ABSTRACT. Fire-prone landscapes are not well studied as coupled human and natural systems (CHANS) and present many challenges for understanding and promoting adaptive behaviors and institutions. Here, we explore how heterogeneity, feedbacks, and external drivers in this type of natural hazard system can lead to complexity and can limit the development of more adaptive approaches to policy and management. Institutions and social networks can counter these limitations and promote adaptation. We also develop a conceptual model that includes a robust characterization of social subsystems for a fire-prone landscape in Oregon and describe how we are building an agent-based model to promote understanding of this social-ecological system. Our agent-based model, which incorporates existing ecological models of vegetation and fire and is based on empirical studies of landowner decision-making, will be used to explore alternative management and fire scenarios with land managers and various public entities. We expect that the development of CHANS frameworks and the application of a simulation model in a collaborative setting will facilitate the development of more effective policies and practices for fire-prone landscapes.

Wildfire links social and ecological systems in dry-forest landscapes of the United States. The management of these landscapes, however, is bifurcated by two institutional cultures that have different sets of beliefs about wildfire, motivations for managing wildfire risk, and approaches to administering policy. Fire protection, preparedness, and response agencies often view wildfire as a threat to be mitigated or extinguished to protect things that humans value (e.g., houses, and timber), whereas land management agencies and conservation organizations often view wildfire as an essential ecological process for sustaining biodiversity and resilient forests. A lack of coordinated action between these two types of organizations raises the possibility of several management challenges in fire-prone socioecological systems: (1) maladaptive management behaviors (e.g., suppressing wildfires, which then allows fuels to accumulate further) resulting from lack of recognition of interdependencies between fire protection and forest restoration or a sole focus on minimizing property damage; (2) limited opportunities for problemsolving, innovation and collective action resulting from lack of communication among the two types of organizations; and (3) impediments to management at politically and ecologically efficient scales due to lack of coordination across cultural and geographic boundaries.

Resilient communities promote trust, have well-developed networks, and can adapt to change. For rural communities in fire-prone landscapes, current resilience strategies may prove insufficient in light of increasing wildfire risks due to climate change. It is argued that, given the complexity of climate change, adaptations are best addressed at local levels where specific social, cultural, political, and economic conditions are matched with local risks and opportunities. Despite the importance of social networks as key attributes of community resilience, research using social network analysis on coupled human and natural systems is scarce. Furthermore, the extent to which local communities in fire-prone areas understand climate change risks, accept the likelihood of potential changes, and have the capacity to develop collaborative mitigation strategies is underexamined, yet these factors are imperative to community resiliency. We apply a social network framework to examine information networks that affect perceptions of wildfire and climate change in Central Oregon. Data were collected using a mailed questionnaire. Analysis focused on the residents' information networks that are used to gain awareness of governmental activities and measures of community social capital. A two-mode network analysis was used to uncover information exchanges. Results suggest that the general public develops perceptions about climate change based on complex social and cultural systems rather than as patrons of scientific inquiry and understanding. It appears that perceptions about climate change itself may not be the limiting factor in these communities' adaptive capacity, but rather how they perceive local risks. We provide a novel methodological approach in understanding rural community adaptation and resilience in fire-prone landscapes and offer a framework for future studies.

No abstract

No abstract