| Summary: |
In the last decades, the Portuguese government has faced the problem of wildfires, devoting effort on decreasing the number of ignitions,
influencing land management, increasing the adoption of fuel management and the implementation of defensible space. The political tools used
were the conventional ones (i.e. legislation and regulations), not based on incentives but always on coercive measures. Following the 2017
season, the social and political pressure to "solve the wildfire problem" has produced a cascade of legislative solutions with unrealistic "one size
fits all" approach and use the threat of financial penalties to force behavioral change. Conversely, policies that take into consideration what has
been learned from behavioral research in social sciences are more likely to promote a change of behaviors and lead to decreasing future negative
outcomes of a wildfire. A key component of efforts to change social norms and behavior involves taking into account the perspectives and
concerns of different groups and audiences.
Therefore, empirical understanding of how di fferent populations perceive fire risk as well as their knowledge and use of different fire mitigation
measures, both before and during an event, is needed to ensure that engagement efforts address actual, rather than perceived, barriers to
preparedness
In PT, the curr ent program of risk communication aimed to reduce ignitions was evaluated as sporadic, generalist, irregular, unorganized and not
preceded by awareness-raising initiatives. It is based on dissemination of information assuming that this can determined awareness and change of
behaviors. Since the 1980's scientific research showed that this kind of approach was inefficacious.
AVODIS project proposes to develop and achieve novel strategies to improve the scarce knowledge of social context of wildfire prevention,
mitigation and suppression and ensure better implementation of risk and crisis com  |
Summary
In the last decades, the Portuguese government has faced the problem of wildfires, devoting effort on decreasing the number of ignitions,
influencing land management, increasing the adoption of fuel management and the implementation of defensible space. The political tools used
were the conventional ones (i.e. legislation and regulations), not based on incentives but always on coercive measures. Following the 2017
season, the social and political pressure to "solve the wildfire problem" has produced a cascade of legislative solutions with unrealistic "one size
fits all" approach and use the threat of financial penalties to force behavioral change. Conversely, policies that take into consideration what has
been learned from behavioral research in social sciences are more likely to promote a change of behaviors and lead to decreasing future negative
outcomes of a wildfire. A key component of efforts to change social norms and behavior involves taking into account the perspectives and
concerns of different groups and audiences.
Therefore, empirical understanding of how di fferent populations perceive fire risk as well as their knowledge and use of different fire mitigation
measures, both before and during an event, is needed to ensure that engagement efforts address actual, rather than perceived, barriers to
preparedness
In PT, the curr ent program of risk communication aimed to reduce ignitions was evaluated as sporadic, generalist, irregular, unorganized and not
preceded by awareness-raising initiatives. It is based on dissemination of information assuming that this can determined awareness and change of
behaviors. Since the 1980's scientific research showed that this kind of approach was inefficacious.
AVODIS project proposes to develop and achieve novel strategies to improve the scarce knowledge of social context of wildfire prevention,
mitigation and suppression and ensure better implementation of risk and crisis communication programs to increase safety and resilience.
This problem is very important namely because; i) Citizens must be prepared to respond to wildfires without assistance and be prepared to secure
their own safety, because Civil Protection services are unable to help everyone during a wildfire, whether through firefighting or assisted
evacuation; ii) Land use and management decisions, past and present, affect wildfire potential. and the extreme fire behavior, so citizens should
be aware of their attitudes and behavior in creating wildfire risk and favoring disastrous fire outbreaks, exacerbated by a context of climate
change; ii) Most of the fatalities that occurred in 2017, in Portugal, could have been avoided if people were properly informed, physically and
mentally prepared to face extreme wildfire events which are events with extreme intensity, high rate of spread, a prolific spotting activity,
exceeding the capacity of control; iv)In any fire event, but particularly in extreme wildfire events, social outcomes depend in part upon the
vulnerability and resilience of affected people, and are most proximally driven by their level of physical and mental preparedness and behavior;v)
in a context of long fire seasons and occurrence of extreme weather and climatic conditions the success of firefighting activities will require more
flexible strategies. Effective risk and crisis communication can create opportunities for more flexible strategies to be utilized.
The novel idea of AVODIS is based on using risk and crisis communication precepts to develop an integrative framework that considers both
individual-level behavior |