View in EDS

Development of burn prescriptions using quantitative expert judgement.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Development of burn prescriptions using quantitative expert judgement.
Authors: Cawson, Jane G.1 (AUTHOR) Jane.Cawson@unimelb.edu.au, Burton, Jamie E.1 (AUTHOR), Parkins, Kate A.1 (AUTHOR), Marshall, Erica1 (AUTHOR), Elliot-Kerr, Shona1 (AUTHOR), Aylward, Nicola2 (AUTHOR), Calwell, Mel2 (AUTHOR), Martin, Hamish2 (AUTHOR), Penman, Trent D.1 (AUTHOR)
Source: Journal of Environmental Management. Dec2025, Vol. 395, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p.
Subjects: Prescribed burning, Fire management, Fire exposure, Plant ecology, Combustion engineering, Expert systems
Geographic Terms: Australia, Victoria
Abstract: Prescribed burning is carried out within a predetermined set of weather conditions—known as the burn prescription—that supports safe and effective operations. These prescriptions are often informed by expert knowledge, particularly the experiential insights of burn practitioners. However, ad hoc approaches to eliciting such expertise lack the rigour required to produce reliable prescriptions. Recent advances in structured elicitation methods offer more robust and transparent methodologies. This research explored the use of structured elicitation techniques to develop new burn prescriptions for native forests and woodlands in Victoria, Australia. Local fire managers identified two priority burn outcomes: a mixed severity, patchy burn, and a high severity, high coverage burn. Our elicitation was designed to develop prescriptions specific to these burn outcomes across five vegetation scenarios with different fuel hazards. The elicited prescriptions for achieving a mixed severity, patchy burn were wetter and less windy than those for a high severity, high coverage burn. Fuel hazard had little influence on the prescribed conditions. The new prescriptions resulted in a 40 % increase in the burn window for achieving a high severity, high coverage burn compared to current prescriptions. In contrast, the burn window for the mixed severity, patchy burn changed little. Thus, achieving a patchy burn may require adjustments to other aspects of burn implementation, such as ignition techniques. Workshop participants described how they modify their ignition approach to manipulate fire behaviour and resulting burn outcome. This study demonstrates how quantitative expert judgement can harness the experiential knowledge of burn practitioners to develop burn prescriptions. Field testing is recommended to further refine these prescriptions. • Structured elicitation was used to develop new burn prescriptions. • Results give weather and fuel moisture ranges to achieve key burn outcomes. • Fuel hazard had little effect on the prescribed burn conditions. • Practitioners vary ignition methods to limit burn intensity and patchiness. • Our elicitation method promotes unbiased, repeatable use of practitioner knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Environmental Management is the property of Academic Press Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Description
Abstract:Prescribed burning is carried out within a predetermined set of weather conditions—known as the burn prescription—that supports safe and effective operations. These prescriptions are often informed by expert knowledge, particularly the experiential insights of burn practitioners. However, ad hoc approaches to eliciting such expertise lack the rigour required to produce reliable prescriptions. Recent advances in structured elicitation methods offer more robust and transparent methodologies. This research explored the use of structured elicitation techniques to develop new burn prescriptions for native forests and woodlands in Victoria, Australia. Local fire managers identified two priority burn outcomes: a mixed severity, patchy burn, and a high severity, high coverage burn. Our elicitation was designed to develop prescriptions specific to these burn outcomes across five vegetation scenarios with different fuel hazards. The elicited prescriptions for achieving a mixed severity, patchy burn were wetter and less windy than those for a high severity, high coverage burn. Fuel hazard had little influence on the prescribed conditions. The new prescriptions resulted in a 40 % increase in the burn window for achieving a high severity, high coverage burn compared to current prescriptions. In contrast, the burn window for the mixed severity, patchy burn changed little. Thus, achieving a patchy burn may require adjustments to other aspects of burn implementation, such as ignition techniques. Workshop participants described how they modify their ignition approach to manipulate fire behaviour and resulting burn outcome. This study demonstrates how quantitative expert judgement can harness the experiential knowledge of burn practitioners to develop burn prescriptions. Field testing is recommended to further refine these prescriptions. • Structured elicitation was used to develop new burn prescriptions. • Results give weather and fuel moisture ranges to achieve key burn outcomes. • Fuel hazard had little effect on the prescribed burn conditions. • Practitioners vary ignition methods to limit burn intensity and patchiness. • Our elicitation method promotes unbiased, repeatable use of practitioner knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:03014797
DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.127756