Untitled

Funder

Organizational Unit

Publications

Will fire-smart landscape management buffer the effects of climate and land-use changes on fire regimes?

Publication . Sil, Ângelo Filipe; Azevedo, João; Fernandes, Paulo M.; Honrado, João P.

Long-term farmland abandonment has increased fuel build-up in many Euro-Mediterranean mountainous regions. The high fuel hazard in these landscapes, combined with ongoing climate change, is increasing the frequency of extreme wildfires, thus altering contemporary fire regimes. Mitigating the loss of the landscape’s capacity to regulate large and intense fires is crucial to prevent future harmful effects of fires. As such, effective strategies to manage these fire-prone landscapes are needed. Yet, further understanding of their performance under global change scenarios is required. This study assessed the effects of fire-smart management strategies on future landscape dynamics, fire regulation capacity (FRC), and fire regime in a Mediterranean fire-prone mountainous landscape in Portugal (30,650 ha) undergoing long-term land abandonment and climate change scenarios. For that, we applied the LANDIS-II model under climate change scenarios (RCP 4.5 and 8.5) and long-term farmland abandonment (2020–2050) according to three fire-smart management strategies focused on fire prevention compared with a business-asusual (BAU) strategy based on fire suppression. Results: Future fire activity and land dynamics resulted in changes that fostered landscape heterogeneity and fragmentation and favoured fire-adapted forests and agroforestry systems while decreasing the dominance of shrublands and croplands. FRC decreased over time, particularly under RCP 8.5 and the BAU strategy. In turn, fire-smart strategies better prevented large and intense fires than the BAU strategy, but their effectiveness decreased under RCP 8.5. The loss of FRC resulted in increased burned area and fire frequency, which predicts a shift from contemporary fire regimes but more markedly under RCP 8.5 and in the BAU strategy. Conclusions: Fire-smart strategies outperformed BAU in averting current fire regime intensification. Merging forestand silvopasture-based management is the most promising approach in taming the effects of climate and farmland abandonment on future fire activity. Our study underlines that planning and management policies in fire-prone Mediterranean mountain landscapes must integrate fire-smart strategies to decrease landscape fuel hazard and buffer the impact of global change on future fire regimes.

2024Journal article

Open access

Integrating multiple landscape management strategies to optimise conservation under climate and planning scenarios: a case study in the Iberian Peninsula

Publication . Iglesias, Miguel Cánibe; Hermoso, Virgilio; Azevedo, João C.; Campos, João C.; Salgado-Rojas, José; Sil, Ângelo; Regos, Adrián

Global change demands dynamic landscape management that integrates different strategies (e.g. promoting rewilding or traditional farming practices) to address the impact of climate and land use change. Planning for management strategies individually can lead to severe trade-offs between objectives, high opportunity costs and challenging implementation. Integrated management plans are needed to optimise the combination of multiple management strategies. We used the multi-action planning tool ‘Prioriactions’ to prioritise the spatial allocation of four management strategies (Afforestation, Rewilding, Farmland Return and Agroforestry Return) in the Meseta Ibérica transboundary Biosphere Reserve. We aimed to achieve targets for conservation of species suit- able area and ecosystem services supply while minimising fire hazard under different climate scenarios. We tested this approach under contrasting planning scenarios depicting different management priorities (Equally Weighted, Forest Maximising and Open Maximising). By integrating multiple management strategies, we could achieve management goals for biodiversity and ecosystem services under different planning scenarios, mini- mising trade-offs and deriving recommendations easier to uptake. The spatial allocation and extent of man- agement strategies varied according to climate change and planning scenarios. Afforestation was needed when putting more priority on forest species and carbon sequestration, while more Farmland Return was allocated when preserving open habitat species and agriculture. Fire hazard was higher in Rewilding areas and lower in Farmland Return and Agroforestry Return areas. The novelty of our approach lies in its capacity to combine different management strategies and provide an optimised spatial arrangement based on management features, making it suitable for planning in dynamic and complex environments where multiple pressures and objectives must be considered.

2025Journal article

Embargoed access