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
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“However, societal factors such as inadequate funding, conflicts among objectives and priority of resource values as well as limited public understanding have created significant delay in the implementation of these programs to restore forest resilience to fire (Franklin et al. 2014;Rideout et al. 2014).”
From Negative consequences of positive feedbacks in US wildfire management (2015) · cites this paper as Rideout et al. 2014
Citations
Cites
Fire and land management planning and implementation across multiple scales
Hann, W. J., & Bunnell, D. L. (2001) · International Journal of Wildland Fire · doi:10.1071/wf01037 · Cited by 115
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Brillinger, 2003, Three environmental probabilistic risk problems, Stat. Sci., 18, 412, 10.1214/ss/1081443225 · DOI
- Caprio, 1997, Pre-twentieth century fire history of sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park: a review and evaluation of our knowledge, 180
- Chou, 1990, Spatial autocorrelation of wildfire distribution in the Idyllwild Quadrangle, San Jacinto Mountain, California, Photgrammetric Eng. Remote Sens., 56, 1507
- 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
- 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
- Faustmann, 1849, Berechnung des Werthes welchen Waldbooden sowie noch night haubare Holzbestande fur die Waldwirtchaft besitzen, Allg. Forst Jagd-Zeitung, 25, 441
- Franklin, 1993, Preserving biodiversity: species, ecosystems, or landscapes?, Ecol. Appl., 3, 202, 10.2307/1941820 · DOI
- Fulé, 2002, Comparing ecological restoration alternatives: Grand Canyon Arizona, For. Ecol. Manag., 170, 19, 10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00759-9 · DOI
- Hardy, 2001, Spatial data for national fire planning and fuel management, Int. J. Wildland Fire, 10, 353, 10.1071/WF01034 · DOI
- Hartman, 1976, The harvesting decision when a standing forest has value, Econ. Inq., 14, 52, 10.1111/j.1465-7295.1976.tb00377.x · DOI
- 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
- 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
- Mills, 1986, Wildfire impacts on the present net value of timber stands: illustrations in the Northern Rocky Mountains, For. Sci., 32, 707
- 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
- 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
- Preisler, 2004, Probability based models for estimation of wildfire risk, Int. J. Wildland Fire, 13, 133, 10.1071/WF02061 · DOI
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Samuelson, 1954, The pure theory of public expenditure, Rev. Econ. Stat., 36, 387, 10.2307/1925895 · DOI · Paper page
- Samuelson, 1976, Economics of forestry in an evolving society, Econ. Inq., 14, 466, 10.1111/j.1465-7295.1976.tb00437.x · DOI
- 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
- 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
Negative consequences of positive feedbacks in US wildfire management
Calkin, D. E., Thompson, M. P., & Finney, M. A. (2015) · Forest Ecosystems · doi:10.1186/s40663-015-0033-8 · Cited by 323
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)
- 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
- 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
