“Society-Ready” and “Fire-Ready” Forestry Education in the United States: Interdisciplinary Discussion in Forestry Course Textbooks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kindra Jesse De’Arman ◽  
Richard F York

Abstract Changing environmental and social forestry contexts present new challenges for forestry graduates. In contrast with previous generations, forestry students today must be prepared to handle the impacts of climate change and increasing fire severity and frequency, as well as critical human dimensions, including the need to collaborate with Native American nations. To explore the extent to which social and fire science is taught in forestry programs and how it has changed over time, we conducted a content analysis of prominent forestry course textbooks used in graduate programs in the United States. We found little change between texts published before and after 2000, except for an increase in discussion of climate change. Of the currently used textbooks, we found a significant variation in whether they included discussion of traditional ecological knowledge, prescribed burning, combined economic factors, logging, and whether they recommended prescribed burning and logging. Given that not all programs offer or require courses that specialize in these topics, many forestry students may be missing relevant interdisciplinary social-fire education that is necessary to handle contemporary and changing forestry issues. Study Implications High-severity fires are a pressing concern in the United States and globally. Their frequency and intensity are affected by historical and contemporary land management practices, climate change, and forest use change—factors that are all influenced by social, political, and economic processes. However, our findings, based on an analysis of the contents of prominent textbooks used in US forestry courses, along with other research, show that the connections between fire and socioecological factors are often neglected in forestry higher-education textbooks. This suggests that future forest managers may not be properly prepared to handle changing fire regimes as climate change advances and social, political, and economic forces influence forestry practices. Thus, our research suggests that required forestry curricula course content should be revised to incorporate more coverage of fire science and socioecological factors, particularly traditional ecological knowledge and climate change, to prepare future foresters for the emerging challenges they will face.

Fire ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Crystal A. Kolden

Prescribed fire is one of the most widely advocated management practices for reducing wildfire hazard and has a long and rich tradition rooted in indigenous and local ecological knowledge. The scientific literature has repeatedly reported that prescribed fire is often the most effective means of achieving such goals by reducing fuels and wildfire hazard and restoring ecological function to fire-adapted ecosystems in the United States (US) following a century of fire exclusion. This has translated into calls from scientists and policy experts for more prescribed fire, particularly in the Western US, where fire activity has escalated in recent decades. The annual extent of prescribed burning in the Western US remained stable or decreased from 1998 to 2018, while 70% of all prescribed fire was completed primarily by non-federal entities in the Southeastern US. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) was the only federal agency to substantially increase prescribed fire use, potentially associated with increased tribal self-governance. This suggests that the best available science is not being adopted into management practices, thereby further compounding the fire deficit in the Western US and the potential for more wildfire disasters.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8335
Author(s):  
Jasmina Nedevska

Climate change litigation has emerged as a powerful tool as societies steer towards sustainable development. Although the litigation mainly takes place in domestic courts, the implications can be seen as global as specific climate rulings influence courts across national borders. However, while the phenomenon of judicialization is well-known in the social sciences, relatively few have studied issues of legitimacy that arise as climate politics move into courts. A comparatively large part of climate cases have appeared in the United States. This article presents a research plan for a study of judges’ opinions and dissents in the United States, regarding the justiciability of strategic climate cases. The purpose is to empirically study how judges navigate a perceived normative conflict—between the litigation and an overarching ideal of separation of powers—in a system marked by checks and balances.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda J. Bilmes

AbstractThe United States has traditionally defined national security in the context of military threats and addressed them through military spending. This article considers whether the United States will rethink this mindset following the disruption of the Covid19 pandemic, during which a non-military actor has inflicted widespread harm. The author argues that the US will not redefine national security explicitly due to the importance of the military in the US economy and the bipartisan trend toward growing the military budget since 2001. However, the pandemic has opened the floodgates with respect to federal spending. This shift will enable the next administration to allocate greater resources to non-military threats such as climate change and emerging diseases, even as it continues to increase defense spending to address traditionally defined military threats such as hypersonics and cyberterrorism.


Author(s):  
M. John Plodinec

Abstract Over the last decade, communities have become increasingly aware of the risks they face. They are threatened by natural disasters, which may be exacerbated by climate change and the movement of land masses. Growing globalization has made a pandemic due to the rapid spread of highly infectious diseases ever more likely. Societal discord breeds its own threats, not the least of which is the spread of radical ideologies giving rise to terrorism. The accelerating rate of technological change has bred its own social and economic risks. This widening spectrum of risk poses a difficult question to every community – how resilient will the community be to the extreme events it faces. In this paper, we present a new approach to answering that question. It is based on the stress testing of financial institutions required by regulators in the United States and elsewhere. It generalizes stress testing by expanding the concept of “capital” beyond finance to include the other “capitals” (e.g., human, social) possessed by a community. Through use of this approach, communities can determine which investments of its capitals are most likely to improve its resilience. We provide an example of using the approach, and discuss its potential benefits.


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-136
Author(s):  
Rick Mitchell

As today’s catastrophic Covid-19 pandemic exacerbates ongoing crises, including systemic racism, rising ethno-nationalism, and fossil-fuelled climate change, the neoliberal world that we inhabit is becoming increasingly hostile, particularly for the most vulnerable. Even in the United States, as armed white-supremacist, pro-Trump forces face off against protesters seeking justice for African Americans, the hostility is increasingly palpable, and often frightening. Yet as millions of Black Lives Matter protesters demonstrated after the brutal police killing of George Floyd, the current, intersecting crises – worsened by Trump’s criminalization of anti-racism protesters and his dismissal of science – demand a serious, engaged, response from activists as well as artists. The title of this article is meant to evoke not only the state of the unusually cruel moment through which we are living, but also the very different approaches to performance of both Brecht and Artaud, whose ideas, along with those of others – including Benjamin, Butler, Latour, Mbembe, and Césaire – inform the radical, open-ended, post-pandemic theatre practice proposed in this essay. A critically acclaimed dramatist as well as Professor of English and Playwriting at California State University, Northridge, Mitchell’s published volumes of plays include Disaster Capitalism; or Money Can’t Buy You Love: Three Plays; Brecht in L.A.; and Ventriloquist: Two Plays and Ventriloquial Miscellany. He is the editor of Experimental O’Neill, and is currently at work on a series of post-pandemic plays.


2021 ◽  
Vol 73 ◽  
pp. 101947
Author(s):  
Ash Gillis ◽  
Michael Vandenbergh ◽  
Kaitlin Raimi ◽  
Alex Maki ◽  
Ken Wallston

Forests ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 3197-3211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyunjin An ◽  
Jianbang Gan ◽  
Sung Cho

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document