The human dimension of wildfire risk assessment includes two main components: one linked to the beginning or the suppression of the fire, as a causative or control agent, respectively, and the other one as an element of vulnerability, related to those people’s lives and values potentially affected by fires. Human relations with fire are very diverse on different continents, ranging from the traditional use of managed fires by indigenous communities [1] [2], to the total fire exclusion policy [3].
Even though many references acknowledge that humans are behind most fire ignitions (90% according to [4]), wildfire risk assessment (and research) has been much less active with the social aspects than with the biophysical aspects of fire ignition. Only in the last years has a growing interest to understand better how human behaviour relates to wildfire prevention [5] led to new approaches to model human causes of fire ignition [6] [7] [8] [9]. These studies have emphasised the complexity and regional variability of human-fire interactions, both including fire occurrence [10] [11] and persistency [12]. Population density and aging, proximity to roads and urbanised areas, livestock density and social conflicts have been identified as closely related to human fire ignition [13] [14] [15].
Finally, humans have an indirect effect on fire via land cover change, particularly through fragmentation (increase in land use intensity) or abandonment (reduction), which impact fire propagation. Humans also fragment the landscape due to settlements, infrastructure (e.g., roads, powerlines, railway tracks) and permanent agriculture. Increases in small-scale agriculture and the abandonment of fire-management practices to manage the landscape are likely to be responsible for the global decline of burned areas (particularly clear in Africa) and fire-related carbon emissions [16] [17]. When the land is no longer used, fragmentation decreases while fuel connectivity increases and thus the fuel horizontal and vertical continuity, leading to fire risk increments. The effects can differ regionally depending on the changes in land-use, e.g., if pastoralism continues in the high mountain areas, agriculture is less intensive in lowland areas.
Return to Conceptual Framework Diagram
Bilbao, B., Mistry, J., Millán, A., & Berardi, A. (2019). Sharing Multiple Perspectives on Burning: Towards a Participatory and Intercultural Fire Management Policy in Venezuela, Brazil, and Guyana. Fire, 2, 39. ↩︎
Rodríguez, I., Sletto, B., Bilbao, B., Sánchez-Rose, I., & Leal, A. (2018). Speaking of fire: reflexive governance in landscapes of social change and shifting local identities. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 20, 689-703. ↩︎
Cochrane, M.A., & Bowman, D.M.J.S. (2021). Manage fire regimes, not fires. Nature Geoscience, 14, 455-457. ↩︎
FAO (2007). Fire management - global assessment 2006. A thematic study prepared in the framework of the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005. Rome: FAO Forestry Paper 151. ↩︎
Brotons, L., Aquilué, N., De Cáceres, M., Fortin, M.-J., & Fall, A. (2013). How fire history, fire suppression practices and climate change affect wildfire regimes in Mediterranean landscapes. PLOS one, 8, e62392. ↩︎
Costafreda-Aumedes, S., Comas, C., & Vega-Garcia, C. (2017). Human-caused fire occurrence modelling in perspective: A review. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 26, 983-998. ↩︎
Coughlan, M.R., Ellison, A., & Cavanaugh, A.H. (2019). Social vulnerability and wildfire in the wildland-urban interface: Literature synthesis. University of Oregon: Northwest Fire Science Consortium. ↩︎
Hesseln, H. (2018). Wildland Fire Prevention: a Review. Current Forestry Reports, 4, 178-190. ↩︎
Scott, J.H., Thompson, M.P., & Gilbertson-Day, J.W. (2017). Exploring how alternative mapping approaches influence fireshed assessment and human community exposure to wildfire. GeoJournal, 82, 201-215. ↩︎
Martínez, J., Vega-García, C., & Chuvieco, E. (2009). Human-caused wildfire risk rating for prevention planning in Spain. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1241-1252. ↩︎
Parisien, M.-A., Miller, C., Parks, S.A., DeLancey, E.R., Robinne, F.-N., & Flannigan, M.D. (2016). The spatially varying influence of humans on fire probability in North America. Environmental Research Letters, 11, 075005. ↩︎
Chuvieco, E., Pettinari, M.L., Koutsias, N., Forkel, M., Hantson, S., & Turco, M. (2021). Human and climate drivers of global biomass burning variability. Science of the Total Environment, 779, 146361. ↩︎
Hantson, S., Lasslop, G., Kloster, S., & Chuvieco, E. (2015). Anthropogenic effects on global mean fire size. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24, 589-596. ↩︎
Knorr, W., Arneth, A., & Jiang, L. (2016). Demographic controls of future global fire risk. Nature climate change, 6, 781-785. ↩︎
Rodrigues, M., de la Riva, J., & Fotheringham, S. (2014). Modeling the spatial variation of the explanatory factors of human-caused wildfires in Spain using geographically weighted logistic regression. Applied Geography, 48, 52-63. ↩︎
Andela, N., Morton, D.C., Giglio, L., Paugam, R., Chen, Y., Hantson, S., van der Werf, G.R., & Randerson, J.T. (2019). The Global Fire Atlas of individual fire size, duration, speed, and direction. Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 11, 529-552. ↩︎
Forkel, M., Andela, N., Harrison, S.P., Lasslop, G., van Marle, M., Chuvieco, E., Dorigo, W., Forrest, M., Hantson, S., Heil, A., Li, F., Melton, J., Sitch, S., Yue, C., & Arneth, A. (2019). Emergent relationships on burned area in global satellite observations and fire-enabled vegetation models. Biogeosciences, 16, 47-76. ↩︎