Repository logo

Theses and Dissertations

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/10217/100459

Browse

Browsing Theses and Dissertations by Author "Beck, Scott, committee member"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Ecosystem service valuation for wildfire mitigation prioritization decision-making in Colorado
    (Colorado State University. Libraries, 2020) Chamberlain, James Luther, IV, author; Jones, Kelly, advisor; Beck, Scott, committee member; Wei, Yu, committee member
    Wildfire presents a sizeable threat to ecosystem service values in Colorado and the Western U.S. If ecosystem services (ES), or the benefits that we obtain from natural ecosystems, are to be fully accounted for and protected in wildfire management, they must be properly valued. Monetary valuation has hitherto been the primary method for capturing the market and non-market value of an ES. Monetary valuation, while a powerful tool, is not applicable for all ES. Socio-cultural valuation, or non-monetary valuation, attempts to expand the scope of what ES can be valued and how they are valued for decision-makers. In this two-part thesis I explore both monetary and non-monetary valuation of ES in Colorado. Chapter One is an original research study that utilizes public participatory geospatial information systems (PPGIS) methods to capture socio-cultural ES values at risk of wildfire in the Big Thompson watershed. This study uses participatory data collection and spatial hotspot analysis, combining public ES perceptions and modeled wildfire risk data to locate potential priority zones for incorporating social values into wildfire management. Chapter Two is a cost-benefit analysis that I contributed to as part of a larger team that uses economic valuation to assess the values at risk from wildfire in the water catchments surrounding the Denver metropolitan area. In this study, the net economic benefits of wildfire mitigation investments carried out by the Forests to Faucets partnership were measured under different modeling assumptions. The research across these two chapters represents two different, but complimentary ways to incorporate a wide range of ES values into wildfire risk assessments.