Designing a Model to Display the Relation between Social Vulnerability and Anthropogenic Risk of Wildfires in Galicia, Spain
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Social Vulnerability and Wildfires
- Social and population dimension: Includes aspects such as justice, social differences, and social organization and individual strengths. Some studies have incorporated variables such as poverty, social marginalization, demographics (age vulnerable groups), education, health and welfare, migration, and risk perception [11]. The factors that determine this dimension are influenced by specific conditions and are very different development processes, depending on the country or region and the kind of danger faced [12].
- Economic dimension: Deals with occupation, income, economic effects, consumption, property, and savings [13]. This dimension also contemplates housing and habitability issues together with livelihood, which may be an aspect to consider in cases where it is based on a single sector (agriculture, fisheries, etc.) [14].
- Environmental or territorial dimension: Even though the environment is the source of the natural processes that can cause a disaster, it is at the same time an important resource for people who have a high hazard exposure [15]. This dimension is related to the environmental destruction effects that cause changes in the natural ecosystem at different scales (melting, destruction of natural barriers in coasts, emissions, etc.) [16]. Therefore, this dimension examines both the population dependence to certain environmental services, and the sensitivity of these environmental services to certain hazards [17].
- Vulnerable to fire danger: Any individual or element to be affected by a wildfire.
- Generators of fire risk: They are the source of fire hazard by inappropriate use of the forest, traditional practices, negligence, etc.
- Relievers of fire risk: Those for whom the natural environment, and specifically the forest environment, is paramount.
- The fire as a threat to fight against: This attitude prevails in areas where there is a close relationship between the urban and natural environment. In this case, the perception is negative, because there is a sense of danger associated with fire; also, adverse effects, such as a loss of quality of land, vegetation, forest landscape, etc., are considered
- Fire as a land management tool: This perception is common in mountain and rural areas with the presence of an agricultural and livestock sector. This view can lead to the expansion of small fires and can cause forest fires of greater intensity and extent.
2.2. Galicia, Social Vulnerability, and Wildfires
- Deficient land management: Galicia is one of the regions with the highest vegetal production and plant growth in Spain. Galician territories have been increasing their areas with highly flammable shrubs and trees. This has been due to the lack of forest management, together with the abandonment of land used for agriculture and livestock.
- Extended livestock farming: Livestock owners make use of abandoned forest land. To acquire grass, small fires are set, increasing the chances of a huge wildfire.
- Wastelands: They are characterized as the industrial parks, residential areas, and suburban areas of cities and towns, where shrub land and waste are mixed. They are not considered forest areas; however, they are areas where the work of extinguishing media is very intense.
- Wildland–urban interface areas: These can be defined as spaces where the surroundings of homes, neighborhoods, and urbanizations are embedded in adjacent forest areas with green spaces. They are considered high-risk areas because here, the occurrence and negligence in fire management multiply. There are large numbers of population centers with these characteristics and a higher risk of fires [37].
- Fire as a tool: Although there are permits for controlled burns, this practice is widespread in Galicia regarding both residues and forest scrub. This practice is very common in depressed and aged areas.
Social and Economic Factors
2.3. Methodology
3. Results
+ β5I.active + β6LnP.Foreign + β7LnParcelVal + β8LnDisCenter
+ β9LnRanch + β10LnRusticHa + β11LnGDP + β12LnLivestock
+ β13I.replacement + β14LnDebtHab + ɛ
4. Discussion
- There is an inverse relationship among “density”, “gross income per capita,” the “active population index”, the “plot value per holder”, and the “proportion of scattered/cores”, indicating that the lower the value of these variables, the greater the number of wildfires. In the case of the “active population index”, if the value decreases, it means a more aged population. In the case of property value, a decrease means that the plots are less valuable. As to the ratio “scattered/cores”, a decrease in its value shows that there are fewer scattered areas and subsequently more wildfires; this is related to the forestry–urban interface fields (transition lands) associated with population centers.
- The relationship is direct to “population over 64 years,” which clearly shows that there are more wildfires within aging population environments; this relies on burning-land traditions and cultural habits, a lower level of education and, in particular, a higher vulnerability. These territories also present a higher “masculinity index”, since there has been a historical female abandonment of rural areas; as a result, the population density is lower. The positive association between wildfire numbers and the rate of foreign population could be connected with their higher presence in vulnerable areas with lower incomes, precarious services, exclusion factors, etc. A positive GDP ratio (higher GDP, means more wildfires) would be explained by the existence of a larger number of urban cores. This means higher municipality richness, and consequently, the existence of more forestry–urban interface, and a higher likelihood of wildfires.
5. Conclusions
Future Research Lines and Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ager, A.; Evers, C.; Day, M.; Preisler, H.; Barros, A.; Nielsen-Pincus, M. Network analysis of wildfire transmission and implications for risk governance. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0172867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Haynes, K.; Handmer, J.; Mcaneney, J.; Tibbits, A.; Coates, L. Australian bushfire fatalities 1900–2008: Exploring trends in relation to the ‘Prepare, stay and defend or leave early’ policy. Environ. Sci. Policy 2010, 13, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hernández, L. Dónde arden nuestros bosques. Análisis y Soluciones de WWF 2016, 1, 64. Available online: http://awsassets.wwf.es/downloads/dondeardennuestrosbosques2016.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2018).
- Padilla, M.; Vega-García, C. On the comparative importance of fire danger rating indices and their integration with spatial and temporal variables for predicting daily human-caused fire occurrences in Spain. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2011, 20, 46–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kocher, S.; Butsic, V. Governance of Land Use Planning to Reduce Fire Risk to Homes Mediterranean France and California. Land 2017, 6, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murphy, B. Enhancing Local Level Emergency Management: The Influence of Disaster Experience and the Role of Households and Neighborhoods; ICLR Research: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Ley 43/2003, de 21 de noviembre, de Montes. BOE» núm. 280, de 22/11/2003. BOE-A-2003-21339. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/l/2003/11/21/43/con (accessed on 16 May 2018).
- Bentley, P.D.; Penman, T.D. Is there an inherent conflict in managing fire for people and conservation? Int. J. Wildland Fire 2017, 26, 455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Del Moral Ituarte, L.; Pita López, M.F. El papel de los riesgos en las sociedades contemporáneas. In Riesgos Naturales; Ayala-Carcedo, F.J., Olcina Cantos, J., Eds.; ARIEL: Barcelona, Spain, 2002; pp. 75–86. [Google Scholar]
- Birkmann, J. Measuring Vulnerability to Natural Hazards: Towards Disaster Resilient Societies, 2nd ed.; United Nation University Press: Tokyo, Japan; New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Donner, W.; Rodríguez, H. Population Composition, Migration and Inequality: The Influence of Demographic Changes on Disaster Risk and Vulnerability. Soc. Forces 2008, 87, 1089–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bergstrand, K.; Mayer, B.; Brumback, B.; Zhang, Y. Assessing the Relationship between Social Vulnerability and Community Resilience to Hazards. Soc. Indic. Res. 2015, 122, 391–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ashe, B.; Mcaneney, K.J.; Pitman, A.J. Total cost of fire in Australia. J. Risk Res. 2009, 12, 121–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, J.R.; Pais, J. When Nature Pushes Back: Environmental Impact and the Spatial Redistribution of Socially Vulnerable Populations. Soc. Sci. Q. 2010, 91, 1187–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molina, J.; Rodríguez, Y.; Silva, F.; Herrera, M. Economic vulnerability of fire-prone landscapes in protected natural areas: Application in a Mediterranean Natural Park. Eur. J. For. Res. 2017, 136, 609–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iyalomhe, F. Understanding developing countries vulnerability and adaptation to climate change using theoretical change vulnerability framework. Afr. J. Comput. ICT 2011, 4, 33–40. [Google Scholar]
- Sharma, S.; Pant, H. Vulnerability of Indian Central Himalayan Forests to Fire in a Warming Climate and a Participatory Preparedness Approach Based on Modern Tools. Curr. Sci. 2017, 112, 2100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cirella, G.T.; Iyalomhe, F.O.; Russo, A. Vulnerability and risks related to climatic events in urban coastal environments: Overview of actuality and challenges of methodologies and approaches. J. Urban Plan. Landsc. Environ. Des. 2016, 1, 67. [Google Scholar]
- Wisner, B.; Blaikie, P.; Cannon, T.; Davis, I. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and Disasters, 2nd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2004; 471p, ISBN 0415-252164. [Google Scholar]
- Morrow, B.H. Identifying 3nd Mapping Community Vulnerability. Disasters 1999, 23, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fogel, S.J. Reducing Vulnerability for Those Who Are Homeless during Natural Disasters. J. Poverty 2017, 21, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso Climent, I. Tercer mundo, desarrollo, desastres y tecnología. Una mirada desde la geografía. Ser. Geográfica 2002, 10, 11–26. [Google Scholar]
- Ballart, H.; Vázquez, I.; Chauvin, S.; Gladine, J.; Plana, E.; Font, M.; Serra, M. La comunicación del riesgo de incendios forestales. Recomendaciones operativas para mejorar la prevención social; Projecte eFIRECOM (DG ECHO 2014/PREV/13); Ediciones CTFC: Boadilla del Monte, Spain, 2016; 30p. [Google Scholar]
- Martínez-Fernández, J.; Chuvieco, E.; Koutsias, N. Modelling long-term fire occurrence factors in spain by accounting for local variations with geographically weighted regression. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 13, 311–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paveglio, T.B.; Edgeley, C.M.; Stasiewicz, A.M. Assessing influences on social vulnerability to wildfire using surveys, spatial data and wildfire simulations. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 213, 425–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moreno, J.M. Evaluación Preliminar de los Impactos en España por Efecto del Cambio Climático. Boletín CF+S 38/39. 2014. Available online: http://polired.upm.es/index.php/boletincfs/article/view/2617/2683 (accessed on 11 September 2018).
- Crompton, R.; Mcaneney, J.; Chen, K.; Pielke, R.; Haynes, K. Influence of Location, Population, and Climate on Building Damage and Fatalities due to Australian Bushfire. Weather. Soc. 2010, 2, 300–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouillon, C.; Fernandez Ramiro, M.M.; Sirca, C.; Fierro Garcia, B.; Casula, F.; Vila, B.; Long Fournel, M.; Pellizzaro, G.; Arca, B.; Tedim, F.; et al. A tool for mapping rural-urban interfaces on different scales. Adv. For. Fire Res. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stein, S.M.; Menakis, J.; Carr, M.A.; Comas, S.J.; Stewart, S.I.; Cleveland, H.; Bramwell, L.; Radeloff, V.C. Wildfire, Wildlands, and People: Understanding and Preparing for Wildfire in the Wildland-Urban Interface—A Forests on the Edge Report; Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-299; Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: Fort Collins, CO, USA, 2013; 36p.
- Balsa Barreiro, J.; Hermosilla, T. Socio-geographic analysis of the causes of the 2006’s wildfires in Galicia (Spain). For. Syst. 2013, 22, 497–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loureiro, M.; Barreal, J. Modelling spatial patterns and temporal trends of wildfires in Galicia (NW Spain). For. Syst. 2015, 24, e022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- San-Miguel-Ayanz, J.; Durrant, T.; Boca, R.; Libertà, G.; Branco, A.; de Rigo, D.; Ferrari, D.; Maianti, P.; Artés, T.; Costa, H.; et al. Forest Fires in Europe, Middle East and North Africa 2017; EUR 29318 EN; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2018; ISBN 978-92-79-92831-4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barreal, J.; Loureiro, M.; Picos, J. Estudio de la incidencia de los incendios en Galicia: Una perspectiva socioeconómica. Revista Galega de Economía 2011, 20. Available online: https://www.redalyc.org/comocitar.oa?id=39121275013 (accessed on 14 March 2018).
- Rigueiro, A.; Mosquera, M.R.; López, L.; Pastor, J.C.; González, M.P.; Romero, R.; Villarino, J.J. Reducción del riesgo de incendios forestales mediante el pastoreo del caballo gallego de monte. Cuadernos de la Sociedad Española de Ciencia Forestal 2002, 14, 115–118. [Google Scholar]
- Barreal, J.; Loureiro, M.; Picos, J. Estudio de la causalidad de los incendios forestales en Galicia. Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales 2012, 12, 101–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- COSE Selvicultores. Informe: El problema actual de los incendios forestales en Galicia. Informe de la Confederación de Organizaciones de Selvicultores de España 2015, 1, 40. Available online: https://studylib.es/doc/6173943/informe-%E2%80%9Cel-problema-actual-de-los-incendios-forestales-en (accessed on 5 April 2018).
- Galiana Martín, L. Las interfaces urbano-forestales: Un nuevo territorio de riesgo en España. Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles 2012, 58, 205–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- PLADIGA 2018. Memoria. Plan de Prevención e Defensa Contra os Incendios Forestais de Galicia; Xunta de Galicia, Consellería do Medio Rural: Santiago, Spain, 2018.
- Vilariño, J.P. Desarrollo corporativo del sector forestal. Agricultura y Sociedad 1998, 85, 15–42. [Google Scholar]
- Consejo Económico y Social (CES). Informe 01/2018, El medio rural y su vertebración social y territorial; Consejo Económico y Social: Madrid, Spain, 2018; Número 01; ISBN 978-84-8188-374-9. [Google Scholar]
- Wigtil, G.; Hammer, R.B.; Kline, J.D.; Mockrin, M.H.; Stewart, S.I.; Roper, D.; Radeloff, V.C. Places where wildfire potential and social vulnerability coincide in the coterminous United States. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2016, 25, 896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, F.M. Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions. Econometrica 1970, 38, 361–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Dimension | Variables | Min. | Max. | Average | Deviation | Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Population | Population>64 | 76.91 | 51,034.37 | 1932.85 | 4554.10 | Population aged over 64 years |
Density | 0.03 | 64.61 | 1.44 | 4.26145 | Number of people per has (hectares). | |
I.replacement | 72.34 | 585.26 | 179.83 | 68.03 | The relation among the population between 60–64 years old and the population between 15–19 years old. Measures the capacity of a population to replace the individuals who are retiring. | |
I.Masculinity | 83.09 | 129.83 | 96.78 | 5.89 | Relation between the number of men and women in a given population. | |
I.active | 72.40 | 177.34 | 118.78 | 19.43 | Relation among the population between 40–64 years old and the population between 15–39 years old. | |
P.Foreign | 0.00 | 2.22 | 0.03 | 0.15 | Proportion between foreign population and total population. | |
Territory | ParcelVal | 0.08 | 9.23 | 1.03 | 0.87 | Value of the plots in thousands of euros divided by the number of people registered in the Real Estate Cadastre. |
DisCenter | 0.00 | 116.00 | 4.81 | 11.17 | Buildings and dwellings of a singular entity that cannot be included in the concept of nucleus divided between the set of towns with less than 10 buildings, which are forming streets, squares, or other urban roads. | |
RusticHa | 0.47 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.07 | Rustic has by municipality. | |
Ranch | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.01 | Number of livestock farms per municipality. | |
Economy | Livestock | 4.853 | 25,032.06 | 3050.26 | 4501.22 | Number of cattle heads per municipality. |
IncCap | 5915.88 | 18,777.41 | 10,368.81 | 1722.46 | Gross income per inhabitant. | |
Debthab | 0.00 | 0.81 | 0.19 | 0.17 | The balance of the debt that the town councils have contracted with the bank, at a certain date. The debt of the town councils was introduced, dividing it among the inhabitants of each municipality so that it would be more representative of the weight of each territory. | |
GDP | 2680.62 | 7,168,155.94 | 176,090.10 | 616,411.74 | Gross domestic product |
Independent Variables | General Model | North Model | South Model | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coefficients (β) | p Value | Coefficients (β) | p Value | Coefficients (β) | p Value | |
Constant | −931.816 | 0.002 | −1207.57 | 0.000 | −1750.38 | 0.000 |
LnPopulation>64 | 189.671 *** | 0.000 | 132.692 *** | 0.000 | 273.830 *** | 0.000 |
LnDensity | −212.140 *** | 0.000 | −19.9101 | 0.573 | −273.462 *** | 0.000 |
IncCap | −0.0584683 *** | 0.000 | −0.0394832 *** | 0.000 | −0.0223893 | 0.264 |
I.Masculinity | 5.68822 ** | 0.010 | 1.71407 | 0.369 | 13.1212 *** | 0.000 |
I.active | −3.11713 * | 0.051 | −1.26194 | 0.384 | −3.55956 * | 0.079 |
LnP.Foreign | 53.7118 *** | 0.002 | −12.8223 | 0.291 | 50.9607 | 0.121 |
LnParcelVal | −60.4937 *** | 0.001 | 4.24432 | 0.850 | −36.5176 | 0.194 |
LnDisCenter | −30.7492 *** | 0.001 | −14.9480 * | 0.063 | 15.6403 | 0.379 |
LnRanch | 35.4466 | 0.138 | −21.3153 | 0.527 | 33.6097 | 0.158 |
LnRusticHa | −275.325 | 0.119 | 95.0943 | 0.659 | −223.834 | 0.114 |
LnGDP | 52.6489 | 0.119 | 46.6009 ** | 0.011 | −17.6842 | 0.766 |
LnLivestock | −2.94676 | 0.846 | 27.7159 | 0.194 | 10.2266 | 0.546 |
I.replacement | 0.108139 | 0.714 | −0.0719371 | 0.863 | −0.207825 | 0.523 |
LnDebtHab | 27.3305 | 0.676 | 47.9772 | 0.549 | −2.70796 | 0.972 |
R2 Sample size | 0.421 314 | 0.547 160 | 0.501 154 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
de Diego, J.; Rúa, A.; Fernández, M. Designing a Model to Display the Relation between Social Vulnerability and Anthropogenic Risk of Wildfires in Galicia, Spain. Urban Sci. 2019, 3, 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci3010032
de Diego J, Rúa A, Fernández M. Designing a Model to Display the Relation between Social Vulnerability and Anthropogenic Risk of Wildfires in Galicia, Spain. Urban Science. 2019; 3(1):32. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci3010032
Chicago/Turabian Stylede Diego, Jaime, Antonio Rúa, and Mercedes Fernández. 2019. "Designing a Model to Display the Relation between Social Vulnerability and Anthropogenic Risk of Wildfires in Galicia, Spain" Urban Science 3, no. 1: 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci3010032
APA Stylede Diego, J., Rúa, A., & Fernández, M. (2019). Designing a Model to Display the Relation between Social Vulnerability and Anthropogenic Risk of Wildfires in Galicia, Spain. Urban Science, 3(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci3010032