Photo credit: Donato Salvatore La Mela Veca.
By Erika Piroli, Donato Salvatore la Mela Veca, Jayalaxshmi Mistry, and Yiannis Kountouris.
Wildfires in the Mediterranean are becoming an increasingly urgent challenge due to climate change and land use changes that heighten fire risks. Traditionally, fire management strategies in the region have focused on suppression, but this approach is proving unsustainable as it has also increased the likelihood of catastrophic wildfires, with severe consequences for both human lives and the environment.
Effectively addressing these challenges requires a deep understanding of local practices and the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders. Our recent study in Monreale, Sicily, delved into these complexities by exploring the diverse perspectives of stakeholders on the causes and management of wildfires in the area. We identified three distinct stakeholder positions: prevention advocates, pro-government supporters, and those favouring privatisation.
A key insight from our research is the lack of consensus among stakeholders on the indirect contributors to wildfires, with debates over whether inadequate maintenance of streets and paths or land abandonment is the more significant factor. Contrasting opinions also arose regarding the most effective strategies for managing wildfires. For instance, one group supports updating silvicultural practices and enhancing forest worker skills, aligning with trends observed in other Mediterranean countries. Another group advocates for privatisation, suggesting that private companies might offer more efficient forest prevention services.
Many stakeholders expressed a preference for prescribed burning as a preventive measure, particularly in fragmented forests and abandoned rural areas in Sicily. However, implementing this strategy is fraught with challenges, including cultural resistance and regulatory obstacles. Despite these differences, there is a shared recognition among stakeholders that the current emphasis on reactive fire management—primarily through fire suppression—has been inadequate. Additionally, in Sicily, the regional Forestry Corps faces significant hurdles, including an ageing workforce, insufficient coordination, and a top-down approach that often overlooks local fire culture.
Our study also delves into the role of political and socioeconomic factors in shaping fire management policies. For example, while one group distrusts the political system and supports privatisation, another group favours strong government involvement, emphasising the importance of public safety and the expertise of public forest workers. These differing views highlight the complexities of fire management in Sicily, where political actors play a crucial role in driving policy changes and allocating resources. Our research underscores the importance of collaboration and conflict resolution, suggesting that a shift from a government-centric approach to a more inclusive, governance-based model could lead to more effective landscape and fire management.
In conclusion, while the perspectives on wildfire management in Monreale are diverse, they provide a strong foundation for developing more effective and sustainable fire policies. By focusing on shared goals and innovative solutions, we can better protect both ecosystems and communities from the devastating impacts of wildfires. Looking ahead, our findings point to several areas for future research and action. For instance, a comparison of public and private aerial firefighting services could provide valuable insights into their cost-effectiveness and environmental impact. Additionally, exploring the potential of Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) to incentivise sustainable practices could prove transformative in the realm of fire management.
Relational Thinking 