Anti-fire statements coexist with millions of anthropogenic fires in Madagascar

In many grassy ecosystems, fire is widely used for landscape management, even amid dominant anti-fire narratives and regulations. This creates conflict and makes fire a sensitive subject for public discussion. In this study, we focus on the highlands of Madagascar, a region dominated by grassy ecosystems and hosting the highest fire activity on the island. We explore inhabitants’ statements about fire across varied ecological and socioeconomic contexts, based on interviews in both urban and rural settings using a mixed-methods approach that included closed-ended, open-ended, word-association, and Likert scale questions on landscape fires. Results revealed that people generally express aversion to landscape fires, aligning with dominant anti-fire narratives that emphasize fire as a factor of environmental degradation. However, some respondents also acknowledged uses and potential benefits of landscape fires, mostly related to agriculture and cattle-raising. Recognition of fire causes and benefits varied significantly between sites and was strongly disconnected from field realities. Rural respondents less frequently mentioned constructive causes and advantages of burning and expressed a stronger preference for local governance of fire use than urban inhabitants. We interpret these patterns as consistent with social desirability bias, fear of consequences, and a reluctance to disclose practices perceived as inappropriate for outsider scrutiny. In addition, we confirm that landscape fires continue to be criminalized in Madagascar, perpetuating the fire conflict. To resolve the conflict, we encourage the differentiation of fire types and contexts and improved communication across governance scales, local communities, and scientists, enabling the adoption of optimal management strategies that balance the multiple interests at play.