4.7 Article

Spatial Modelling of Fire Drivers in Urban-Forest Ecosystems in China

Journal

FORESTS
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/f8060180

Keywords

spatial heterogeneity; geographically weighted logistic regression; fire risk; wildfire management

Categories

Funding

  1. Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University Funds for Distinguished Young Scholar [xjq201613]
  2. Asia-Pacific Network for Sustainable Forest Management and Rehabilitation (APFnet)
  3. Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University [KXB16008A]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fires in urban-forest ecosystems (UFEs) are frequent with complex causes, posing a serious hazard to human lives and infrastructure. Thus, quantifying wildfire risks in UFEs and their spatial pattern is quintessential to develop appropriate fire management strategies. The aim of this study was to explore spatial ( geographically weighted logistic regression, GWLR) versus non-spatial ( logistic regression, LR) modelling approaches to determine the relationship between forest fire occurrence and driving factors in Yichun, a typical urban-forest ecosystem in China. As drivers of fire, 13 factors related to topographic, vegetation, infrastructure, meteorological and socio-economy were considered and regressed against fire occurrence data from 1980 to 2010. Results demonstrate the superiority of GWLR models over LR in terms of prediction accuracy, goodness of fit and model residuals. The GWLR model further captured the spatial variability of driving factors over a broad study area, and the fire likelihood maps identified areas with different zones of fire risk in the study area. In conclusion, the study demonstrates quantitatively and spatially the importance of accounting for local variation in drivers of fires, thereby improving fire management and prevention strategies. The findings also contribute to the emerged field of fire management and fire risk assessment in UFEs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available