Abstract

Purpose of ReviewScience plays a critical role in natural resource management, and the use of science in decision-making is mandated by several policy initiatives. Other disciplines have documented the challenges associated with applying science to management and possible solutions to overcoming challenges, but the evaluation of science use in wildland fire management is relatively immature. In this paper, we reviewed the available literature that evaluates science use in wildland fire management and common barriers and facilitators to science use in decision-making.Recent FindingsWe developed a conceptual model that describes the possible uses of science in fire management (perception, planning, forecasting, implementation, assessment, communication, and policy), common barriers to science use (lack of science, uncertainty, funding/capacity, conflict), common facilitators to fire science use (collaboration, trust, boundary organizations, co-production), and factors that can act as facilitators or barriers to science use depending on their presence or absence (awareness, accessibility, relevance). In the context of our conceptual model, we reviewed 67 papers that examined fire science use between 1986 and 2019.SummaryMost studies were conducted in the USA in the last 10 years and demonstrated that science is commonly used in fire management and that the maturation of organizations devoted to science translation and communication in the last 10 years has likely facilitated the application of fire science. The evaluation of fire science use, however, is still relatively immature, with studies needed on the use of fire science in countries outside the USA, the use of science in the management of wildfires, and in the crafting of policy related to wildland fire management.

Highlights

  • Background and Purpose of ReviewThis article is part of the Topical Collection on Fire Science and ManagementScience, or the systematic pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world through experiment and observation, has long played a critical role in the management of natural resources

  • A surge in research into the application of fire science has likely been spurred in part by the establishment of the Fire Science Exchange Network (FSEN) in 2009, a boundary organization in the USA funded by the Joint Fire Science Program (JFSP) and devoted to accelerating the adoption of fire science [15], as well as policy changes following destructive wildfires in Australia that spurred efforts to better incorporate science into fire management [16]. Since this emerging body of work has not been synthesized, the purpose of this study was to review the scientific literature on the use of science in wildland fire management and to identify factors that act as barriers or facilitators to fire science application

  • This review did not include papers that present fire science findings or decision support tools for wildland fire management unless the papers included some discussion about the use of that science and whether or not the findings or tools were being used in fire management

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The systematic pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world through experiment and observation, has long played a critical role in the management of natural resources. More emphasis has been placed on the role of other forms of knowledge (e.g., local knowledge, traditional ecological knowledge), collaborative governance, and other factors in informing land management decisions [1]. Science continues to plays a critical role in decision-making and is critical for reducing uncertainty and enhancing credibility. Certain factors need to be in place for science to have utility to end users. These include salience (e.g., relevant to land management decisions), credibility (e.g., technically robust), and legitimacy (e.g., unbiased) [3], conditions which are not always present in scientific studies. Scientific findings can conflict with other values related to the management of natural resources [6]

Objectives
Methods
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call