4.5 Article

Exploring spatially varying relationships between forest fire and environmental factors at different quantile levels

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF WILDLAND FIRE
卷 29, 期 6, 页码 486-498

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/WF19010

关键词

forest fire count; geographically weighted quantile regression; quantile regression; risk assessment

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31770697]
  2. Asia-Pacific Network for Sustainable Forest Management and Rehabilitation (APFnet Climate Research Project) Phase II and the Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University Funds for Distinguished Young Scholar [XJQ201613]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of driving factors on forest fire occurrence at various risk levels beyond average fire risk is of great interest to forest fire managers in practice. Using forest fire occurrence data collected in Fujian province, China, global quantile regression (QR) and geographically weighted quantile regression (GWQR) were applied to investigate the spatially varying relationships between forest fire and environmental factors at different quantiles (e.g. 0.50, 0.75, 0.90 and 0.99) of fire occurrence. These results indicated that: (1) at each quantile, the regression coefficients of both global QR and GWQR were negative for elevation, slope and Normalised Difference Vegetation Index, and positive for settlement density, national road density and grass cover; (2) low number of pixels with high fire occurrence in space might dramatically affect the analysis and modelling of the relationship between fire occurrence and a specific environmental factor; (3) according to GWQR, the relationships between forest fire and environmental factors significantly varied across the study area at different quantiles of fire occurrence; and (4) the GWQR models performed better in model fitting and prediction than the QR models at all quantiles. Therefore, the GWQR models could help decision makers to better plan for forest fire management and prevention strategies.

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