Resolving conflicts in fire management using decision theory: Asset-protection versus biodiversity conservation

Driscoll, Don A., Lindenmayer, David B., Bennett, Andrew F., Bode, Michael, Bradstock, Ross A., Cary, Geoffrey J., Clarke, Michael F., Dexter, Nick, Fensham, Rod, Friend, Gordon, Gill, Malcolm, James, Stuart, Kay, Geoff, Keith, David A., MacGregor, Chris, Possingham, Hugh P., Russel-Smith, Jeremy, Salt, David, Watson, James E. M., Williams, Dick and York, Alan (2010) Resolving conflicts in fire management using decision theory: Asset-protection versus biodiversity conservation. Conservation Letters, 3 4: 215-223. doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00115.x

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
UQ212925.pdf HERDC combined - not publicly available application/pdf 8.72MB 4

Author Driscoll, Don A.
Lindenmayer, David B.
Bennett, Andrew F.
Bode, Michael
Bradstock, Ross A.
Cary, Geoffrey J.
Clarke, Michael F.
Dexter, Nick
Fensham, Rod
Friend, Gordon
Gill, Malcolm
James, Stuart
Kay, Geoff
Keith, David A.
MacGregor, Chris
Possingham, Hugh P.
Russel-Smith, Jeremy
Salt, David
Watson, James E. M.
Williams, Dick
York, Alan
Title Resolving conflicts in fire management using decision theory: Asset-protection versus biodiversity conservation
Journal name Conservation Letters   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1755-263X
Publication date 2010-08
Sub-type Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
DOI 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00115.x
Open Access Status DOI
Volume 3
Issue 4
Start page 215
End page 223
Total pages 9
Place of publication Oxford, United Kingdom
Publisher Blackwell
Collection year 2011
Language eng
Subject 960604 Environmental Management Systems
050205 Environmental Management
Formatted abstract
Agencies charged with nature conservation and protecting built-assets from fire face a policy dilemma because management that protects assets can have adverse impacts on biodiversity. Although conservation is often a policy goal, protecting built-assets usually takes precedence in fire management implementation. To make decisions that can better achieve both objectives, existing trade-offs must first be recognized, and then policies implemented to manage multiple objectives explicitly. We briefly review fire management actions that can conflict with biodiversity conservation. Through this review, we find that common management practices might not appreciably reduce the threat to built-assets but could have a large negative impact on biodiversity. We develop a framework based on decision theory that could be applied to minimize these conflicts. Critical to this approach is (1) the identification of the full range of management options and (2) obtaining data for evaluating the effectiveness of those options for achieving asset protection and conservation goals. This information can be used to compare explicitly the effectiveness of different management choices for conserving species and for protecting assets, given budget constraints. The challenge now is to gather data to quantify these trade-offs so that fire policy and practices can be better aligned with multiple objectives.
©2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Keyword Back-burning
Decision theory
Management actions
Multi-criteria optimization
Planned fire
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Critical review of research, literature review, critical commentary
Collections: School of Mathematics and Physics
Official 2011 Collection
School of Biological Sciences Publications
Ecology Centre Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 36 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 38 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Sun, 22 Aug 2010, 00:10:04 EST