Cohesive fire management within an uncertain environment: A review of risk handling and decision support systems

Pacheco, Abílio Pereira; Claro, João; Fernandes, Paulo M.; Neufville, Richard de; Oliveira, Tiago; Borges, José G.; Rodrigues, José

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2015.02.033

Cited by 61 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An effective decision process relies on generating and evaluating the consequences of a range of available management alternatives (Hammond et al 1999;Gregory and Keeney 2002;Gregory and Long 2009;Marcot et al 2012), and many decision-support systems are set up at least in part to assist Influence of affected communities and governmental officials on fire manager decision space managers with these steps Noonan-Wright et al 2011;Zimmerman 2012;Mitsopoulos et al 2015;Pacheco et al 2015;Kalabokidis et al 2016). Imperfect information is the norm in fire response, meaning that fire managers often make decisions in the face of substantial uncertainty .…”

Section: Evaluating Consequences and Alternativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, given the complexity and uncertainty of fire response, decision-support systems are likely necessary to help fire managers determine and demonstrate effective and efficient solutions (Mavsar et al 2013;Pacheco et al 2015). Broadly speaking, by effective we mean yielding desirable fire outcomes, and by efficient, we mean doing so in a manner less costly than alternatives with equal effectiveness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We further draw from several review papers focused on related questions of fire impacts, resource valuation, optimisation, fire management operations, fire modelling, uncertainty and risk, and decision support (Bowman and Johnston 2014;Hand et al 2014;Milne et al 2014;Minas et al 2012;Duff and Tolhurst 2015;Martell 2015;Omi 2015;Pacheco et al 2015). We attempt to link insights from these strands of research to identify productive paths forward to improve the efficiency of large fire management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A review of challenges to determining and demonstrating efficiency of large fire management

Thompson

Silva

Calkin

et al. 2017

Int. J. Wildland Fire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Characterising the impacts of wildland fire and fire suppression is critical information for fire management decision-making. Here, we focus on decisions related to the rare larger and longer-duration fire events, where the scope and scale of decision-making can be far broader than initial response efforts, and where determining and demonstrating efficiency of strategies and actions can be particularly troublesome. We organise our review around key decision factors such as context, complexity, alternatives, consequences and uncertainty, and for illustration contrast fire management in Andalusia, Spain, and Montana, USA. Two of the largest knowledge gaps relate to quantifying fire impacts to ecosystem services, and modelling relationships between fire management activities and avoided damages. The relative magnitude of these and other concerns varies with the complexity of the socioecological context in which fire management decisions are made. To conclude our review, we examine topics for future research, including expanded use of the economics toolkit to better characterise the productivity and effectiveness of suppression actions, integration of ecosystem modelling with economic principles, and stronger adoption of risk and decision analysis within fire management decision-making.

show abstract

Section: Evaluating Consequences and Alternativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A review of challenges to determining and demonstrating efficiency of large fire management

Thompson

Silva

Calkin

et al. 2017

Int. J. Wildland Fire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Estes são a base da gestão de incêndios e decisões políticas, através de múltiplos níveis e escalas, e são responsáveis pela eficiência dos recursos destinados ao combate e supressão (PACHECO et al, 2015). Em contrapartida, com uma quantidade limitada de equipamentos e recursos financeiros e humanos, os gestores florestais devem decidir a aplicação mais eficiente de subsídios em ações, como prevenção (ex.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Avaliação Da Eficiência De Combate Aos Incêndios Florestais Em Unidades De Conservação Brasileiras

Félix

Lima

Torres

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoO objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a eficiência de combate aos incêndios florestais em unidades de conservação brasileiras no período de 2008 a 2012. Foram utilizados três parâmetros principais para se avaliar a eficiência de combate: a área queimada, em que se avaliou a eficiência, distribuindo os incêndios ocorridos por classes de tamanho, e se observou a área queimada média por incêndio; o tempo para o ataque e sua distribuição por classe de tempo, em que se avaliou a eficiência de mobilização dos combatentes em termos Abstract Assessment of firefighting efficiency in Brazilian conservation units.The objective of this study was to assess the firefighting efficiency in Brazilian conservation units from 2008 to 2012. Three main parameters were used to evaluate the combat efficiency: burned area, in which efficiency was evaluated, the fires were distributed by size classes, and the average burned area by fire was observed; time for attack and its distribution by time class, in which the firefighters mobilization efficiency was evaluated in terms of average time from detection until the first fire attack; and time of combat, in which the average time of combat and its distribution by class of time of combat were evaluated. In the analysed period, Brazil presented a low combat efficiency. The average burned area in Brazilian protected areas was 613.61 ha in this period. The average time for attack and the average time of combat were 194.82 and 1,012.51 minutes, respectively. The main difficulty in the study was the lack of complete data of the Record of Fire Occurrence (ROI). Keywords: Fire, Brazil, conservation units, ROI. INTRODUÇÃOIncêndios resultam em mudanças drásticas em todos os tipos de ecossistemas florestais (ZAITSEV et al., 2016). Eles têm forte impacto tanto sobre as condições bióticas como as abióticas (ADÁMEK et al., 2015). Nas Unidades de Conservação (UC), áreas ambientais destinadas primordialmente a proteção, os incêndios florestais são uma grave perturbação, que pode colocar em risco os processos ambientais e a biodiversidade. Na grande maioria das UCs brasileiras, não existe um planejamento adequado visando à prevenção e ao combate a incêndios (BONTEMPO et al., 2011).Grande parte dessa dificuldade no planejamento está relacionada a fatores incertos e altamente variáveis, tais como condições meteorológicas, ação antrópica, comportamento do fogo e propagação e seus efeitos. Estes são a base da gestão de incêndios e decisões políticas, através de múltiplos níveis e escalas, e são responsáveis pela eficiência dos recursos destinados ao combate e supressão (PACHECO et al., 2015). Em contrapartida, com uma quantidade limitada de equipamentos e recursos financeiros e humanos, os gestores florestais devem decidir a aplicação mais eficiente de subsídios em ações, como prevenção (ex. campanhas de educação ambiental), gestão de combustível (ex. queima prescrita e tratamentos mecânicos), pré-supressão (ex. planejamento e preparação,

show abstract

“…These efforts reflect broader trends of increasing sophistication of risk assessment and risk management within the global fire science and decision support communities [11][12][13][14][15][16]. One notable advancement relates to analysis of risk transmission (i.e., the analysis of ignition patterns, potential fire flow pathways, and simulated fire perimeters) in order to determine areas on the landscape that have a higher propensity to be a source of damaging fires [17][18][19][20][21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing Wildfire Suppression Difficulty in Relation to Protection Demand

Thompson¹,

Liu²,

Wei³

et al. 2018

Environmental Risks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the field of wildfire risk management has seen dramatic advances. One notable improvement is in the realm of pre-fire suppression response planning, in particular the expansion from the assessment of risks posed by fire to the assessment of opportunities to effectively manage fire. Such proactive assessment and planning is critical to ensure that suppression response strategies and tactics are more likely to be safe and efficient. In this paper we will review the state-of-the-art in wildfire suppression planning, and illustrate application of advanced planning tools on a fire-prone landscape in Colorado, USA. Specifically we will use geospatial tools to quantify a composite index of suppression difficulty, and map this layer in relation to two key protection priorities that often drive suppression response decisions: built structures, and high value watersheds. We will discuss how our assessment results can inform planning and prioritization efforts, and offer suggestions for future research.

show abstract

Cohesive fire management within an uncertain environment: A review of risk handling and decision support systems

Cited by 61 publications

References 96 publications

A review of challenges to determining and demonstrating efficiency of large fire management

A review of challenges to determining and demonstrating efficiency of large fire management

Avaliação Da Eficiência De Combate Aos Incêndios Florestais Em Unidades De Conservação Brasileiras

Analyzing Wildfire Suppression Difficulty in Relation to Protection Demand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About