Search for: All records

Abstract Previous research has examined individual factors contributing to wildfire risk, but the compounding effects of these factors remain underexplored. Here, we introduce the “Integrated Human-centric Wildfire Risk Index (IHWRI)” to quantify the compounding effects of fire-weather intensification and anthropogenic factors—including ignitions and human settlement into wildland—on wildfire risk. While climatic trends increased the frequency of high-risk fire-weather by 2.5-fold, the combination of this trend with wildland-urban interface expansion led to a 4.1-fold increase in the frequency of conditions conducive to extreme-impact wildfires from 1990 to 2022 across California. More than three-quarters of extreme-impact wildfires—defined as the top 20 largest, most destructive, or deadliest events on record—originated within 1 km from the wildland-urban interface. The deadliest and most destructive wildfires—90% of which were human-caused—primarily occurred in the fall, while the largest wildfires—56% of which were human-caused—mostly took place in the summer. By integrating human activity and climate change impacts, we provide a holistic understanding of human-centric wildfire risk, crucial for policy development. 

Globally, land subsidence (LS) often adversely impacts infrastructure, humans, and the environment. As climate change intensifies the terrestrial hydrologic cycle and severity of climate extremes, the interplay among extremes (e.g., floods, droughts, wildfires, etc.), LS, and their effects must be better understood since LS can alter the impacts of extreme events, and extreme events can drive LS. Furthermore, several processes causing subsidence (e.g., ice‐rich permafrost degradation, oxidation of organic matter) have been shown to also release greenhouse gases, accelerating climate change. Our review aims to synthesize these complex relationships, including human activities contributing to LS, and to identify the causes and rates of subsidence across diverse landscapes. We primarily focus on the era of synthetic aperture radar (SAR), which has significantly contributed to advancements in our understanding of ground deformations around the world. Ultimately, we identify gaps and opportunities to aid LS monitoring, mitigation, and adaptation strategies and guide interdisciplinary efforts to further our process‐based understanding of subsidence and associated climate feedbacks. We highlight the need to incorporate the interplay of extreme events, LS, and human activities into models, risk and vulnerability assessments, and management practices to develop improved mitigation and adaptation strategies as the global climate warms. Without consideration of such interplay and/or feedback loops, we may underestimate the enhancement of climate change and acceleration of LS across many regions, leaving communities unprepared for their ramifications. Proactive and interdisciplinary efforts should be leveraged to develop strategies and policies that mitigate or reverse anthropogenic LS and climate change impacts. 

Abstract Recent major investments in infrastructure in the United States and globally present a crucial opportunity to embed equity within the heart of resilient infrastructure decision-making. Yet there is a notable absence of frameworks within the engineering and scientific fields for integrating equity into planning, design, and maintenance of infrastructure. Additionally, whole-of-government approaches to infrastructure, including the Justice40 Initiative, mimic elements of process management that support exploitative rather than exploratory innovation. These and other policies risk creating innovation traps that limit analytical and engineering advances necessary to prioritize equity in decision-making, identification and disruption of mechanisms that cause or contribute to inequities, and remediation of historic harms. Here, we propose a three-tiered framework toward equitable and resilient infrastructure through restorative justice, incremental policy innovation, and exploratory research innovation. This framework aims to ensure equitable access and benefits of infrastructure, minimize risk disparities, and embrace restorative justice to repair historical and systemic inequities. We outline incremental policy innovation and exploratory research action items to address and mitigate risk disparities, emphasizing the need for community-engaged research and the development of equity metrics. Among other action items, we recommend a certification system—referred to as Social, Environmental, and Economic Development (SEED)—to train infrastructure engineers and planners and ensure attentiveness to gaps that exist within and dynamically interact across each tier of the proposed framework. Through the framework and proposed actions, we advocate for a transformative vision for equitable infrastructure that emphasizes the interconnectedness of social, environmental, and technical dimensions in infrastructure planning, design, and maintenance.