(De)Constructing Hazard: The Making of Meaning and Value in Oregon’s Firescapes
| dc.contributor.advisor | Walker, Peter | |
| dc.contributor.author | Casey, Alexandra | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-08-07T22:59:53Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2024-08-07 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Amidst the global rise of wildfire disasters and the complex human-environment interactions they (re)produce (Fischer, et al., 2016), Oregon’s Senate Bill 762 stands out as an ambitious policy initiative aiming to improve wildfire adaptation, resilience, and mitigation across scales—from home protection zones to entire firesheds. However, this legislative effort met significant public pushback after the release of a wildfire hazard map that identified high-hazard areas for downstream regulation. The SB 762 hazard map has since been rescinded, and implementation of new fire safety codes were delayed as the state revised its approach under SB 80. This thesis explores the political ecology, critical physical geography, and critical GIS of wildfire hazard mapping in Oregon, focusing on the construction of SB 762 wildfire map and its rearticulation under SB 80. Chapter I presents a broad overview to mixed-methods research and builds on an interdisciplinary body of literature from geography, sociology, science and technology studies, wildfire risk science, and political science to uncover how these maps are dynamic entities shaped by scales of influence and visibility. Chapter II uses geospatial data, interviews, and public meeting transcripts to find how units of measurement such as pixels and tax lots do not just determine the scale of analysis but also influence the extent and outcomes of negotiations within GIS decision-making processes. Through a close examination of these units, I find that the fixed scales of scientific assumptions in the initial SB 762 map affect whose voices are amplified in the shaping of definitions, thresholds, and distribution of power and responsibility in wildfire risk management. In Chapter III, I analyze a large set of appeals and public meetings to understand how individuals work to articulate property’s conditions in ways legible to current and anticipated future hazard metrics. I ultimately find that influence from individuals and representatives of rural agricultural interests shifts the map's meaning of hazard. Overall, this thesis argues that scientific units of analysis and political representation produce the parameters through which rural agricultural stakeholders (re)negotiate the SB 762/80 wildfire map. | en_US |
| dc.description.embargo | 2026-07-23 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1794/29855 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | |
| dc.publisher | University of Oregon | |
| dc.rights | All Rights Reserved. | |
| dc.subject | critical GIS | en_US |
| dc.subject | political ecology | en_US |
| dc.subject | pyrogeography | en_US |
| dc.subject | wildfire risk mapping | en_US |
| dc.title | (De)Constructing Hazard: The Making of Meaning and Value in Oregon’s Firescapes | |
| dc.type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation | |
| thesis.degree.discipline | Department of Geography | |
| thesis.degree.grantor | University of Oregon | |
| thesis.degree.level | masters | |
| thesis.degree.name | M.S. |