CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Forest Management and PolicyFire effects on ecosystemsEconomic and Environmental Valuation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Valuing fire planning alternatives in forest restoration: Using derived demand to integrate economics with ecological restoration

Rideout, Douglas B., Ziesler, Pamela S., Kernohan, Nicole J.·2014·Journal of Environmental Management
DOI 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.03.023
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Assessing the value of fire planning alternatives is challenging because fire affects a wide array of ecosystem, market, and social values. Wildland fire management is increasingly used to address forest restoration while pragmatic approaches to assessing the value of fire management have yet to be developed. Earlier approaches to assessing the value of forest management relied on connecting site valuation with management variables. While sound, such analysis is too narrow to account for a broad range of ecosystem services. The metric fire regime condition class (FRCC) was developed from ecosystem management philosophy, but it is entirely biophysical. Its lack of economic information cripples its utility to support decision-making. We present a means of defining and assessing the deviation of a landscape from its desired fire management condition by re-framing the fire management problem as one of derived demand. This valued deviation establishes a performance metric for wildland fire management. Using a case study, we display the deviation across a landscape and sum the deviations to produce a summary metric. This summary metric is used to assess the value of alternative fire management strategies on improving the fire management condition toward its desired state. It enables us to identify which sites are most valuable to restore, even when they are in the same fire regime condition class. The case study site exemplifies how a wide range of disparate values, such as watershed, wildlife, property and timber, can be incorporated into a single landscape assessment. The analysis presented here leverages previous research on environmental capital value and non-market valuation by integrating ecosystem management, restoration, and microeconomics.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.03.023

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Brillinger, 2003, Three environmental probabilistic risk problems, Stat. Sci., 18, 412, 10.1214/ss/1081443225 · DOI
  2. Caprio, 1997, Pre-twentieth century fire history of sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park: a review and evaluation of our knowledge, 180
  3. Chou, 1990, Spatial autocorrelation of wildfire distribution in the Idyllwild Quadrangle, San Jacinto Mountain, California, Photgrammetric Eng. Remote Sens., 56, 1507
  4. de Groot, 2002, A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services, Ecol. Econ., 41, 393, 10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7 · DOI · Paper page
  5. de Groot, 2010, Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and value in landscape planning, management and decision making, Ecol. Complex., 7, 260, 10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006 · DOI
  6. Faustmann, 1849, Berechnung des Werthes welchen Waldbooden sowie noch night haubare Holzbestande fur die Waldwirtchaft besitzen, Allg. Forst Jagd-Zeitung, 25, 441
  7. Franklin, 1993, Preserving biodiversity: species, ecosystems, or landscapes?, Ecol. Appl., 3, 202, 10.2307/1941820 · DOI
  8. Fulé, 2002, Comparing ecological restoration alternatives: Grand Canyon Arizona, For. Ecol. Manag., 170, 19, 10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00759-9 · DOI
  9. Hardy, 2001, Spatial data for national fire planning and fuel management, Int. J. Wildland Fire, 10, 353, 10.1071/WF01034 · DOI
  10. Hartman, 1976, The harvesting decision when a standing forest has value, Econ. Inq., 14, 52, 10.1111/j.1465-7295.1976.tb00377.x · DOI
  11. Hughey, 2003, Integrating economics into priority setting and evaluation in conservation management, Conserv. Biol., 17, 93, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2003.01317.x · DOI
  12. Keane, 2008, Climate change effects on historical range and variability of two large landscapes in western Montana, USA, For. Ecol. Manag., 254, 375, 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.08.013 · DOI
  13. Mills, 1986, Wildfire impacts on the present net value of timber stands: illustrations in the Northern Rocky Mountains, For. Sci., 32, 707
  14. Ojea, 2012, Defining and classifying ecosystem services for economic valuation: the case of forest water services, Environ. Sci. Policy, 19–20, 1, 10.1016/j.envsci.2012.02.002 · DOI
  15. Podur, 2003, Spatial patterns of lightning-caused forest fires in Ontario, 1976–1998, Ecol. Model., 164, 1, 10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00386-1 · DOI
  16. Preisler, 2004, Probability based models for estimation of wildfire risk, Int. J. Wildland Fire, 13, 133, 10.1071/WF02061 · DOI
  17. Rideout, 2008, Estimating rate of substitution for protecting values at risk for initial attack planning and budgeting, For. Policy Econ., 10, 205, 10.1016/j.forpol.2007.10.003 · DOI
  18. Rideout, 2012, Comparing fire protection and improvement values at four major U.S. national parks and assessing the potential for generalized value categories, Int. J. Saf. Secur. Eng., 2, 1, 10.2495/SAFE-V2-N1-1-12 · DOI
  19. Salvador, 2005, Does fire occurrence modify the probability of being burned again? A null hypothesis test from Mediterranean ecosystems in NE Spain, Ecol. Model., 188, 461, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2004.12.017 · DOI
  20. Samuelson, 1954, The pure theory of public expenditure, Rev. Econ. Stat., 36, 387, 10.2307/1925895 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Samuelson, 1976, Economics of forestry in an evolving society, Econ. Inq., 14, 466, 10.1111/j.1465-7295.1976.tb00437.x · DOI
  22. Wainger, 2011, Realizing the potential of ecosystem services: a framework for relating ecological changes to economic benefits, Environ. Manag., 48, 710, 10.1007/s00267-011-9726-0 · DOI
  23. Wu, 2011, Investing in natural capital: using economic incentives to overcome barriers to forest restoration, Restor. Ecol., 19, 441, 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2011.00788.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 15

Metadata

Authors
Rideout, D. B., Ziesler, P. S., & Kernohan, N. J.
Affiliations
Colorado State University (US)
Corresponding author
Rideout, Douglas B.
ORCID
Ziesler, Pamela S.
Venue
Journal of Environmental Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-08
Volume
141
Pages
190-200
ISSN
0301-4797 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.03.023
OpenAlex
W2011990737
Cited by
15
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Environmental Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Forest Management and Policy
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
Keywords
wildfire management, forest restoration, derived demand, ecosystem services valuation, non-market valuation, restoration prioritization, ecosystem management, wildlife values
MeSH terms
Conservation of Natural Resources, Decision Making, Fires, Models, Theoretical, Trees, Forestry

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Valuing fire planning alternatives in forest restoration: Using derived demand to integrate economics with ecological restoration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.03.023
The paper
Rideout, D. B., Ziesler, P. S., & Kernohan, N. J. (2014). Valuing fire planning alternatives in forest restoration: Using derived demand to integrate economics with ecological restoration. Journal of Environmental Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.03.023