Environmental Studies (ENVS) Data
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Recent Submissions
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Item Open Access Code Descriptions for “Managed wildfire: A strategy limited by terminology, risk perception, and ownership boundaries.”(University of Oregon, 2021) Davis, Emily Jane; Huber-Stearns, Heidi R.; Cheng, Antony S.; Deak, Alison; Evans, Alexander; Caggiano, Michael; McAvoy, Darren J.Federal land managers in the United States are permitted to manage wildfires with strategies other than full suppression under appropriate conditions to achieve natural resource objectives. However, policy and scientific support for “managed wildfire” appear insufficient to support its broad use. We conducted case studies in northern New Mexico and southwestern Utah to examine how managers and stakeholders navigated shifting barriers and opportunities to use managed wildfire from 2018-2021. Use of managed wildfire was fostered through an active network of civil society partnerships in one case, and strong interagency cooperation and existing policies and plans in the other. In both, the COVID-19 pandemic, drought, and agency direction curtailed recent use. Local context shapes wildfire response strategies, yet centralized decision making and policy also can enable or constrain them. Future research could refine understanding of social factors in incident decision making, and evaluation of risks and tradeoffs in wildfire response.Item Open Access Code Descriptions for “Spanning boundaries for managing wildfire risk in forest and range landscapes: Lessons from case studies in the western United States.”(University of Oregon, 2021) Davis, Emily Jane; Huber-Stearns, Heidi R.; Cheng, Antony S.; Deak, AlisonManaging wildfire risk across boundaries and scales is critical in fire-prone landscapes around the world, as a variety of actors undertake mitigation and response activities according to jurisdictional and administrative boundaries; and available human, organizational, technical, and financial resources. There is a need to catalyze their coordination more effectively to collectively manage wildfire risk. We interviewed 102 people across five large landscape case studies in the western US to categorize how boundary spanning people, organizations, settings, concepts, and objects were deployed in range and forestlands to collectively address wildfire risk. Across all cases, actors spanned jurisdictional, conceptual, and administrative boundaries to create: 1) conductive settings for boundary work to occur; 2) concepts to communicate across boundaries; and 3) concrete objects as joint reference points, and to navigate challenges to implementing work on the ground. This work highlights context-specific ways to advance cross-boundary wildfire risk reduction efforts, and uses a boundary spanning lens to provide insight into how collective action in wildfire management evolves in different settings. This research also shows prescribed fire as a gateway for future collective action in wildfire risk, including managing naturally ignited wildfires for resource benefits or improved coordination and communication during wildfire suppression efforts.Item Open Access Code Descriptions and data for “Comparing social constructions of wildfire risk across media, government, and participatory discourse in a Colorado fireshed(University of Oregon, 2021-08-11) Jacobson, Meredith; Smith, Hollie; Huber-Stearns, Heidi R.; Davis, Emily Jane; Cheng, Antony S.; Deak, AlisonThis study examined how wildfire risk is framed by different entities and actors within a common region, during and after experiencing several large wildfire events. Using a social constructionist lens, we viewed wildfire risk as a fluid and variable concept that is socially constructed and framed through public discourse. Inconsistent social constructions of wildfire risk may pose challenges for effective wildfire risk governance and management, which requires the coordination of diverse entities including government, land managers, homeowners, and community groups. We sought to understand differing social constructions of wildfire risk within one region, the Northern Colorado Front Range, across four domains of social discourse: mainstream media coverage, governmental planning documents, a community collaborative group’s meeting notes, and Community Wildfire Protection Plans. Through multiple rounds of qualitative coding, we compared how values at risk, causes of risk, and solutions to mitigate risk are framed across discourse domains. We also identified which agencies, organizations, or other actors’ voices were most prominent within each domain. Our results show inconsistent framings of wildfire risk definition across the data, building upon past literature that has identified divides between fire suppression and mitigation work, as well as disconnects between media representations of fire and perspectives of resource managers and scientists. Lastly, we highlight two examples of cross-cutting discourses - public drinking water and smoke – as concepts that span boundaries and may have the power to generate broader coordination and support for wildfire policy solutions and action.Item Open Access Amazonian Dark Earths [Dataset](University of Oregon, 2020) Silva, Lucas C. R.; Corrêa, Rodrigo S.; Wright, Jamie L.; Bomfim, Barbara; Hendricks, Lauren; Gavin, Daniel G.; Muniz, Aleksander W.; Martins, Gilvan Coimbra; Motta, Antônio Carlos Vargas; Barbosa, Julierme Zimmer; Melo, Vander de Freitas; Young, Scott D.; Broadley, Martin R.; Santos, Roberto V.