4.5 Article

Wildfire, climate, and perceptions in Northeast Oregon

期刊

REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE
卷 16, 期 6, 页码 1819-1832

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10113-015-0914-y

关键词

Climate change; Wildfire; Survey; Perceptions; Oregon; Global warming; Drought; Insects; Forests

资金

  1. Agricultural and Food Research Initiative of the US Department of Agriculture [2014-68002-21782]
  2. NIFA [687305, 2014-68002-21782] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER
  3. Office Of The Director
  4. EPSCoR [1101245] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wildfire poses a rising threat in the western USA, fueled by synergies between historical fire suppression, changing land use, insects and disease, and shifts toward a drier, warmer climate. The rugged landscapes of northeast Oregon, with their historically forest- and resource-based economies, have been one of the areas affected. A 2011 survey found area residents highly concerned about fire and insect threats, but not about climate change. In 2014 we conducted a second survey that, to explore this apparent disconnect, included questions about past and future summertime (fire season) temperatures. Although regional temperatures have warmed in recent decades at twice the global rate, accompanied by increasing dryness and fire risks, the warming itself is recognized by only 40 % of our respondents. Awareness of recent warming proves unrelated to individual characteristics that might indicate experience on the land: old-timer versus newcomer status, year-round versus seasonal residence, and ownership of forested land. Perceptions of past warming and expectations of future warming are more common among younger respondents and less common among Tea Party supporters. The best-educated partisans stand farthest apart. Perceptions about local temperatures that are important for adaptation planning thus follow ideological patterns similar to beliefs about global climate change.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据