Literature DB >> 27272166

Evaluating the Characteristics of Social Vulnerability to Wildfire: Demographics, Perceptions, and Parcel Characteristics.

Travis B Paveglio1, Tony Prato2, Catrin Edgeley3, Darek Nalle3.   

Abstract

A large body of research focuses on identifying patterns of human populations most at risk from hazards and the factors that help explain performance of mitigations that can help reduce that risk. One common concept in such studies is social vulnerability-human populations' potential exposure to, sensitivity from and ability to reduce negative impacts from a hazard. While there is growing interest in social vulnerability for wildfire, few studies have critically evaluated the characteristics that scholars often indicate influence social vulnerability to that hazard. This research utilizes surveys, wildfire simulations, and GIS data to test the relationships between select demographic, perceptual and parcel characteristics of property owners against empirically simulated metrics for wildfire exposure or wildfire-related damages and their performance of mitigation actions. Our results from Flathead County, MT, USA, suggest that parcel characteristics such as property value, building value, and the year structures were built explaining a significant amount of the variance in elements of social vulnerability. Demographic characteristics commonly used in social vulnerability analysis did not have significant relationships with measures of wildfire exposure or vulnerability. Part-time or full-time residency, age, perceived property risk, and year of development were among the few significant determinants of residents' performance of fuel reduction mitigations, although the significance of these factors varied across the levels of fuel reduction performed by homeowners. We use these and other results to argue for a renewed focus on the finer-scale characteristics that expose some populations to wildfire risk more than others.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hazard; Risk; Social vulnerability; Vulnerability; Wildfire

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27272166     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-016-0719-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  8 in total

1.  Wildfire risk transmission in the Colorado Front Range, USA.

Authors:  Jessica R Haas; David E Calkin; Matthew P Thompson
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 4.000

2.  What motivates individuals to protect themselves from risks: the case of wildland fires.

Authors:  Ingrid M Martin; Holly Bender; Carol Raish
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.000

Review 3.  Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness.

Authors:  Fran H Norris; Susan P Stevens; Betty Pfefferbaum; Karen F Wyche; Rose L Pfefferbaum
Journal:  Am J Community Psychol       Date:  2008-03

4.  How risk management can prevent future wildfire disasters in the wildland-urban interface.

Authors:  David E Calkin; Jack D Cohen; Mark A Finney; Matthew P Thompson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-12-16       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Simulating effects of land use policies on extent of the wildland urban interface and wildfire risk in Flathead County, Montana.

Authors:  Travis B Paveglio; Tony Prato; Michael Hardy
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 6.789

6.  Coupling the Biophysical and Social Dimensions of Wildfire Risk to Improve Wildfire Mitigation Planning.

Authors:  Alan A Ager; Jeffrey D Kline; A Paige Fischer
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 4.000

7.  Locating spatial variation in the association between wildland fire risk and social vulnerability across six Southern states.

Authors:  Neelam C Poudyal; Cassandra Johnson-Gaither; Scott Goodrick; J M Bowker; Jianbang Gan
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 3.266

8.  Does Place Attachment Predict Wildfire Mitigation and Preparedness? A Comparison of Wildland-Urban Interface and Rural Communities.

Authors:  Charis E Anton; Carmen Lawrence
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 3.266

  8 in total
  1 in total

1.  Is a clean river fun for all? Recognizing social vulnerability in watershed planning.

Authors:  Bethany B Cutts; Andrew J Greenlee; Natalie K Prochaska; Carolina V Chantrill; Annie B Contractor; Juliana M Wilhoit; Nancy Abts; Kaitlyn Hornik
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.