Wildfire risk in temperate forests has become a nearly intractable problem that can be characterized as a socioecological “pathology”: that is, a set of complex and problematic interactions among social and ecological systems across multiple spatial and temporal scales. Assessments of wildfire risk could benefit from recognizing and accounting for these interactions in terms of socioecological systems, also known as coupled natural and human systems (CNHS). We characterize the primary social and ecological dimensions of the wildfire risk pathology, paying particular attention to the governance system around wildfire risk, and suggest strategies to mitigate the pathology through innovative planning approaches, analytical tools, and policies. We caution that even with a clear understanding of the problem and possible solutions, the system by which human actors govern fire‐prone forests may evolve incrementally in imperfect ways and can be expected to resist change even as we learn better ways to manage CNHS.

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.

. 2017. Using an agent-based model to examine forest management outcomes in a fire-prone landscape in Oregon, USA. Ecology and Society 22 (1) ABSTRACT. Fire-prone landscapes present many challenges for both managers and policy makers in developing adaptive behaviors and institutions. We used a coupled human and natural systems framework and an agent-based landscape model to examine how alternative management scenarios affect fire and ecosystem services metrics in a fire-prone multiownership landscape in the eastern Cascades of Oregon. Our model incorporated existing models of vegetation succession and fire spread and information from original empirical studies of landowner decision making. Our findings indicate that alternative management strategies can have variable effects on landscape outcomes over 50 years for fire, socioeconomic, and ecosystem services metrics. For example, scenarios with federal restoration treatments had slightly less high-severity fire than a scenario without treatment; exposure of homes in the wildland-urban interface to fire was also slightly less with restoration treatments compared to no management. Treatments appeared to be more effective at reducing high-severity fire in years with more fire than in years with less fire. Under the current management scenario, timber production could be maintained for at least 50 years on federal lands. Under an accelerated restoration scenario, timber production fell because of a shortage of areas meeting current stand structure treatment targets. Trade-offs between restoration outcomes (e.g., open forests with large fire-resistant trees) and habitat for species that require dense older forests were evident. For example, the proportional area of nesting habitat for northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis) was somewhat less after 50 years under the restoration scenarios than under no management. However, the amount of resilient older forest structure and habitat for white-headed woodpecker (Leuconotopicus albolarvatus) was higher after 50 years under active management. More carbon was stored on this landscape without management than with management, despite the occurrence of high-severity wildfire. Our results and further applications of the model could be used in collaborative settings to facilitate discussion and development of policies and practices for fire-prone landscapes.

No abstract

The need is urgent to build capacity in the environmental community, and the interdisciplinary approach is one of the most promising avenues to accomplish this. The environmental studies and sciences program movement can ably lead this effort. Based on a workshop at the second annual meeting of the Association for Environmental Studies and Sciences (AESS) in 2010, we look at barriers to interdisciplinarity in academia, including the cultural, historical, and institutional context of disciplinary scholarship. It is within this context that interdisciplinarians must fight for identity, recognition, roles, legitimacy, and standing. Teaching, research, service, publishing, competing for funding, and meeting reappointment/promotion/tenure evaluation criteria can all pose unique difficulties for interdisciplinary scholars. We offer advice to those seeking professional interdisciplinary education, including finding the right program and advisor, developing skills, designing and completing the dissertation, and establishing a professional network. We also offer advice on securing a job-setting the stage while still in graduate school and highlighting interdisciplinary strengths in the application and interview process. We also offer advice on career advancement, such as clarifying one's expertise and its significance, setting and fulfilling tenure-track benchmarks, adapting the career trajectory to capitalize on an interdisciplinary career, clarifying with one's institution the criteria for advancement, and preparing the tenure portfolio. Finally, we offer an introduction to interdisciplinarity as an explicit, systematic approach in concept and framework that rests on a higher order means of organizing knowledge and action, with a focus on integration. AESS is emerging as an organization to assist professionals by assembling a supportive community of environmental educators, researchers, and problem solvers, by clarifying and promoting standards for successful interdisciplinarity in the classroom and in the field, and by offering advice and support on career issues for both up-and-coming professionals and established faculty and practitioners.