and regulators, wildfire managers and Rx burn implementers, and members of the public, throughout the research process to ensure that the results are relevant and useful.

This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.