↓ Skip to main content

Does Wildfire Open a Policy Window? Local Government and Community Adaptation After Fire in the United States

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Does Wildfire Open a Policy Window? Local Government and Community Adaptation After Fire in the United States
Published in
Environmental Management, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00267-018-1030-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miranda H. Mockrin, Hillary K. Fishler, Susan I. Stewart

Abstract

Becoming a fire adapted community that can coexist with wildfire is envisioned as a continuous, iterative process of adaptation, but it is unclear how communities may pursue adaptation. Experience with wildfire and other natural hazards suggests that disasters may open a "window of opportunity" leading to local government policy changes. We examined how destructive wildfire affected progress toward becoming fire adapted in eight locations in the United States. We found that community-level adaptation following destructive fires is most common where destructive wildfire is novel and there is already government capacity and investment in wildfire regulation and land use planning. External funding, staff capacity, and the presence of issue champions combined to bring about change after wildfire. Locations with long histories of destructive wildfire, extensive previous investment in formal wildfire regulation and mitigation, or little government and community capacity to manage wildfire saw fewer changes. Across diverse settings, communities consistently used the most common tools and actions for wildfire mitigation and planning. Nearly all sites reported changes in wildfire suppression, emergency response, and hazard planning documents. Expansion in voluntary education and outreach programs to increase defensible space was also common, occurring in half of our sites, but land use planning and regulations remained largely unchanged. Adaptation at the community and local governmental level therefore may not axiomatically follow from each wildfire incident, nor easily incorporate formal approaches to minimizing land use and development in hazardous environments, but in many sites wildfire was a focusing event that inspired reflection and adaptation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 126 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 17%
Student > Master 20 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 8 6%
Researcher 7 6%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 41 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 23 18%
Environmental Science 21 17%
Engineering 8 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 3%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 45 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2018.
All research outputs
#2,979,384
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#201
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,267
of 340,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#7
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,954 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.