Economic efficiency of fuel treatments in western US forests: A methodological framework
| Authors: | Evan E. Hjerpe, Patricia A. Champ, Samuel G. Evans, José J. Sánchez, Kelly W. Jones, John Loomis, Thomas P. Holmes, Gwendolyn Aldrich, Mark Buckley, Melanie M. Colavito, Andrew Sánchez Meador |
| Year: | 2026 |
| Type: | Scientific Journal |
| Station: | Rocky Mountain Research Station |
| DOI: | https://doi.org/10.1071/WF25060 |
| Source: | International Journal of Wildland Fire |
Abstract
Reducing fuels in overly dense, arid forests of the Western US is a prominent fire mitigation strategy. Fuel treatments, including thinning and prescribed burning, are a means of reintroducing fire to fire-dependent forests and alleviating wildfire-related damages to human health, infrastructure and natural resources.
To help establish economic efficiency analysis of fuel treatments, we provide a methodological framework illustrating benefit-cost analysis (BCA) and considerations for dealing with valuation complexity.
Our framework was developed from research reviews and valuation discussions that occurred at a fall 2024 workshop of social scientists involved in economic research on fuel treatments. We augmented the framework with additional literature reviews and reference example valuations.
We detailed 25 unique potential benefits of fuel treatments and multiple costs. Complexity in (BCA) of fuel treatments stems from limited data and reference studies, various beneficiaries and accounting stances, spatial and temporal dispersion of benefits and costs, and aggregating multiple benefits with differing outputs and units.
Further empirical and simulation-based analyses of the benefits and costs of fuels treatments would support a clearer understanding of the economic trade-offs involved. Such information could highlight opportunities for long-term savings from proactive investments in wildfire resilience.