Environmental Management

, Volume 43, Issue 6, pp 1085–1095 | Cite as

Understanding Social Complexity Within the Wildland–Urban Interface: A New Species of Human Habitation?

  • Travis B. Paveglio
  • Pamela J. Jakes
  • Matthew S. Carroll
  • Daniel R. Williams


The lack of knowledge regarding social diversity in the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) or an in-depth understanding of the ways people living there interact to address common problems is concerning, perhaps even dangerous, given that community action is necessary for successful wildland fire preparedness and natural resource management activities. In this article, we lay out the knowledge and preliminary case study evidence needed to begin systematically documenting the differing levels and types of adaptive capacity WUI communities have for addressing collective problems such as wildland fire hazard. In order to achieve this end, we draw from two theoretical perspectives encompassing humans' interactions with their environment, including (1) Kenneth Wilkinson's interactional approach to community, (2) and certain elements of place literature. We also present case study research on wildfire protection planning in two drastically different California communities to illustrate how social diversity influences adaptive capacity to deal with hazards such as wildland fire. These perspectives promote an image of the WUI not as a monolithic entity but a complex mosaic of communities with different needs and existing capacities for wildland fire and natural resource management.


Wildland urban interface Community Wildland fire Adaptive capacity Social diversity Hazards 



This research was supported in part by funds provided by the Joint Fire Science Program and the Northern Research Station and Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.


  1. Bell MM (1992) The fruit of difference: the rural-urban continuum as a system of identity. Rural Sociology 57(1):65–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkes F (2007) Understanding uncertainty and reducing vulnerability: lessons from resilience thinking. Natural Hazards 41:283–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brandenburg A, Carroll MS (1995) Your place or mine? The effect of place creation on environmental values and landscape meaning. Society and Natural Resources 8:381–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bright AD, Burtz RT (2006) Firewise activities of full-time versus seasonal residents in the wildland-urban interface. Journal of Forestry 104(6):307–315Google Scholar
  5. Brunson MW, Shindler BA (2004) Geographic variation in social acceptability of wildland fuels management in the western United States. Society and Natural Resources 17:661–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carroll MS, Cohn PJ, Blatner KA (2004) Private and tribal forest landowners and fire. a two county case study in Washington State. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34:2148–2158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohn PJ, Williams DR, Carroll MS (2008) Wildland-urban interface residents’ views on risk and attribution. In: Martin WE, Raish C, Kent B (eds) Wildfire risk: human perceptions and management implications. Resources for the Future, Washington, pp 23–43Google Scholar
  8. Cortner HJ (1991) Interface policy offers opportunities and challenges: USDA Forest Service strategies and constraints. Journal of Forestry 89(6):31–34Google Scholar
  9. CWPP Task Force (2008) Community guide to preparing and implementing a community wildfire protection plan. Western Governors’ Association, DenverGoogle Scholar
  10. Daniels SE, Walker GB (2001) Working through environmental policy conflict: the collaborative learning approach. Praeger, WestportGoogle Scholar
  11. Donahue EM, Haynes RW (2002) Assessing the viability and adaptability of Oregon communities. General technical report PNW-549. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  12. Donaghue EM, Sturtevant VE (2007) Social science constructs in ecosystem assessments: revisiting community capacity and community resiliency. Society and Natural Resources 20:899–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Drabek TE (1986) Human system responses to disaster: an inventory of sociological findings. Springer-Verlag, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Flint CG, Luloff AE (2005) Natural resource-based communities, risk, and disaster: an intersection of theories. Society and Natural Resources 18(5):399–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Flint CG, Luloff AE (2007) Community activeness in response to forest disturbance in Alaska. Society and Natural Resources 20:431–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Flint CG, Luloff AE, Theodori GL (2008) Exploring the regional community field (submitted for publication)Google Scholar
  17. Haight RG, Cleland DT, Hammer RB, Radeloff VC, Rupp TS (2004) Assessing fire risk in the wildland urban interface—a landscape ecosystem approach. Journal of Forestry 102:41–48Google Scholar
  18. Haynes RW (2003) Assessing the viability and adaptability of forest-dependent communities in the United States. General technical report PNW-567. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  19. Jakes P, Fish T, Carr D, Blahna D (1998a) Practical social assessments for national forest planning. General technical report NC-198. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, MNGoogle Scholar
  20. Jakes P, Fish T, Carr D, Blahna D (1998b) Functional communities: a tool for national forest planning. Journal of Forestry 96(3):33Google Scholar
  21. Jakes P, Nelson K, Lang E, Monroe M, Agrawal S, Kruger L, Sturtevant V (2003) A model for improving community preparedness for wildfire. In: Jakes PJ (ed) Homeowners, communities, and wildfire: findings from the National Fire Plan. General technical report NC-231. USDA, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN, pp 4–9Google Scholar
  22. Jakes P, Burns S, Cheng A, Saeli E, Nelson K, Brummel R, Grayzeck S, Sturtevant V, Williams D (2007a) Critical elements in the development and implementation of community wildfire protection plans (CWPPs). In: Butler BW, Cook W (compilers) The fire environment—innovations, management, and policy, conference proceedings, 26–30 March 2007, Destin, FL. Proceedings RMRS-P-46CD. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp 613–624Google Scholar
  23. Jakes P, Kruger L, Monroe M, Nelson K, Sturtevant V (2007b) Improving wildfire preparedness: lessons from communities across the US. Human Ecology Review 13(2):188–197Google Scholar
  24. Kemmis D (1990) Community and the politics of place. University of Oklahoma Press, NormanGoogle Scholar
  25. Krannich RS, Luloff AE (1991) Problems of resource dependency in US rural communities. Progress in Rural Policy and Planning 1:5–18Google Scholar
  26. Lee RG (1991) Four myths of interface communities: rural localities do not epitomize idealized conceptions. Journal of Forestry 89(6):35–38Google Scholar
  27. Lobao L (2004) Continuity and change in place stratification: spatial inequality and middle-range territorial units. Rural Sociology 69(1):1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Luloff AE, Swanson LE (1995) Community agency and disaffection: enhancing collective resources. In: Beaulieu LJ, Mulkey D (eds) Investing in people: the human capital needs of rural America. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 351–372Google Scholar
  29. McGee TK, Russell S (2003) ‘It’s just a natural way of life…’ an investigation of wildfire preparedness in rural Australia. Global Environmental Change Part B Environmental Hazards 5(1–2):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mecer DE, Prestmon JP (2005) Comparing production function models for wildfire risk analysis in the wildland-urban interface. Forest Policy and Economics 7:782–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. National Interagency Fire Center (n.d.) Wildfire statistics. Available at: Accessed 10 May 2008
  32. Nelson KC, Monroe MC, Johnson JF (2005) The look of the land: homeowner landscape management and wildfire preparedness in Minnesota and Florida. Society and Natural Resources 18:321–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Office of the Inspector General, Western Region (2006) Audit report: Forest Service large rire suppression costs. Report 08601-44-SF, Department of Agriculture, U.SGoogle Scholar
  34. Patterson ME, Williams DR (2005) Maintaining research traditions on place: diversity of thought and scientific progress. Journal of Environment Psychology 25(4):361–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Quarantelli EL, Dynes RR (1976) Community conflicts: its absence and its presence in natural disasters. Mass Emergencies 1(2):139–152Google Scholar
  36. Radeloff VC, Hammer RB, Stewart SI, Fried JS, Holcomb SS, McKeefry JF (2005) The wildland urban interface in the United States. Ecological Applications 15(3):799–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shumway JM, Otterstrom SM (2001) Spatial patterns of migration and income change in the Mountain West: the dominance of service-based, amenity-rich counties. Professional Geographer 53:492–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Society of American Foresters (2004) Preparing a community wildfire protection plan:a handbook for wildland-urban interface communities. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  39. Slovic P (1993) Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis 13(6):675–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Steelman T, Kunkel GF (2004) Effective community responses to wildfire threats: lessons from New Mexico. Society and Natural Resources 17(8):679–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stewart RI, Radeloff VC, Hammer RB, Hambaker TJ (2007) Defining the wildland-urban interface. Journal of Forestry 105(4):201–207Google Scholar
  42. Toennies F (1957) Community and society. (trans: Loomis CP). Michigan State University Press, East LansingGoogle Scholar
  43. U.S. Department of Agriculture (2001) Urban wildland interface communities within vicinity of federal lands that are at high risk from wildfire. Federal Register 66(3):757–777Google Scholar
  44. U.S. Department of Agriculture Southern Research Station (2002) Human influences on forest ecosystems: the southern wildland-urban interface assessment. In: Macie EA, Hermansen LA (eds) General technical report SRS-55Google Scholar
  45. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of the Interior (1995) Federal wildland fire management policy and program review. USDI and USDA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  46. U.S. Government Accountability Office (2007) Wildland management: a cohesive strategy and clear cost-containment goals are needed for federal agencies to manage wildland fire activities effectively. GAO-07-1017TGoogle Scholar
  47. Walker SH, Rideout DB, Loomis JB, Reich R (2006) Comparing the value of fuel treatment options in northern Colorado’s urban and widland-urban interface areas. Forest Policy and Economics 9:694–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wall E, Marzall K (2006) Adaptive capacity for climate change in Canadian rural communities. Local Environment 11(4):373–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilkinson KP (1991) The community in rural America. Greenwood Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  50. Williams DR, Stewart SI (1998) Sense of place: an elusive concept that is finding a home in ecosystem management. Journal of Forestry 66(5):18–23Google Scholar
  51. Winkler R, Field DR, Luloff AE, Krannich RS, Williams T (2007) Social landscapes of the inter-mountain West: a comparison of ‘Old West’ and ‘New West’ communities. Rural Sociology 72(3):478–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zhang Y, Wimberly MC (2007) The importance of scale in using hierarchical census data to identify the widland-urban interface. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 31(3):138–147Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Travis B. Paveglio
    • 1
  • Pamela J. Jakes
    • 2
  • Matthew S. Carroll
    • 1
  • Daniel R. Williams
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Natural Resource SciencesWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  2. 2.Northern Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceSt. PaulUSA
  3. 3.Rocky Mountain Research StationUSDA Forest ServiceFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations