Understanding change: Wildfire in Boulder County, Colorado

Brenkert–Smith, Hannah; Champ, Patricia A.; Telligman, Amy L.

doi:10.2737/rmrs-rn-57

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An extensive description of every variable in the 2007 and 2010 data can be found in Champ et al . and Brenkert‐Smith et al . Table provides summary statistics by year for the variables included in the risk models.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table describes the response rates for the 2007 and 2010 surveys. The surveys and additional details of the implementation procedures are more fully described in Brenkert‐Smith et al …”

Section: Living With Wildfire In Boulder and Larimer Countiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In November 2010, two months after the Fourmile Canyon Fire in Boulder County and the Reservoir Road Fire in Larimer County, a survey was administered to the respondents to the 2007 survey (Table I) Table I describes the response rates for the 2007 and 2010 surveys. The surveys and additional details of the implementation procedures are more fully described in Brenkert-Smith et al (55,56)…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An extensive description of every variable in the 2007 and 2010 data can be found in Champ et al (57,58) and Brenkert-Smith et al (55,56) Table II provides summary statistics by year for the variables included in the risk models. Two risk indices were created from the survey measures following the approach in Brenkert-Smith et al (15) The probability risk index (probindex) was generated using principal components analysis on two Likert-scale items: "A wildfire is unlikely to happen within the time period you expect to live here" and "Your property is not at risk of a wildfire."…”

Section: Summary Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Is Seeing Believing? Perceptions of Wildfire Risk Over Time

Champ

Brenkert–Smith

2015

Risk Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ongoing challenges to understanding how hazard exposure and disaster experiences influence perceived risk lead us to ask: Is seeing believing? We approach risk perception by attending to two components of overall risk perception: perceived probability of an event occurring and perceived consequences if an event occurs. Using a two-period longitudinal data set collected from a survey of homeowners living in a fire-prone area of Colorado, we find that study participants' initial high levels of perceived probability and consequences of a wildfire did not change substantially after extreme wildfire events in the intervening years. More specifically, perceived probability of a wildfire changed very little, whereas the perceived consequences of a wildfire went up a bit. In addition, models of risk perceptions show that the two components of overall risk perception are correlated with somewhat different factors, and experience is not found to be one of the strongest correlates with perceived risk. These results reflect the importance of distinguishing the components of overall risk and modeling them separately to facilitate additional insights into the complexities of risk perceptions, factors related to perceived risk, and change in risk perceptions over time.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table describes the response rates for the 2007 and 2010 surveys. The surveys and additional details of the implementation procedures are more fully described in Brenkert‐Smith et al …”

Section: Living With Wildfire In Boulder and Larimer Countiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%