Acceptability Norms toward Fire Management in Three National Forests

Norm theory offers a paradigm for understanding why the public judges management actions acceptable or unacceptable. This study assesses normative beliefs about acceptable wildland fire management. The acceptability of three fire management actions for eight scenarios was examined. The scenarios varied by fire origin and fire impact on air quality, private property, forest recovery, and outdoor recreation. The data were obtained from a mail survey of visitors to three national forests: (a) Arapaho-Roosevelt, Colorado (n = 469), (b) Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie, Washington (n = 498), and (b) San Bernardino, California (n = 321). Results of a mixed design ANOVA indicated that the acceptability of wildland fire management actions varied according to the fire scenario evaluated, but substantive differences in normative beliefs were not noted among the three forests. Chi-square analyses identified differences in normative agreement for fire management actions across scenarios but did not reveal substantive differences in normative agreement between forests.

[1]  Martin Fishbein,et al.  Current Studies in Social Psychology , 1965 .

[2]  Terry C. Daniel,et al.  Targeting Audiences and Content for Forest Fire Information Programs , 1986 .

[3]  Jerry J. Vaske,et al.  Communicating Judgments About Practical Significance: Effect Size, Confidence Intervals and Odds Ratios , 2002 .

[4]  J. Vaske,et al.  Using normative beliefs to determine the acceptability of wildlife management actions , 1998 .

[5]  G. Morgan,et al.  Null Hypothesis Significance Testing: Effect Size Matters , 2001 .

[6]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[7]  Jonathan G. Taylor,et al.  Recreation and fire management: public concerns, attitudes, and perceptions. , 1986 .

[8]  J. Vaske,et al.  Backcountry encounter norms: theory, method and empirical evidence. , 1986 .

[9]  David A. Cleaves,et al.  Risk perception and behavioral context: U.S. forest service fire management professionals , 1988 .

[10]  Jerry J. Vaske,et al.  Generalizing the Encounter--Norm--Crowding Relationship , 2002 .

[11]  Bo Shelby,et al.  Using normative data to develop evaluative standards for resource management: a comment on three recent papers. , 1991 .

[12]  Daniel R. Williams,et al.  Demographic Influences on Environmental Value Orientations and Normative Beliefs About National Forest Management , 2001 .

[13]  M. Manfredo,et al.  The Influence of Attitude Accessibility on Attitude-Behavior Relationships: Implications for Recreation Research. , 1992 .

[14]  James B. Davis.  The wildland-urban interface: paradise or battleground? , 1990 .

[15]  P. Alaback,et al.  Evaluating risks and benefits of wildland fire at landscape scales , 2000 .

[16]  Jonathan G. Taylor,et al.  Public Support for Fire-Management Policies , 1984 .

[17]  J. Vaske,et al.  Toward an Understanding of Norm Prevalence: A Comparative Analysis of 20 Years of Research , 2000, Environmental management.

[18]  Jonathan G. Taylor,et al.  Fire in wilderness: public knowledge, acceptance, and perceptions. , 1986 .

[19]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[20]  J. Vaske,et al.  Standards for lethal response to problem urban wildlife , 1998 .

[21]  M. Brunson.  "Socially Acceptable" Forestry: What Does It Imply for Ecosystem Management? , 1993 .

[22]  J. Vaske,et al.  Norms, standards, and natural resources , 1996 .