scholarly journals Cost shared wildfire risk mitigation in Log Hill Mesa, Colorado: survey evidence on participation and willingness to pay

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 567 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Meldrum ◽  
Patricia A. Champ ◽  
Travis Warziniack ◽  
Hannah Brenkert-Smith ◽  
Christopher M. Barth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Cost Sharing ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Willingness To Participate ◽  
Wildfire Risk ◽  
Risk Levels ◽  
Visual Impacts ◽  
The Cost

Wildland–urban interface (WUI) homeowners who do not mitigate the wildfire risk on their properties impose a negative externality on society. To reduce the social costs of wildfire and incentivise homeowners to take action, cost sharing programs seek to reduce the barriers that impede wildfire risk mitigation. Using survey data from a WUI community in western Colorado and a two-stage decision framework, we examine residents’ willingness to participate in a cost sharing program for removing vegetation on their properties and the amount they are willing to contribute to the cost of that removal. We find that different factors motivate decisions about participation and about how much to pay. Willingness to participate correlates with both financial and non-monetary considerations, including informational barriers and wildfire risk perceptions, but not with concerns about effectiveness or visual impacts. Residents of properties with higher wildfire risk levels are less likely to participate in the cost sharing than those with lower levels of wildfire risk. We find widespread, positive willingness to pay for vegetation removal, with the amount associated negatively with property size and positively with respondent income. These results can inform the development of cost sharing programs to encourage wildfire risk mitigation on private property.

Renovating the View of Cost Sharing for the Underground Low Voltage Cable Projects in Hanoi

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (5E) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pham Thi Thu Ha ◽  
Phan Dieu Huong
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Cost Sharing ◽  
Low Voltage ◽  
Power Grid ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Power Industry ◽  
Well Field ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Sharing Responsibility ◽  
The Cost

Underground power grid projects in Hanoi is so urgent that it requires immediate implementation. To synchronously and quickly implement the underground power grid projects, people in charge should not follow the outdated perspectives of just including the power industry, but also need to call for the support and cost sharing responsibility from consumers. This paper aims at approaching the subject both from the producers and consumers’ perspectives to together sharing the cost of putting the power grid underground not only in Hanoi but other metropolitans in Vietnam as well. Field studies (including 104 families) at Hoan Kiem District, Hanoi and CBA method were applied to investigate the willingness to pay (WTP) level of consumers to share the cost with the power industry for the underground power grid projects in Hanoi. The overview of the results shows that cost for the underground power grid in Hoan Kiem District ranging from 30,000 VND/household/month to 46,000VND/household/month. On the other hand, the willingness to pay of a typical household of four people within Hoan Kiem District ranges from 17,000VND/month to 24,000VND/month, with the most favorable method of annual payment within a detailed timeline.

scholarly journals Interactions between Resident Risk Perceptions and Wildfire Risk Mitigation: Evidence from Simultaneous Equations Modeling

Fire ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
James R. Meldrum ◽  
Hannah Brenkert-Smith ◽  
Patricia Champ ◽  
Jamie Gomez ◽  
Lilia Falk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Household Survey ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Wildfire Risk ◽  
Level Data ◽  
Publicly Supported ◽  
Survey Responses ◽  
In Fire ◽  
Simultaneous Model

Fire science emphasizes that mitigation actions on residential property, including structural hardening and maintaining defensible space, can reduce the risk of wildfire at a home. Accordingly, a rich body of social science literature investigates the determinants of wildfire risk mitigation behaviors of residents living in fire-prone areas. Here, we investigate relationships among wildfire hazards, residents’ risk perceptions, and conditions associated with mitigation actions using a combination of simulated wildfire conditions, household survey responses, and professionally assessed parcel characteristic data. We estimate a simultaneous model of these data that accounts for potential direct feedbacks between risk perceptions and parcel-level conditions. We also compare the use of self-reported versus assessed parcel-level data for estimating these relationships. Our analysis relies on paired survey and assessment data for approximately 2000 homes in western Colorado. Our simultaneous model demonstrates dual-directional interactions between risk perceptions and conditions associated with mitigation actions, with important implications for inference from simpler approaches. In addition to improving general understanding of decision-making about risk and natural hazards, our findings can support the effectiveness of publicly supported programs intended to encourage mitigation to reduce society’s overall wildfire risk.

Wildfire Communication and Climate Risk Mitigation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robyn S. Wilson ◽  
Sarah M. McCaffrey ◽  
Eric Toman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Management ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Strategic Communication ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Wildfire Risk ◽  
The Public ◽  
Resource Managers ◽  
Risk Management Process

Throughout the late 19th century and most of the 20th century, risks associated with wildfire were addressed by suppressing fires as quickly as possible. However, by the 1960s, it became clear that fire exclusion policies were having adverse effects on ecological health, as well as contributing to larger and more damaging wildfires over time. Although federal fire policy has changed to allow fire to be used as a management tool on the landscape, this change has been slow to take place, while the number of people living in high-risk wildland–urban interface communities continues to increase. Under a variety of climate scenarios, in particular for states in the western United States, it is expected that the frequency and severity of fires will continue to increase, posing even greater risks to local communities and regional economies.Resource managers and public safety officials are increasingly aware of the need for strategic communication to both encourage appropriate risk mitigation behavior at the household level, as well as build continued public support for the use of fire as a management tool aimed at reducing future wildfire risk. Household decision making encompasses both proactively engaging in risk mitigation activities on private property, as well as taking appropriate action during a wildfire event to protect personal safety. Very little research has directly explored the connection between climate-related beliefs, wildfire risk perception, and action; however, the limited existing research suggests that climate-related beliefs have little direct effect on wildfire-related action. Instead, action appears to depend on understanding the benefits of different mitigation actions and in engaging the public in interactive, participatory communication programs that build trust between the public and natural resource managers. A relatively new line of research focuses on resource managers as critical decision makers in the risk management process, pointing to the need to thoughtfully engage audiences other than the lay public to improve risk management.Ultimately, improving the decision making of both the public and managers charged with mitigating the risks associated with wildfire can be achieved by carefully addressing several common themes from the literature. These themes are to (1) promote increased efficacy through interactive learning, (2) build trust and capacity through social interaction, (3) account for behavioral constraints and barriers to action, and (4) facilitate thoughtful consideration of risk-benefit tradeoffs. Careful attention to these challenges will improve the likelihood of successfully managing the increasing risks that wildfire poses to the public and ecosystems alike in a changing climate.

scholarly journals Developing Behavioral and Evidence-Based Programs for Wildfire Risk Mitigation

Fire ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 66
Author(s):  
Hilary Byerly ◽  
James R. Meldrum ◽  
Hannah Brenkert-Smith ◽  
Patricia Champ ◽  
Jamie Gomez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Design ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Research Report ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Wildfire Risk ◽  
Property Owners ◽  
Evidence Based Programs

The actions of residents in the wildland–urban interface can influence the private and social costs of wildfire. Wildfire programs that encourage residents to take action are often delivered without evidence of effects on behavior. Research from the field of behavioral science shows that simple, often low-cost changes to program design and delivery can influence socially desirable behaviors. In this research report, we highlight how behavioral science and experimental design may advance efforts to increase wildfire risk mitigation on private property. We offer an example in which we tested changes in outreach messaging on property owners’ interest in wildfire risk information. In partnership with a regional wildfire organization, we mailed 4564 letters directing property owners to visit personalized wildfire risk webpages. By tracking visitation, we observed that 590 letter recipients (12%) sought information about their wildfire risk and response varied by community. This research–practice collaboration has three benefits: innovation in outreach, evidence of innovation through experimental design, and real impacts on interest in wildfire mitigation among property owners. Future collaborations may inform behavioral and evidence-based programs to better serve residents and the public interest as the risks from wildfires are projected to grow.

Minority households’ willingness to pay for public and private wildfire risk reduction in Florida

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armando González-Cabán ◽  
José J. Sánchez
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Risk Reduction ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Cost Sharing ◽  
Latent Class ◽  
Latent Class Model ◽  
Random Parameter ◽  
Cost Share ◽  
Wildfire Risk ◽  
Private And Public

The purpose of this work is to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for minority (African-American and Hispanic) homeowners in Florida for private and public wildfire risk-reduction programs and also to test for differences in response between the two groups. A random parameter logit and latent class model allowed us to determine if there is a difference in wildfire mitigation program preferences, whether WTP is higher for public or private actions for wildfire risk reduction, and whether households with personal experience and who perceive that they live in higher-risk areas have significantly higher WTP. We also compare Florida minority homeowners’ WTP values with Florida original homeowners’ estimates. Results suggest that Florida minority homeowners are willing to invest in public programs, with African-Americans WTP values at a higher rate than Hispanics. In addition, the highest priority for cost-sharing funds would go to low-income homeowners, especially to cost-share private actions on their own land. These results may help fire managers optimise allocation of scarce cost-sharing funds for public v. private actions.

Living in a tinderbox: wildfire risk perceptions and mitigating behaviours

2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 832 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia A. Champ ◽  
Geoffrey H. Donovan ◽  
Christopher M. Barth
Keyword(s):  
Perceived Risk ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Front Range ◽  
Wildfire Risk ◽  
Prone Area ◽  
The Usa ◽  
In Fire ◽  
The Relationship

The loss of homes to wildfires is an important issue in the USA and other countries. Yet many homeowners living in fire-prone areas do not undertake mitigating actions, such as clearing vegetation, to decrease the risk of losing their home. To better understand the complexity of wildfire risk-mitigation decisions and the role of perceived risk, we conducted a survey of homeowners in a fire-prone area of the front range of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado. We examine the relationship between perceived wildfire risk ratings and risk-mitigating behaviours in two ways. First, we model wildfire risk-mitigation behaviours as a function of perceived risk. Then, we model wildfire risk-mitigation behaviours and perceived risk simultaneously. The results of the simultaneous model suggest that perceived risk and wildfire risk-mitigating behaviours are jointly determined. By correctly specifying the relationship between risk perceptions and mitigating behaviours, we are better able to understand the relationship between other factors, such as exposure to a wildfire-mitigation program and wildfire risk-mitigating behaviours. We also find that having a wood roof, as well as homeowner age, income and previous experience with living in a fire-prone area, are associated with wildfire risk-mitigating behaviours.

scholarly journals Homeowner Preferences for Wildfire Risk Mitigation in the Alaskan Wildland Urban Interface

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (21) ◽  
pp. 11754
Author(s):  
Allen Molina ◽  
Joseph Little ◽  
Stacy Drury ◽  
Randi Jandt
Keyword(s):  
Willingness To Pay ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Public Lands ◽  
Discrete Choice Experiments ◽  
Individual Risk ◽  
Fuel Treatments ◽  
Wildland Urban Interface ◽  
Wildfire Risk ◽  
Amenity Values

Wildfire has become a larger threat to human life and property with the proliferation of homes into the wildland urban interface and warming climate. In this study we explored Alaskan homeowner preferences for wildfire risk mitigation in the wildland urban interface using discrete choice experiments to better understand the drivers of their risk mitigation actions. Estimates of willingness-to-pay for private mitigation actions are increased with wildfire risk reduction for all respondents. Willingness-to-pay for private mitigation is also positively associated with the presence of thinned fuel treatments on nearby public lands, but is estimated to decrease if cleared fuel treatments are present on public lands. Our study concludes that homeowners minimize wildfire risk while maintaining neighborhood amenity values. Additionally, findings suggest that there is an optimal amount of neighborhood participation to motivate individual risk mitigation actions, as well as having a say in the mitigation actions on public lands.

scholarly journals Climate change management: a resilience strategy for flood risk using Blockchain tools

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Vannucci ◽  
Andrea Jonathan Pagano ◽  
Francesco Romagnoli
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Flood Risk ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Insurance Scheme ◽  
The Public ◽  
Management Platform ◽  
Climate Change Management ◽  
The Cost

AbstractThis work aims to offer a contribution in the analysis and management, from an economic and financial point of view, of the flood risk, and extended to the hydrogeological risk, from the perspective of a public administration. As main responsible actor for containing the phenomenon through the maintenance of the territory, public administration is responsible for the cost of restoring of the services that have been damaged by this type of phenomenon. The assets of which the public administration must ensure the restoration are all public infrastructures (i.e. transportation, energy and water supply system, communication) together with the damage suffered by private property, if these affect services to be guaranteed to the population. In this work, the authors propose possible strategies that a public administration can put in place to deal with flood risk. Three main strategies are analysed: an absolute passivity that provides for the payment of damages as they occur (i.e. business-as-usual scenario), a classic insurance scheme, a resilient and innovative insurance scheme. The economic–financial profiles of these strategies proposed in this work put an emphasis on how the assumption of a time horizon can change the convenience of one strategy compared to the others. This study highlights the key role of the quantification of flood risk mitigation measure from an engineering perspective, and their potential issues to pursue these objectives in connection to the regulatory framework of the public administrations. This synergy is supported by the potential use of Blockchain-based tools. Within the paper is highlighted the key role that such platform IT data management platform could have within risk analysis and management schemes, both as a data collection tool and as certification of the various steps necessary to complete the process.

scholarly journals Quality Visibility Improvement with Effort Alignment and Cost-Sharing Policies in a Food Supply Chain

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Wenbo Zhang ◽  
Qin Su
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Food Supply ◽  
Cost Sharing ◽  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Pareto Improvement ◽  
Food Supply Chain ◽  
Decentralized Supply Chain ◽  
Managerial Implications ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Cost

Improving quality visibility along a food supply chain has been considered as a critical driver of quality risk mitigation, safety and security assurance, and performance sustainability. This paper explores the coordination mechanisms in a food supply chain, where the demand and costs are sensitive to the supply chain quality visibility that depends on an upstream supplier and a downstream retailer jointly, and the effort to improve quality visibility is increasingly expensive. After comparing the centralized and decentralized supply chain models to discover an opportunity for Pareto improvement, it is proved that a pure revenue-sharing contract fails to coordinate the supply chain, while the price discount contract with effort alignment policy or effort cost-sharing policy works. The two coordinating contracts’ boundary conditions of excluding deviated actions are presented. It is shown that the contract with effort alignment policy is cheaper but more rigid, whereas the cost-sharing one allows us to arbitrarily allocate the supply chain’s profits despite more information being collected. The models are applied to a fresh chicken supply chain in order to verify their effectiveness and robustness in reality. The impacts of several specific parameters on supply chain decisions and performances are analyzed, and the results reveal some meaningful managerial implications regarding supply chain quality visibility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document