IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v221y2010i8p1162-1172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the ecological benefits of wildfire by integrating fire and ecosystem simulation models

Author

Listed:
  • Keane, Robert E.
  • Karau, Eva

Abstract

Fire managers are now realizing that wildfires can be beneficial because they can reduce hazardous fuels and restore fire-dominated ecosystems. A software tool that assesses potential beneficial and detrimental ecological effects from wildfire would be helpful to fire management. This paper presents a simulation platform called FLEAT (Fire and Landscape Ecology Assessment Tool) that integrates several existing landscape- and stand-level simulation models to compute an ecologically based measure that describes if a wildfire is moving the burning landscape towards or away from the historical range and variation of vegetation composition. FLEAT uses a fire effects model to simulate fire severity, which is then used to predict vegetation development for 1, 10, and 100 years into the future using a landscape simulation model. The landscape is then simulated for 5000 years using parameters derived from historical data to create an historical time series that is compared to the predicted landscape composition at year 1, 10, and 100 to compute a metric that describes their similarity to the simulated historical conditions. This tool is designed to be used in operational wildfire management using the LANDFIRE spatial database so that fire managers can decide how aggressively to suppress wildfires. Validation of fire severity predictions using field data from six wildfires revealed that while accuracy is moderate (30–60%), it is mostly dictated by the quality of GIS layers input to FLEAT. Predicted 1-year landscape compositions were only 8% accurate but this was because the LANDFIRE mapped pre-fire composition accuracy was low (21%). This platform can be integrated into current readily available software products to produce an operational tool for balancing benefits of wildfire with potential dangers.

Suggested Citation

  • Keane, Robert E. & Karau, Eva, 2010. "Evaluating the ecological benefits of wildfire by integrating fire and ecosystem simulation models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(8), pages 1162-1172.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:221:y:2010:i:8:p:1162-1172
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.01.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380010000475
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.01.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keane, Robert E. & Drury, Stacy A. & Karau, Eva C. & Hessburg, Paul F. & Reynolds, Keith M., 2010. "A method for mapping fire hazard and risk across multiple scales and its application in fire management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(1), pages 2-18.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Montagné-Huck, Claire & Brunette, Marielle, 2018. "Economic analysis of natural forest disturbances: A century of research," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 42-71.
    2. Joe Scott & Don Helmbrecht & Matthew Thompson & David Calkin & Kate Marcille, 2012. "Probabilistic assessment of wildfire hazard and municipal watershed exposure," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 64(1), pages 707-728, October.
    3. Benjamin P. Bryant & Tessa Maurer & Philip C. Saksa & Jonathan D. Herman & Kristen N. Wilson & Edward Smith, 2023. "Exploring Interacting Effects of Forest Restoration on Wildfire Risk, Hydropower, and Environmental Flows," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, July.
    4. Polash Banerjee, 2022. "MODIS-FIRMS and ground-truthing-based wildfire likelihood mapping of Sikkim Himalaya using machine learning algorithms," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 110(2), pages 899-935, January.
    5. Christopher Khawand, 2015. "Air Quality, Mortality, and Perinatal Health: Causal Evidence from Wildfires," 2015 Papers pkh318, Job Market Papers.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Seidl, Rupert & Fernandes, Paulo M. & Fonseca, Teresa F. & Gillet, François & Jönsson, Anna Maria & Merganičová, Katarína & Netherer, Sigrid & Arpaci, Alexander & Bontemps, Jean-Daniel & Bugmann, Hara, 2011. "Modelling natural disturbances in forest ecosystems: a review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(4), pages 903-924.
    2. Horia-Nicolai L. Teodorescu, 2015. "Defining resilience using probabilistic event trees," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 279-290, June.
    3. Ghafar Salavati & Ebrahim Saniei & Ebrahim Ghaderpour & Quazi K. Hassan, 2022. "Wildfire Risk Forecasting Using Weights of Evidence and Statistical Index Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, March.
    4. Susete Marques & Marco Marto & Vladimir Bushenkov & Marc McDill & JoséG. Borges, 2017. "Addressing Wildfire Risk in Forest Management Planning with Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Naderpour, Mohsen & Rizeei, Hossein Mojaddadi & Khakzad, Nima & Pradhan, Biswajeet, 2019. "Forest fire induced Natech risk assessment: A survey of geospatial technologies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    6. Alan A. Ager & Michelle Buonopane & Allison Reger & Mark A. Finney, 2013. "Wildfire Exposure Analysis on the National Forests in the Pacific Northwest, USA," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1000-1020, June.
    7. Sarkawt G. Salar & Arsalan Ahmed Othman & Sabri Rasooli & Salahalddin S. Ali & Zaid T. Al-Attar & Veraldo Liesenberg, 2022. "GIS-Based Modeling for Vegetated Land Fire Prediction in Qaradagh Area, Kurdistan Region, Iraq," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-31, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:221:y:2010:i:8:p:1162-1172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.