1. Wildfire in Colorado: Understanding the role of social interactions and risk perceptions in shaping households’ mitigation behaviors Katie Dickinson Working with Hannah Brenkert-Smith, Patricia Champ, and Nicholas Flores

2. Katie Dickinson, environmental economist Research interest: What motivates individual actions that affect environmental, health, and economic outcomes? Past projects: -Sanitation choices in India -Malaria prevention and treatment behaviors in Tanzania -Mosquito control in Wisconsin Current projects at NCAR: -Wildfire mitigation behaviors in Colorado -Cookstove use and meningitis in Ghana -Hurricane warning information and evacuation decisions in Miami Overarching questions: How do social networks shape behaviors? How can a better understanding of human behaviors inform more effective policies and programs? What benefits and costs do people consider when making decisions in the face of risk? Relevance to NCAR: Understanding the societal impacts of weather and climate requires an understanding of behavioral responses to risk

3. Wildfire Study: Definitions Wildfire in Colorado: Understanding the role of social interactions and risk perceptions in shaping households’ mitigation behaviors

4. Wildfire Study: Definitions Wildfire in Colorado: Understanding the role of social interactions and risk perceptions in shaping households’ mitigation behaviors Risk: Probability of fire occurring times consequences (or impacts) of fire (damage to own house & property, loss of life or other health impacts, psychological impacts…)

5. Wildfire Study: Definitions Wildfire in Colorado: Understanding the role of social interactions and risk perceptions in shaping households’ mitigation behaviors Risk perceptions: Individual’s assessment of probability and consequences of fire

6. Wildfire Study: Definitions Wildfire in Colorado: Understanding the role of social interactions and risk perceptions in shaping households’ mitigation behaviors Mitigation behaviors: Actions taken by homeowner to reduce (perceived) wildfire risk, including structural changes to the home (e.g., fire- resistant roofing) and actions to reduce fuels (e.g., creating a “defensible space” around the home).

7. Wildfire Study: Definitions Wildfire in Colorado: Understanding the role of social interactions and risk perceptions in shaping households’ mitigation behaviors Social interactions: Contact between individuals within social groups. Can include group or 1-on- 1 interactions, organized or spontaneous, issue- focused or generic.

8. Wildfire Study: Basic Model M Fire Mitigation Behaviors R Risk Perceptions S Social Interactions Social group gives information about fire risk, changing my risk perception Neighbor removes dead trees, lowering my risk (risk interdependency) Attending fire event teaches me how to install screens over vents (learning) Neighborhood group launches campaign to get everyone to “do their part” (social norms)

9. Wildfire Study: Methods Social survey data collection – 700 homeowners in Boulder and Larimer Counties (Colorado) surveyed via internet and mail in 2007 – Repeat survey after big fires in fall of 2010 – Survey includes extensive questions on social interactions, risk perceptions, behaviors, and household characteristics Quantitative statistical analysis to infer relationships between variables in our dataset

10. Wildfire Study: Snapshot M Fire Mitigation Behaviors R Risk Perceptions S Social Interactions Social amplification of wildfire risk: Are measures of social interaction and information sources related to risk perceptions?

11. Probability Consequences Damage to own house Damage to own land Damage to neighbors’ property Damage to public lands Consequences Damage to own house Damage to own land Damage to neighbors’ property Damage to public lands Social Interactions Generic Informal Proximity to neighbors Frequency of interaction with neighbors Generic Informal Proximity to neighbors Frequency of interaction with neighbors Generic Formal Participation in social groups and community groups Generic Formal Participation in social groups and community groups Perceived Wildfire Risk Fire-specific Informal Talking with neighbors about fire Reporting that neighbors have taken action Fire-specific Informal Talking with neighbors about fire Reporting that neighbors have taken action Fire-specific Formal Attending fire-related event Fire-specific Formal Attending fire-related event Personal Characteristics Location, Age, Gender, Income, Previous Wildfire Experience, Parcel Characteristics

12. Results: Social Amplification of Risk Wildfire risk perceptions are associated with social interaction measures Fire-specific interactions are associated with more risk perception measures than generic interactions – Talking with neighbors about fire is associated with higher perceived fire probability and consequences – Reporting that neighbors took action before you decreases perceived probability of fire But generic interactions also matter

13. Wildfire Study Challenges Correlation does not equal causation – Do I think fire is more likely because I talked to my neighbor about fire? – Or did I talk to my neighbor because I thought fire was more likely? Possible solutions: – 2010 data… Looking at changes in perceptions and behavior over time – Experimental approaches… “lab” or field M R S

14. Summary Social science perspective can aid in understanding human behaviors in the face of weather and climate risks In the wildfire context, interactions with neighbors, social contacts, and experts may shape risk perceptions and mitigation actions – Risk interdependency: what I do affects your risk Getting people to act “better” isn’t just a matter of delivering more information