Search for: All records

Background The rising occurrence of simultaneous large wildfires has put strain on United States national fire management capacity leading to increasing reliance on assistance from partner nations abroad. However, limited analysis exists on international resource-sharing patterns and the factors influencing when resources are requested and deployed. Aims This study examines the drivers of international fire management ground and overhead personnel deployed to the United States. Methods Using descriptive statistics and case examples data from 2008 to 2020, this study investigates the conditions under which international personnel are deployed to the United States and their relationship to domestic resource strain. Factors such as fire weather, fire simultaneity, and the impact on people and structures are analysed as potential drivers of demand for international resources. Additionally, barriers to resource sharing, including overlapping fire seasons between countries are examined. Key results The findings indicate that international personnel sharing is more likely when the United States reaches higher preparedness levels, experiences larger area burned, and when fires pose a greater impact on people and structures. However, overlapping fire seasons can limit the ability to share resources with partner nations. Conclusions and implications Understanding the factors influencing resource sharing can help improve collaboration efforts and enhance preparedness for future wildfire seasons. 

Changing global fire regimes including extended fire seasons due to climate change may increase the co-occurrence of high-impact fires that overwhelm national fire suppression capacities. These shifts increase the demand for international resource sharing to supplement national fire suppression efforts. In this paper, we explore the development and evaluate the effectiveness of international resource sharing arrangements of three regions: (1) The United States, Canada, and Australia (“Big Three”); (2) Europe; and (3) Southeast Asia by conducting a literature review of gray and peer- reviewed literature in combination with key informant interviews. For the “Big Three” and Europe, international resource sharing is perceived as necessary, effective, and continuously improving. Converging fire management processes and training and developing more effective administrative procedures facilitate these relationships. In Southeast Asia, political tensions and limited firefighting capacities have hampered effective cooperation. Formalized agreements of country-to-country support for fire management are nascent and evolving, and there is evidence that demand for expanding and improving these partnerships is increasing. 

Abstract In this paper we consider some questions surrounding whether or not regional climate models “add value,” a controversial issue in climate science today. We highlight some objections frequently made about regional climate models both within and outside the community of modelers, including several claims that regional climate models do not “add value.” We show that there are a number of issues involved in the latter claims, the primary ones centering on the fact that different research questions are being pursued by the modelers making the complaints against regional climate models. Further issues focus on historical deficiencies of particular—but not generalizable—failures of individual regional models. We provide tools to sort out these different research questions and particular failures, and to improve communication and understanding surrounding added value in climate modeling and philosophy of climate science.