​

​

 

This wildfire vulnerability assessment framework relies on existing biophysical and social factors in a particular region to assess wildfire vulnerability. Our analysis estimated higher influence of fuel sensitivity levels, protected areas and population densities on overall vulnerability. With increasing human population and expanding land-use change, the interfaces between vegetation fires and vulnerable human assets are becoming more abundant, critical and conflicting (4).

 

Our results highlight the importance of an interdisciplinary approach for reduction of wildfire vulnerability in wildfire prone areas. Better fuel management plans based on vegetation’s wildfire proneness and building resilience in the communities residing in wildfire prone areas are cost-effective strategies in reducing wildfire vulnerability as compared to fire suppression and firefighting (4). The southern part of Lillooet and Penticton fire zones and the northern part of Kamloops fire zone are the most vulnerable area in Kamloops fire service region. The north-eastern and south-western part of the Cariboo fire service region constitutes the most vulnerable landscapes in the region. These area with high vulnerability should receive higher priority in allocating resources and interventions to mitigate vulnerability to wildfires.

​

​

​

​

​

Our study is based on a wildfire vulnerability assessment framework developed by researchers from Mediterranean Europe (4). Differences in landscapes and wildfire proneness between Mediterranean European forests and western Canadian forests bring a degree of uncertainty in our analysis. As biophysical and social factors related with wildfire vulnerability differs between Mediterranean and North American regions, there is opportunity for integration of new variables and modification of existing variables while adapting this framework for British Columbia.

​

The access to spatial data becomes a significant barrier when adapting a framework from different regions. In our analysis, we did not gain access to spatial data of fuel management plans and first responders in selected fire service regions. Hence, analysis of the coping capacity index in our study relies on fire station service area and fire surveillance towers. There is an opportunity for improvement in the coping capacity index by integrating fuel management plans within the composite index.

​

Weighting criteria for developing scores for wildfire proneness for vegetation and protected areas are based on literature review conducted as a part of this project. For the rest of the composite indices, we have adapted weighting criteria from the existing framework. These weighting criteria can be improved in the context of BC forest regions by getting consensus of concerned stakeholders on the weighting methods.

​

Validity of this framework can be improved through assessing the level of accuracy by using this framework in different forest regions in BC and across Canada.