Wildfires across western North America have increased in number and size over the past three decades, and this trend will continue in response to further warming. As a consequence, the wildland–urban interface is projected to experience substantially higher risk of climate-driven fires in the coming decades. Although many plants, animals, and ecosystem services benefit from fire, it is unknown how ecosystems will respond to increased burning and warming. Policy and management have focused primarily on specified resilience approaches aimed at resistance to wildfire and restoration of areas burned by wildfire through fire suppression and fuels management. These strategies are inadequate to address a new era of western wildfires. In contrast, policies that promote adaptive resilience to wildfire, by which people and ecosystems adjust and reorganize in response to changing fire regimes to reduce future vulnerability, are needed. Key aspects of an adaptive resilience approach are ( i ) recognizing that fuels reduction cannot alter regional wildfire trends; ( ii ) targeting fuels reduction to increase adaptation by some ecosystems and residential communities to more frequent fire; ( iii ) actively managing more wild and prescribed fires with a range of severities; and ( iv ) incentivizing and planning residential development to withstand inevitable wildfire. These strategies represent a shift in policy and management from restoring ecosystems based on historical baselines to adapting to changing fire regimes and from unsustainable defense of the wildland–urban interface to developing fire-adapted communities. We propose an approach that accepts wildfire as an inevitable catalyst of change and that promotes adaptive responses by ecosystems and residential communities to more warming and wildfire.

There is no uniform means for assessing social impact from wildland fires beyond statistics such as home loss, suppression costs and the number of residents evacuated. In this paper we argue for and provide a more comprehensive set of considerations for gauging social impact following wildfires. These expanded considerations can advance methods for determining how social impacts from wildfire are changing over time and among diverse communities affected by fire. Our preliminary considerations for social impact from wildfire are drawn from the synthesis of the literature on wildfire and other hazards. We explain how our considerations cover existing research insights and advance them by accounting for wildfire-specific impacts. Considerations are presented as a series of questions that could be answered by an assemblage of outside professionals and local key informants in an affected area for comparison and policy purposes. Those considerations could also be used to advance research questions related to wildfire exposure and impact. We discuss multiple methodological strategies for collecting and analysing data that would be needed to answer considerations presented as part of this synthesis. This includes potential methods for using those considerations to assess social impact across communities.

Social interactions are widely recognized as a potential influence on risk-related behaviors. We present a mediation model in which social interactions (classified as formal/informal and generic/fire-specific) are associated with beliefs about wildfire risk and mitigation options, which in turn shape wildfire mitigation behaviors. We test this model using survey data from fire-prone areas of Colorado. In several cases, our results are consistent with the mediation hypotheses for mitigation actions specifically targeting vegetative fuel reduction. Perceived wildfire probability partially mediates the relationship between several interaction types and vegetative mitigation behaviors, while perceptions of aesthetic barriers and lack of information play a mediating role in the case of fire-specific formal interactions. Our results suggest that social interactions may allow mitigation and prevention behaviors to “catch fire” within a community, and that wildfire education programs could leverage these interactions to enhance programmatic benefits.