IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v113y2020ics1389934119302606.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The influence of risk attitudes on suppression spending and on wildland fire program budgeting

Author

Listed:
  • Rossi, David
  • Kuusela, Olli-Pekka

Abstract

Research has suggested that excessive risk aversion is a key driver of rising federal suppression costs. To formally understand how alternative risk attitudes of contracted incident managers can affect a public fire management organization's demand for fire management effort, a two-stage sequential game with complete information is presented. Qualitative expressions of the relevant comparative statics are derived and Monte Carlo simulations are constructed from the parameterized game to quantify these relationships. The simulation exercise reveals that risk aversion and a low tolerance for downside risk can have the similar effect of increasing the relative share of agency expenditures devoted to wildfire suppression. This theoretical analysis exposes the potential for multiple types of risk attitudes to influence an incident commander's demand for suppression effort. Consequently, these determinants of suppression demand also influence the organization's overall allocation of fire management budgets, suppression's expenditure share, and the overall agency exposure to downside risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Rossi, David & Kuusela, Olli-Pekka, 2020. "The influence of risk attitudes on suppression spending and on wildland fire program budgeting," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:113:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119302606
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102087
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934119302606
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102087?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. Liqun Liu & Jack Meyer, 2012. "Decreasing absolute risk aversion, prudence and increased downside risk aversion," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 243-260, June.
    2. Robyn S. Wilson & Patricia L. Winter & Lynn A. Maguire & Timothy Ascher, 2011. "Managing Wildfire Events: Risk‐Based Decision Making Among a Group of Federal Fire Managers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 805-818, May.
    3. Menezes, C & Geiss, C & Tressler, J, 1980. "Increasing Downside Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 921-932, December.
    4. Scott, Robert C & Horvath, Philip A, 1980. "On the Direction of Preference for Moments of Higher Order Than the Variance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(4), pages 915-919, September.
    5. Michael S. Hand & Matthew J. Wibbenmeyer & David E. Calkin & Matthew P. Thompson, 2015. "Risk Preferences, Probability Weighting, and Strategy Tradeoffs in Wildfire Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1876-1891, October.
    6. John M. Antle, 1987. "Econometric Estimation of Producers' Risk Attitudes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 69(3), pages 509-522.
    7. Kenneth J. Arrow & Robert C. Lind, 1974. "Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 3, pages 54-75, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Matthew J. Wibbenmeyer & Michael S. Hand & David E. Calkin & Tyron J. Venn & Matthew P. Thompson, 2013. "Risk Preferences in Strategic Wildfire Decision Making: A Choice Experiment with U.S. Wildfire Managers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1021-1037, June.
    9. Calkin, David C. & Finney, Mark A. & Ager, Alan A. & Thompson, Matthew P. & Gebert, Krista M., 2011. "Progress towards and barriers to implementation of a risk framework for US federal wildland fire policy and decision making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 378-389, June.
    10. Chavas, Jean-Paul, 2004. "Risk Analysis in Theory and Practice," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780121706210.
    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. Rossi, David & Kuusela, Olli-Pekka & Dunn, Christopher, 2022. "A microeconometric analysis of wildfire suppression decisions in the Western United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    2. Rossi, David & Kuusela, Olli-Pekka, 2023. "Carbon and Timber Management in Western Oregon under Tax-Financed Investments in Wildfire Risk Mitigation," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 48(2), May.

    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. Linden McBride & Leah Bevis, 2019. "Working Paper 311 - Risk, Returns, and Welfare," Working Paper Series 2437, African Development Bank.
    2. Sanglestsawai, Santi & Rodriguez, Divina Gracia P. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Yorobe, Jose M., 2017. "Production Risk, Farmer Welfare, and Bt Corn in the Philippines," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 507-528, December.
    3. Mintewab Bezabih & Remidius Ruhinduka & Mare Sarr, 2016. "Climate change perception and system of rice intensification (SRI) impact on dispersion and downside risk: a moment approximation approach," GRI Working Papers 256, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    4. Michael S. Hand & Matthew J. Wibbenmeyer & David E. Calkin & Matthew P. Thompson, 2015. "Risk Preferences, Probability Weighting, and Strategy Tradeoffs in Wildfire Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1876-1891, October.
    5. Bozzola, Martina, 2014. "Adaptation to Climate Change: Farmers' Risk Preferences and the Role of Irrigation," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182771, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Karin L. Riley & Matthew P. Thompson & Joe H. Scott & Julie W. Gilbertson-Day, 2018. "A Model-Based Framework to Evaluate Alternative Wildfire Suppression Strategies," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, January.
    7. Catarina Roseta‐Palma & Yiğit Sağlam, 2019. "Downside risk in reservoir management," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(2), pages 328-353, April.
    8. Michel Denuit & Liqun Liu, 2014. "Decreasing higher-order absolute risk aversion and higher-degree stochastic dominance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 287-295, February.
    9. Donald C. Keenan & Arthur Snow, 2016. "Strong Increases in Downside Risk Aversion," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, Springer;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 41(2), pages 149-161, September.
    10. Paul Karehnke & Frans de Roon, 2020. "Spanning Tests for Assets with Option-Like Payoffs: The Case of Hedge Funds," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5969-5989, December.
    11. Martina Bozzola & Melinda Smale & Salvatore Di Falco, 2016. "Climate, Shocks, Weather and Maize Intensification Decisions in Rural Kenya," FOODSECURE Working papers 39, LEI Wageningen UR.
    12. Liu, Liqun & Meyer, Jack, 2013. "Substituting one risk increase for another: A method for measuring risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(6), pages 2706-2718.
    13. Unser, Matthias, 2000. "Lower partial moments as measures of perceived risk: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 253-280, June.
    14. Ayenew, Habtamu Yesigat & Sauer, Johannes & Abate-Kassa, Getachew, 2016. "Cost of Risk Exposure, Farm Disinvestment and Adaptation to Climate Uncertainties: The Case of Arable Farms in the EU," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235595, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Hurley, Terrance M., 2010. "A review of agricultural production risk in the developing world," Working Papers 188476, HarvestChoice.
    16. Champ, Patricia A. & Meldrum, James R. & Brenkert-Smith, Hannah & Warziniack, Travis W. & Barth, Christopher M. & Falk, Lilia C. & Gomez, Jamie B., 2020. "Do actions speak louder than words? Comparing the effect of risk aversion on objective and self-reported mitigation measures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 301-313.
    17. De Donno, Marzia & Menegatti, Mario, 2022. "On the relationship between comparisons of risk aversion of different orders," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    18. Paan Jindapon & Liqun Liu & William S. Neilson, 2021. "Comparative risk apportionment," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 9(1), pages 91-112, April.
    19. Donald C. Keenan & Arthur Snow, 2022. "Reversibly greater downside risk aversion," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 47(2), pages 327-338, September.
    20. Bozzola, Martina & DiFalco, Salvatore & Finger, Robert, 2017. "Time variant risk preferences in agriculture: evidences from Italy," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258365, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fire management; Suppression; Risk aversion; Downside risk; Cost plus net value change; Budgetary institutions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:forpol:v:113:y:2020:i:c:s1389934119302606. 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.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.