Natural disturbances are fundamental to the healthy dynamics of boreal forest landscape ecosystems. Yet, there are concerns that the cumulative impacts of all types of human and natural disturbances may be increasing in frequency and magnitude, threatening human communities and ecological integrity. Amidst these concerns, forest managers face increasingly difficult trade-offs in balancing social, economic, and ecological outcomes. While existing research on public perceptions often isolates a single disturbance type (e.g., insects), such narrow focus limits our understanding of how the public weighs competing management alternatives. To address this gap, we conducted a factorial survey experiment (i.e., vignettes) in western Canada to evaluate the public’s acceptance of common forest disturbance options. Results indicate that insect and disease outbreaks are preferred to wildfire and harvest events. Support for disturbance changed depending on socio-demographic characteristics (male and/or rural), factual knowledge of Canadian forests, concern for safety and economic impacts, and acceptance of Indigenous partnerships. Although most respondents identified Indigenous communities as crucial partners in maintaining healthy forests, respondents were less willing to support direct Indigenous management of disturbances, such as wildfire. We discuss the implications of these findings in light of evolving public preferences and increasingly risk-prone forest landscapes.
Goodine et al. (Wed,) studied this question.