Forest fires risk communication - operational recommendations to improve social prevention

The perception society has of the risk of forest fire determines to a large extent people’s
response in emergency situations, as well as public support for forest management policies
and actions which fire prevention and management services perform in the area. In general,
this social perception determines thought and action, and affects all actions performed in the
context of forest fire risk management, generally perceived as a catastrophic and random
element, as well as its effects.
This document covers a set of practical recommendations to facilitate the communication
of the forest fire phenomenon, with the aim of providing information to the public which is
as scientifically and technically accurate as possible, with the acceptance of forest fires as
a natural disruption of the ecosystem, the predictable character of their behaviour and the
generalised premise that certain catastrophic forest fires fall outside of the scope and control
of current extinction methods. The document is aimed at all actors involved in the prevention
and management of the forest fire risk, offering different guidelines to improve planning and
development of risk communication, both at a local level as well as at regional and country
level, and with an approach that applies to the whole Mediterranean region.
Broadly speaking, social perception of forest fires can be understood through two different
views, which may in some cases be held by a single person. In each case, it is necessary to
develop different communication proposals, with the aim of reaching the proposed objectives
for social prevention. These two points of view can be summed up as:
(1) “Forest fire as a threat to be tackled”: frequent situation in Mediterranean areas with
agricultural abandonment processes and large-scale urban development in contact with the
forest, a population unfamiliar with the uses and natural dynamic of forest lands and a strong
social demand for environmental functions of the forest landscapes, such as biodiversity,
scenic beauty, recreational use, etc. In this situation there is no difference between forest
fire and fire, both being considered as something negative for both persons and property,
as well as for the environment. The presence of fire in the ecosystem is only measured
through the ecological losses perceived as irreparable, regardless of the degree of intensity
with which the fire or forest fire may burn, and which by extension may affect in different
ways the ecosystem - which may even include beneficial effects, though these are eclipsed
by the “dramatic” impact of the burnt landscape.
(2) “Fire as a management tool”: situation in which fire is used as an efficient tool to manage
land and natural resources, and is used, for example, for the removal of vegetation from
the fringes of cultivated lands, leftover vegetation from agricultural or forest work, or the
removal of shrub vegetation and regeneration of pasture lands. Prescribed or controlled
fire (see section 3.8) refers to the updated understanding of fire as a management tool,
with multiple uses: recovery of natural habitats for conservation of biodiversity, recovery
of abandoned pasture lands, reduction of the amount of forest vegetation in undergrowth
for prevention of forest fires. The presence of fire as a tool takes on a special meaning in
mountain regions and rural areas with a strong agricultural and livestock sector presence.
Overall, and regardless of the type of relationship fire maintains with the land, whether they
are areas historically affected by forest fires or areas where the phenomenon is recent, each
context will require different communication strategies to be able to incorporate the necessary
specificities allowing for a successful performance, awareness raising, disclosure or social
prevention.