Wildfires: Systemic changes required

Abstract

In their Policy Forum “Reform forest fire management” (18 September, p. [1280][1]), M. P. North et al. highlight public support and improved spatial planning as key leverage points to deemphasize fire exclusion and expand beneficial fire. Although these steps are necessary, we caution that they are insufficient to overcome barriers to change. There needs to be a deeper, systems-level understanding of the fire management system. The behavior of fire managers is a direct and logical result of the structure of the system in which they operate, influenced by factors such as incentives, culture, and capacity. If managers are judged by fire exclusion, that will become the dominant paradigm. Managers within this system may operate at cross-purposes, as shown by the widely divergent fire management policies and objectives across jurisdictional boundaries ([ 1 ][2], [ 2 ][3]). The joint influences of complexity, conflict, and uncertainty lead to a risk-averse decision structure constrained by perceptions and pressures, and susceptible to suboptimal decision biases and solutions to problems. The emphasis on aggressive suppression over less tangible ecological benefits and hazard mitigation disconnects fire management objectives from underlying resource management objectives. Infusing risk management principles into fire management decisions would directly address these systemic issues. We propose that efforts targeting transformation focus on four areas: (i) Engage in multiparty risk communication and prioritization of investments based on who can most efficiently mitigate risks. (ii) Track how, why, and with what information decisions are made, and ensure that decision processes are relevant and responsive to organizational and stakeholder needs. (iii) Invest in research to improve knowledge of fire management effectiveness, and consistently integrate new information. (iv) Cultivate a workforce well versed in risk management and the means to integrate this knowledge into decision-making. Transforming fire management is not an inevitable consequence of enhanced support or planning alone; it requires meaningful organizational change in how and why fire response is determined. Adopting systems and risk analysis principles to better understand and improve fire management decisions is a critical step toward effecting comprehensive change. 1. [↵][4]1. D. Calkin, 2. M. P. Thompson, 3. A. A. Ager, 4. M. Finney , For. Pol. Econ. 13, 378 (2011). [OpenUrl][5][CrossRef][6][PubMed][7][Web of Science][8] 2. [↵][9]National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy ([www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/index.shtml][10]). [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aab2356 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [5]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DTrends%2Bin%2BEcology%2B%2526%2BEvolution%26rft.stitle%253DTrends%2Bin%2BEcology%2B%2526%2BEvolution%26rft.aulast%253DBond%26rft.auinit1%253DW.%2BJ.%26rft.volume%253D20%26rft.issue%253D7%26rft.spage%253D387%26rft.epage%253D394%26rft.atitle%253DFire%2Bas%2Ba%2Bglobal%2B%2527herbivore%2527%253A%2Bthe%2Becology%2Band%2Bevolution%2Bof%2Bflammable%2Becosystems.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252Fj.tree.2005.04.025%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F16701401%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [6]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.tree.2005.04.025&link_type=DOI [7]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=16701401&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fsci%2F350%2F6263%2F920.2.atom [8]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000230504500010&link_type=ISI [9]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [10]: http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/index.shtml