Social science to advance wildfire adaptation in the southwestern United States: a review and future research directions

Introduction

The centrality of social contexts and processes to broader wildfire adaptation efforts has been emphasised consistently over the course of several decades of international research across diverse scales, populations, and environments (Daniel et al. 2007; Toman et al. 2013; Tedim et al. 2016). An emergent focus on elevating social components of wildfire adaptation in management practices has introduced renewed calls from social scientists to better integrate social considerations through public involvement, community interactions, and organisational collaboration among other approaches (Carroll et al. 2007; Paveglio 2021; Eriksen 2022). The southwestern US states of Arizona and New Mexico have experienced a recent influx of high profile wildfires that caused socially and ecologically impactful outcomes and generated public and political concern, motivating review and examination of changes in national policy. These include the 1990 Dude Fire and 2013 Yarnell Fires that drove improvements in fire fighter safety, the destructive 2002 Rodeo–Chediski Fire that helped motivate the 2003 Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA), and the 2000 Cerro Grande and 2022 Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon Fires that renewed discussions and challenges around prescribed fire use, each underscoring the continued need for integration of social considerations across the region (Finco et al. 2012; Abrams et al. 2015; Colavito et al. 2021). Impacts associated with these and other fire events emphasise the importance of understanding social conditions in the Southwest; however, the Southwest lags behind some regions of the USA in terms of social science research that can inform wildfire adaptation (Collins et al. 2022).

The southwestern USA encompasses a complex web of social and ecological conditions that have influenced the emergence of localised conditions for wildfire adaptation, response, and recovery. Both Arizona and New Mexico exhibit similar trends to other regions of the USA, such as increases in wildfire events bolstered by climate change, rapid development and land use change, and difficulty reducing fuel on landscapes at the scale and scope needed to support fire adaptation (Hjerpe et al. 2009; Radeloff et al. 2018; Mueller et al. 2020). However, there are also more unique phenomena and processes that set the Southwest apart and make it worthy of further study. This includes an eclectic mix of social considerations, such as complex land use histories such as Spanish land grants awarded to New Mexico communities and Pueblos, Indigenous use of fire since time immemorial, and distinctive culturally significant infrastructure such as acequias (community-operated irrigation systems) (Raish et al. 2005; Dunbar-Ortiz 2007; Cox 2014; Fulé et al. 2021; Roos et al. 2021). The Southwest is also home to varied ecosystems such as the Sky Island bioregion, Sonoran Desert, and the largest contiguous ponderosa pine forest in the world (Schubert 1974; Arizpe et al. 2020; Aslan et al. 2021). This ecological diversity fostered the establishment of numerous forest restoration concepts and early development of associated management practices and techniques (Covington et al. 1997). Additionally, this region has a history of innovative management approaches to address wildfire risk, ranging from early and extensive use of natural ignitions to achieve management objectives (Hunter et al. 2014; Stoddard et al. 2020) to the adoption of novel policy mechanisms to fund forest restoration and watershed health (Steelman and Kunkel 2004; Miller et al. 2017). Together, these environments have created complex management challenges related to wildfire, including the prevalence of post-fire flooding caused by monsoon rains falling over hydrophobic burn scars (Fraser et al. 2022). Social science research can provide meaningful insights into wildfire management and adaptation across these conditions as people and the landscapes they live in continue to evolve across the region (Colavito 2017).

Numerous reviews related to social components of fire focus on specific topics (e.g. Christianson 2015; McCaffrey 2015; Hesseln 2018), or more broadly on the status of this field (Toman et al. 2013; McCaffrey et al. 2013a).; this review focuses instead on research conducted specifically within the Southwest. This geographic focus is applied with the intent to (1) identify unique regional, sub-regional, and local contexts that influence human relationships with wildfire in the Southwest, and (2) determine which research topics and contexts are underrepresented in studies published about the Southwest to elevate their inclusion in research for more cohesive wildfire adaptation. This article presents a comprehensive literature review of the existing social science literature for both southwestern states, with the aim of identifying overarching themes and notable research gaps that merit further exploration. These findings can provide a roadmap for future social research in this region to encourage actionable science that can make a meaningful impact for communities, managers, and ecosystems moving forward.

Approach

Literature reviews are well suited for characterising past research and assessing future needs due to their comprehensive nature (Booth et al. 2012; Gough et al. 2012). They necessitate the methodical collection, screening, and analysis of literature around a specific topic, allowing the elucidation of key topics or themes to produce new observations about a given field (Littell et al. 2008). Several core online databases, including CAB abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Treesearch, formed the basis for this review. Broad search strings such as ‘U.S. southwest OR Arizona OR New Mexico,’ ‘wildfire OR wildland fire OR brush fire OR forest fire,’ and ‘social OR human’ were combined using advanced search tools in each database to gather candidate publications for review. This process resulted in the identification of 302 unique publications. The following five criteria, modified from Toman et al. (2013) and McCaffrey et al. (2013a) to allow comparison with broader wildfire social science trends being observed in the USA, were used to screen these candidate publications to determine their suitability for inclusion in this study: (1) The publication must be focused entirely, or in large part, on the examination of social components of wildfire and its management; (2) The publication must include primary data collected and analysed using a social science research method such as interviews, focus groups, or surveys. This focus best captures rich detail about the populations and contexts studied in ways that secondary data cannot. Economic studies were excluded because of significant differences in methodologies and data. Studies focused exclusively on document analyses or literature reviews and syntheses were also excluded to avoid repeated inclusion of the same findings; (3) The publication must use social data gathered fully or partially in southwestern USA. Geographic delineations of what constitutes the ‘Southwest’ varies significantly; this term is used here to refer to the states of Arizona and New Mexico exclusively. In publications where this term was used to describe the Southwest as a broader geography including other states, focus was placed on analysis of findings and implications for these two states. Studies that presented data collected in multiple states and/or countries and included a southwestern site were kept in this review to ensure comprehensive documentation of existing data; (4) The publication must be a peer or editorially reviewed journal article or book chapter. White papers, reports, and other grey literature are not included here given that quality can vary significantly and that there are few maintained databases containing these materials across organisations and agencies, making it difficult to comprehensively assess these kinds of publications; and (5) The publication must be published or in press by June 2023. No parameters were specified regarding how old a publication should be for inclusion given the scarcity of such work in the Southwest. Additional publications identified for consideration were determined via searches conducted in common forestry- or fire-focused journals, on prominent researchers, and through review of works cited in initial materials identified through the screening process above.

In total, 65 publications produced between 1984 and 2023 were included in this review.¹ These publications generally focused on using social science methods to understand wildfire adaptation across different scales and contexts, with important implications for the establishment and continuity of fire adapted communities – groups of residents, land management, government, and fire professionals who collaborate effectively to plan for, respond to, and recover from wildfire (Paveglio and Edgeley 2020). Therefore, the author read each article and categorised key findings under the 10 considerations presented in the Fire Adapted Communities Framework (also sometimes referred to as the FAC wheel) (Fig. 1), before coding thematically within each consideration by hand. Existing research emphasises the benefits of focusing adaptation at the community level (Paveglio et al. 2018), and numerous efforts across the Southwest such as the New Mexico Fire Adapted Communities Learning Network, Yavapai Firewise, and the Arizona Wildfire Initiative seek to foster or support fire adapted communities, underscoring the practical benefits of exploring existing literature through this framework. The Fire Adapted Communities Framework was developed by the Fire Adapted Communities Learning Network to help communities explore pathways to wildfire adaptation and provide examples of activities associated with each consideration. Importantly, the concept of a fire adapted community is not a one-size-fits-all framework, meaning that the recommendations provided around the outer circle of Fig. 1 are not prescriptive, but instead illustrative of the range of potential actions that communities might explore (Paveglio and Edgeley 2020; FAC Net 2021). Publications often had findings, implications, or research needs that aligned with several of the 10 Fire Adapted Communities Framework considerations, and therefore may appear multiple times in different sections below.

Fig. 1.

The Fire Adapted Communities Framework, developed by the Fire Adapted Communities Learning Network (FAC Net 2021). The Framework presents 10 components that contribute to community wildfire adaptation and provides related examples of potential actions. Importantly, this does not present a one-size-fits-all approach but a starting place for discussion and action around local wildfire adaptation.

Emergent themes across findings are summarised below, using the 10 Framework considerations to identify gaps in knowledge about social fire adaptation in the Southwest. Each section concludes with a list of suggested future research directions for social scientists studying the Southwest to consider as research on humans and wildfire continues to grow. These research needs were determined using a three-phased approach: first, any recommendations made in publications included in this review were identified and grouped where suggestions were similar; second, the author compared this list of needs with the current state of the science on that topic using existing literature reviews and syntheses wherever possible (e.g. Toman et al. 2014; Christianson 2015; McCaffrey 2015; Hesseln 2018); and finally, the author compared these research needs with the Fire Adapted Communities Framework to identify other possible considerations that may be missing, still recognising that Fig. 1 is not exhaustive but can indicate common kinds of activities that social science research can support or explore. It was not always clear whether recommendations made by publication authors were specific to the Southwest or were intended to be more generalisable; therefore, the author organised research needs in each section below from most to least specific to the Southwest where possible, to indicate which needs are more relevant to this region.

Findings

Earlier social research on wildfire in the Southwest focused on public acceptance of varied management approaches such as prescribed fire (e.g. Cortner et al. 1984; Taylor and Daniels 1984; Brunson and Shindler 2004), a trend that reflected policy changes within the federal land management agencies in the late 1970s and 1980s. These efforts often sought to ‘test’ residents' knowledge via survey instruments to examine the extent to which ecological and management understandings influenced support or opposition. A shift began in the mid- to late 2000s as research increasingly focused on the engagement and integration of residents and communities into adaptation efforts, rather than studying them merely as external supporters or opposers of land management (Collins 2008b, 2009; Winter et al. 2009). This transition was likely influenced by wildfire social science research funding made available through the 2000 National Fire Plan (Steelman et al. 2004; McCaffrey and Kumagai 2007). Related research also began to emerge around public experiences with fires, examining risk perceptions, communication, and evacuation. The latest wave of research from around 2010 onward situates social science about wildfire within larger geographic scales and across broader lines of inquiry associated with forest health and landscape level fuels management. This aligns with growing interest in partnerships, collaboration, and cross-boundary management of public lands, driven in part by agency missions related to stewardship and partnerships. Fig. 2 shows the number of publications produced annually and included in this review, with several influxes in publishing that appear to align with these three waves. Two Fire Adapted Communities Framework considerations – ‘prevention’ and ‘infrastructure and business’ – have received little to no attention in the Southwest to date.

Fig. 2.

Number of publications produced annually containing social science research on wildfire in the Southwest.

Far more research was published using data collected in Arizona (39 articles) than New Mexico (11 articles), although a modest number used or compared data from both states (15 articles). Some populations or areas were studied frequently over time – most notably, Flagstaff, AZ (e.g. McCaffrey 2008; Steelman 2008; McCaffrey et al. 2013b; Urgenson et al. 2017; Colavito et al. 2020; Edgeley and Colavito 2022; Hjerpe et al. 2023) – or shared insights from the same dataset across multiple studies, particularly in the White Mountain region of Arizona (Carroll et al. 2005, 2006; Cohn et al. 2006, 2008; Collins 2008a, 2008b, 2009; Collins and Bolin 2009). The vast majority of studies used interview (40) or survey (28) methodologies to collect data. Focus group research (5) on wildfire has not been published using data from the Southwest since 2009 (Ryan and Hamin 2009; Winter et al. 2009). Few studies explicitly identified a social theory used to develop or advance understandings or inform study design; where this information was present, researchers typically used Ajzen and Fishbein’s (1980) Theory of Reasoned Action (e.g. Muleady-Mecham et al. 2004; Winter et al. 2009) or Giddens’ (1984) Structuration Theory (e.g. Carroll et al. 2005, 2011). The following sections explore these topical and methodological evolutions with specific attention to emergent themes and related research needs organised under each area of the Fire Adapted Communities Framework. It is critical to note that studies including data from one community, population, or state presented here is not generalisable to the entire Southwest, but the collection of such data over time and in different locations and contexts can help inform a deeper understanding of social variation related to wildfire adaptation in the region.

Discussion

Social science research related to wildfire in the Southwest has evolved significantly over the past four decades, making fundamental contributions to national and international understandings of key topics such as resident mitigation and support for landscape treatments. However, some considerations for fire adaptation remain chronically understudied in Arizona and New Mexico relative to other states (e.g. California and Colorado). For example, research on public acceptance of prescribed fire has become outdated, whereas other areas such as fire prevention and smoke adaptation remain unexplored, limiting the development of a comprehensive picture of the unique regional, state, and local contexts that affect human–wildfire interactions. Advancing social science related to wildfire is increasingly urgent as investment in efforts to reduce risk and accelerate adaptative actions continue to intensify (most recently with the addition of new US Forest Service Wildfire Crisis Strategy landscapes in Arizona and New Mexico), but prioritisation, funding, and implementation of adaptation activities often remain driven by spatial and secondary data (such as census data) or property characteristics gathered by tax assessors (such as property size, value, and year structures were built) (Ager et al. 2019; USDA Forest Service 2022). Thus, this review presents a potential roadmap for critical social science research in the Southwest over the coming years to ensure that efforts to adapt to wildfire incorporate local contexts that maximise public and professional health and safety while minimising social and ecological impacts.

This review documents two core areas where disparities in social science research related to wildfire in the Southwest are emerging that should be considered by social scientists seeking to expand this field: study locations and study populations. Far more research draws from data collected in Arizona than New Mexico, and existing research in both states has historically focused on several key populations, including Flagstaff and the White Mountains region of AZ, and Santa Fe and Ruidoso, NM². The Rodeo–Chediski and Cerro Grande fires have been focusing events in social science research for their respective states, acting as benchmarks for regional attitudes and approaches for several decades now (Moscovici 1988; Birkland 1997). However, there is a scarcity of studies exploring some of the Southwest’s more recent impactful fire events (e.g. the 2012 Little Bear Fire, NM, or the 2021 Telegraph and Mescal fires, AZ), meaning that more contemporary understandings of experiences with wildfire are lacking. Much of the existing research across the Southwest also focuses on forested ecosystems; as wildfire expands into ecosystems that historically have not experienced frequent fire, the need to study human–fire interactions in other environments will become greater. A very limited number of studies explore underrepresented perspectives on fire adaptation, including Indigenous and Hispanic experiences and insights (Winter and Cvetkovich 2008; Roos et al. 2021; Russell et al. 2021). Taken together, this review is an invitation for social scientists to consider the study of new places and populations to elevate social and ecological diversity in conversations about fire adaptation in the Southwest. Such studies can advance discussion and action related to environmental justice and equity and better situate Southwestern insights in broader conversations about fire adaptation as it relates to climate change, drought, and other risks (Ojerio et al. 2011; Smith et al. 2016; Wilder et al. 2016). However, this suggestion also comes with a call for scientists to engage these communities and populations in meaningful and ethical ways that respect local culture and knowledge, being mindful of participant capacity and relationships as partnerships, collaborations, and knowledge co-production become increasingly sought after (Wilmer et al. 2021).

This review also provides key insights related to study design for social scientists wishing to study wildfire in the Southwest. First, there may be value in greater methodological diversity in future research, where appropriate, to access novel findings that current studies do not, perhaps most readily through the reintroduction of focus groups as a data collection technique. Other more specialised or interdisciplinary approaches, such as Q-methodology or participatory mapping, are scarcely used and may offer opportunities to expand and deepen nuanced understandings, particularly related to decision-making processes around wildfire in both operational wildfire management and land management contexts and to understand behaviours enacted by residents or communities. Second, social scientists should explore opportunities to embed Southwestern research within broader discussions and advancement of theory development to support fire adaptation moving forward. The growing absence of the use and acceleration of social theory in the Southwest is of concern because one of the most foundational purposes of social science research is theoretical advancement (Flyvbjerg 2001; McCaffrey and Kumagai 2007). Inclusion of theoretical thinking in wildfire research across this region will ensure that Southwestern conditions and considerations inform theory development, which may be particularly valuable if such research also includes understudied or localised populations and places.

Broadening scales and scopes related to lines of inquiry in social science research for wildfire over the past decade have resulted in a gradual shift from studies that engage communities or engage in public-facing research to manager-oriented studies that investigate social perspectives on ecological adaptation at the landscape and regional scales. Study of managers is of great importance and future efforts should endeavour to explore more specific management challenges and approaches; however, many studies of this nature exclude community voices or rely on assumptions that managers accurately perceive and understand community dynamics and can serve as a proxy for these populations, limiting more holistic and representative understandings of social dynamics around wildfire. As efforts to advance landscape level adaptation progress, continued inclusion of resident and community perspectives that complement and extend studies of managers and other professionals will be essential for cohesive and strategic advancement (Paveglio et al. 2018). Without continued study at the community level, the Southwest risks falling behind other regions in terms of capacity to incorporate social nuance into adaptation strategies because the depth of social understandings available in other states may no longer exist; therefore, there is a need to protect and maintain intentional inclusion of community members through place-based, primary data collection among social scientists studying the Southwest.

Widespread challenges regarding the process of conducting social research that yields high-quality datasets are reflected in studies conducted in the Southwest. For example, survey studies in this review conducted in the 2000s had response rates above 40% (e.g. Brunson and Shindler 2004; Ostergren et al. 2006), whereas those conducted since 2010 tend to be below 25% (e.g. Diaz et al. 2016; Zanocco et al. 2018; Edgeley and Colavito 2022), aligning with documented national declines in study participation over time (Stedman et al. 2019). As the conditions for social science research evolve, two common limitations of research exploring the social aspects of wildfire have emerged more frequently in recent publications. First, there is an increase in studies that draw from small datasets without discussion or action regarding approaches to determine data quality (e.g. theoretical saturation or non-response bias). Second, research efforts focused solely on secondary data such as GIS analyses or investigations of census data as a proxy for social conditions have emerged in greater numbers. Such studies were identified but removed from this review in earlier database searches because although they may have the capacity to make broad inferences about human populations, they are generally unable to capture the complexities and nuances that local social systems exhibit because of their inability to document non-quantifiable factors in the same way that wildfire social science can. Wildfire social science can explore social interactions with the landscape through many lenses, ranging from experiences with a specific event to relationships and resources that influence actions related to risk, but must go further than studies reliant on secondary data to embrace emergent insights while remaining grounded in direct connections to the people and places being studied.

Some ambiguity has emerged about what constitutes wildfire social science in recent years. Drawing on insights from the Southwestern research examined above, this article posits that rigorous wildfire social science has several key characteristics that set it aside from other related fields: (1) it is primarily concerned with the role that wildfire plays in social relationships to the landscape over time, with particular attention to continuity and change in both landscapes and the people that inhabit them (Williams and Stewart 1998; Paveglio et al. 2009); (2) it is grounded in place-based data collection that necessitates interaction with the study population at hand to gather primary data using foundational social science research methods. These approaches are best suited to capture social processes related to fire and the land by drawing on the past and present to anticipate how relationships between people and place might evolve in the future, as demonstrated by the depth and breadth of much of the research in this review; (3) it contributes to the establishment or expansion of social theory (McCaffrey and Kumagai 2007; Paveglio 2023); and (4) it results in the generation of actionable outcomes for people living and working in fire-prone landscapes (Champ et al. 2022). Importantly, wildfire social science recognises that not everything can (or should) be quantified; much of the value imbued in social science approaches lies in its ability to elucidate intricate nuances in social systems, and oversimplification of these social processes can result in ineffective or misaligned policies and management strategies that become catalysts for unintentional or unwanted outcomes over time. Opportunities to conduct rigorous wildfire social science both in the Southwest and beyond are abundant and can build from the foundational research presented in this review.

Conclusion

Social science is becoming a more integrated component of wildfire adaptation discussions and actions in the Southwestern USA. This review finds that there is a small but growing body of research dedicated to social aspects of wildland fire in Arizona and New Mexico, but the need for social science research related to wildfire in these states persists as people and place continue to evolve. A shift from community-oriented research towards manager-focused studies over the past decade has limited regional capacity to document and theorise about the nuances at the local level that must be incorporated to progress wildfire adaptation. This article provides a roadmap of focal areas to expand wildfire social science in the Southwest, ensuring that conditions in Arizona and New Mexico are included and elevated in national and international conversations about wildfire adaptation. The Southwest is well positioned to become a national and international leader in key areas of wildfire social science such as management of and response to post-fire flooding, and support and use of natural ignitions to achieve land management objectives. Strategic hiring and investment in wildfire social science within the Southwest can further support this, particularly within agencies like the US Forest Service that have hired researchers with similar expertise in other regions of the USA. A growing wildfire social science workforce in Arizona and New Mexico can benefit greatly from hiring practices that are inclusive of the Southwest’s rich diversity of ethnicities, races, cultures, languages, and histories. Many of the research needs identified here are likely present across other US states, regions, and countries; therefore, similar geographically focused literature reviews elsewhere will be beneficial for developing a comprehensive constellation of wildfire social science understandings, needs, and disparities at the national level. Wildfire social science continues to play a critical role in adaptation planning and action, but increased investment in, and inclusion of, this research is critical to ensure that ecological and social adaptation are effectively integrated at local, landscape, and regional scales.

Supplementary material

Supplementary material is available online.

Data availability

All publications reviewed in this manuscript have been published and therefore are available to readers.

Conflicts of interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

Declaration of funding

This research was supported by funding provided by the Arizona Board of Regents through the Technology, Research and Innovation Fund (TRIF), the Arizona Wildfire Initiative supported by the Arizona Governor’s Office, the Rocky Mountain Research Station of the US Forest Service under agreement #21-CS-11221636-128, Joint Fire Science Program awards 21-2-01-7 and 22-2-01-9, and the Early Career Faculty Innovator Program at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a program sponsored by the National Science Foundation, Cooperative Agreement Number: 1755088.