In Canada and elsewhere, there is an ascendancy of a whole-of-society approach that centres shared responsibility for wildfire management. This article engages the debates on the rise of shared responsibility for wildfire management to argue that this context demands a renewed research focus on understanding how the public allocates responsibility for wildfire management. We illustrate this argument through a case study of public engagement with wildfire risk and shared responsibility in Whistler, British Columbia, western Canada. Our case study draws on evidence from a quantitative survey administered to 1311 participants in the spring and summer of 2024. The study reveals a near-universal concern about wildfires among the participants and a high level of risk perception. This is consistent with community climate and wildfire reports and plans. This level of concern is driving a high level of mitigation activity completion among participants, even though the level of preparedness is mixed. Our study found a marked pattern of responsibility allocation across the phases of wildfire management. Participants put the municipal government at the forefront of mitigation, preparedness, and response. The provincial government was ranked as most responsible for recovery. Homeowner responsibility declined as one moves from mitigation and preparedness through to response and recovery. Private actors, such as insurance, have greater responsibility in the recovery phase. Multivariate General Linear Models (GLMs) show that how respondents allocate responsibility for various aspects of wildfire management is influenced by home ownership, prior wildfire experience, perceived preparedness, and commitment to bearing the costs of FireSmart assessment. We conclude that a sustained research commitment is needed to further elucidate the dynamics of public expectations and attitudes in the context of shared responsibility for wildfire management.
Adeniyi Asiyanbi (2026) studied this question.