Browsing by Author "Lecina-Diaz, Judit"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Incorporating fire-smartness into agricultural policies reduces suppression costs and ecosystem services damages from wildfiresPublication . Lecina-Diaz, Judit; Chas-Amil, María-Luisa; Aquilué, Núria; Sil, Ângelo Filipe; Brotons, Lluís; Regos, Adrián; Touza, Julia M.In southern Europe, land abandonment and an unbalanced investment toward fire suppression instead of pre-vention has gradually increased wildfire risk, which calls for a paradigm change in fire management policies. Here we combined scenario analysis, fire landscape modelling, and economic tools to identify which land-use policies would reduce the expected wildfire-related losses in the Transboundary Biosphere Reserve 'Geres-Xure ' s' (Spain-Portugal). To do so, we applied the least-cost-plus-net-value-change approach and estimated net changes in wildfire damages based on their implications for the 2010-2050 period and five ecosystem services: agriculture, pasture, timber, recreation and climate regulation. Four land-use scenarios were considered: (1) Business as Usual (BAU); (2) fire-smart, fostering more fire-resistant (less flammable) and/or fire-resilient landscapes (fire-smart); (3) High Nature Value farmlands (HNVf), wherein the abandonment of extensive agri-culture is reversed; and (4) a combination of HNVf and fire-smart. HNVf is the best scenario for suppression cost savings, but it generates the lowest net present value of societal benefits from climate regulation. In fact, the most efficient scenario with the lowest societal discounted net suppression costs and change on ecosystem services damages is the HNVf + fire-smart scenario, as it also generates suppression cost savings from agricultural expansion, and lead to a significant reduction in damages on timber and recreational benefits. Therefore, reverting land abandonment through recultivation and promoting fire-resistant tree species is the most efficient way to reduce wildfire hazard. In this sense, payments for ecosystem services should reward farmers and landowners for their role in wildfire prevention. This study improves the understanding of the financial and societal benefits derived from reducing fire suppression spending and ecosystem services damage by undertaking fire-smart land-use strategies, which can be essential to enhance local stakeholders' support for Payments of Ecosystem Services policies for wildfire prevention.
- Stakeholder perceptions of wildfire management strategies as nature-based solutions in two Iberian biosphere reservesPublication . Lecina-Diaz, Judit; Campos, João C.; Pais, Silvana; Carvalho-Santos, Cláudia; Azevedo, João; Fernandes, Paulo M.; Gonçalves, João Francisco; Aquilué, Núria; Roces-Díaz, José V.; Torre, María Agrelo de la; Brotons, Lluís; Chas-Amil, María-Luisa; Lomba, Angela; Duane, Andrea; Moreira, Francisco; Touza, Julia M.; Hermoso, Virgilio; Sil, Ângelo Filipe; Vicente, Joana R.; Honrado, João P.; Regos, AdriánIncreased large and high-intensity wildfires cause large socioeconomic and ecological impacts, which demand improved landscape management approaches in which both ecological and societal dimensions are integrated. Engaging society in fire management requires a better understanding of stakeholder perceptions of wildfires and landscape management. We analyze stakeholder perceptions about wildfire-landscape interactions in abandoned rural landscapes of southern Europe, and how fire and the land should be managed to reduce wildfire hazard and ensure the long-term supply of ecosystem services in these fire-prone regions. To do so, a structured online questionnaire was sent to the stakeholders of two transboundary biosphere reserves in Spain-Portugal. Our analysis also questioned to what extent fuel management strategies can be considered nature-based solutions (NbS) using the IUCN standard. Overall, stakeholders state that fire should be managed and support fire prevention in lieu of fire suppression policies. Rural abandonment is perceived as the main cause of large wildfires, with high-intensity fires impacting the study regions more than in the recent past, a trend which they expect to continue in the future in the absence of management. All the suggested fuel management strategies, except chemical treatments, were accepted by the stakeholders who perceive more positive than negative effects of fuel management on forest ecosystem services. Transboundary coordination was rated as inadequate or even nonexistent. We did not find differences among stakeholder sectors and biosphere reserves, indicating that in the study area, there is a general agreement on perceptions about wildfire and associated impacts at the landscape level. Finally, we showed that promoting agricultural and livestock uses, modifying forest species composition to increase fire resistance, and introducing large herbivores have the potential to become effective NbS in the regions. This study represents a first-step analysis representing a base for future co-design and implementation of NbS to improve fuel management, contributing to the understanding of the stakeholder support for their application in addressing the socioeconomic challenges in high fire-risk areas.