Using community archetypes to better understand differential community adaptation to wildfire risk - PubMed (original) (raw)

Using community archetypes to better understand differential community adaptation to wildfire risk

Matthew Carroll et al. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016.

Abstract

One of the immediate challenges of wildfire management concerns threats to human safety and property in residential areas adjacent to non-cultivated vegetation. One approach for relieving this problem is to increase human community 'adaptiveness' to deal with the risk and reality of fire in a variety of landscapes. The challenge in creating 'fire-adapted communities' (FACs) is the great diversity in character and make-up of populations at risk from wildfire. This paper outlines a recently developed categorization scheme for Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) communities based on a larger conceptual approach for understanding how social diversity is likely to influence the creation of FACs. The WUI categorization scheme situates four community archetypes on a continuum that recognizes dynamic change in human community functioning. We use results from the WUI classification scheme to outline key characteristics associated with each archetype and results from recent case studies to demonstrate the diversity across WUI communities. Differences among key characteristics of local social context will likely result in the need for different adaptation strategies to wildfire. While the WUI archetypes described here may not be broadly applicable to other parts of the world, we argue that the conceptual approach and strategies for systematically documenting local influences on wildfire adaptation have potential for broad application.This article is part of the themed issue 'The interaction of fire and mankind'.

Keywords: community archetypes; fire-adapted community; wildfire risk; wildland–urban interface.

© 2016 The Author(s).

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Depiction of the WUI community archetypes (adapted from Paveglio et al. [27]). (Online version in colour.)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Pyne S. 2015. Between two fires: a fire history of contemporary America. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.
    1. Paton D, Buergelt PT, Tedim F, McCaffrey S. 2014. Wildfires: international perspectives on their social–ecological implications. In Wildfire hazards, risks and disasters (ed. Paton D.), pp. 1–14. London, UK: Elsevier.
    1. Steelman TA, McCaffrey S. 2011. What is limiting more flexible fire management—public or agency pressure? J. For. 109, 454–461.
    1. Smith AMS, et al. 2016. The science of firescapes: achieving fire resilient communities. BioScience 66, 130–146. (10.1093/biosci/biv182) - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moritz MA, et al. 2014. Learning to coexist with wildfire. Nature 515, 58–66. (10.1038/nature13946) - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources