You are here

Categorizing the social context of the wildland urban interface: Adaptive capacity for wildfire and community "archetypes"

Posted date: April 17, 2015
Publication Year: 
2015
Authors: Paveglio, Tavis B.; Moseley, Cassandra; Carroll, Matthew S.; Williams, Daniel R.; Davis, Emily Jane; Fischer, A. Paige
Publication Series: 
Scientific Journal (JRNL)
Source: Forest Science. 61(2): 298-310.

Abstract

Understanding the local context that shapes collective response to wildfire risk continues to be a challenge for scientists and policymakers. This study utilizes and expands on a conceptual approach for understanding adaptive capacity to wildfire in a comparison of 18 past case studies. The intent is to determine whether comparison of local social context and community characteristics across cases can identify community "archetypes" that approach wildfire planning and mitigation in consistently different ways. Identification of community archetypes serves as a potential strategy for collaborating with diverse populations at risk from wildfire and designing tailored messages related to wildfire risk mitigation. Our analysis uncovered four consistent community archetypes that differ in terms of the local social context and community characteristics that continue to influence response to wildfire risk. Differences among community archetypes include local communication networks, reasons for place attachment or community identity, distrust of government, and actions undertaken to address issues of forest health and esthetics. Results indicate that the methodological approach advanced in this study can be used to draw more consistent lessons across case studies and provide the means to test different communication strategies among archetypes.

Citation

Paveglio, Tavis B.; Moseley, Cassandra; Carroll, Matthew S.; Williams, Daniel R.; Davis, Emily Jane; Fischer, A. Paige. 2015. Categorizing the social context of the wildland urban interface: Adaptive capacity for wildfire and community "archetypes." Forest Science. 61(2): 298-310.