Next Article in Journal
Fire Severity and Vegetation Recovery on Mine Site Rehabilitation Using WorldView-3 Imagery
Previous Article in Journal
Embracing Complexity to Advance the Science of Wildland Fire Behavior
Article Menu
Issue 2 (September) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessConcept Paper

Wildfire Response Performance Measurement: Current and Future Directions

1
Rocky Mountain Research Station, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA
2
Department of Forest and Rangeland Stewardship, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA
3
Rocky Mountain Research Station, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Missoula, MT 59801, USA
4
Rocky Mountain Research Station, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Washington, DC 20227, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 11 April 2018 / Revised: 12 June 2018 / Accepted: 16 June 2018 / Published: 24 June 2018
Full-Text   |   PDF [1996 KB, uploaded 13 July 2018]   |  

Abstract

The Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, defines success in the wildland fire response environment as “safely achieving reasonable objectives with the least firefighter exposure necessary while enhancing stakeholder support for our management efforts”. However, persistent information and knowledge gaps challenge the agency’s ability to measure success in coming fire seasons. In this paper, we outline a roadmap to help fill these gaps, describing progress towards developing meaningful fire response key performance indicators (KPIs). We focus on characterizing suppression resource use and effectiveness as requisite initial steps towards reducing unnecessary exposure. Our intentions are to articulate the rationale for embracing KPIs for fire response operations, briefly review best practices as they relate to organizational performance measurement, and describe recent and emerging analysis techniques designed to ultimately improve responder exposure assessment. Specifically, we review tangible research products that could be operationalized as KPIs in the near future, and illustrate their calculation and interpretation for a set of large fires that occurred in the U.S. in 2017. To conclude, we offer thoughts on productive pathways forward with performance measurement. View Full-Text
Keywords: exposure; effectiveness; performance measurement; key performance indicators; risk management; safety exposure; effectiveness; performance measurement; key performance indicators; risk management; safety
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Thompson, M.P.; Lauer, C.J.; Calkin, D.E.; Rieck, J.D.; Stonesifer, C.S.; Hand, M.S. Wildfire Response Performance Measurement: Current and Future Directions. Fire 2018, 1, 21.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Fire EISSN 2571-6255 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top