Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenor:
-
Sophie De Pauw
(University of Reading)
Send message to Convenor
- Format:
- Panel
- Stream:
- Decolonisation
- Location:
- Palmer 1.11
- Sessions:
- Friday 30 June, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
To date, fire's biophysical aspects has dominated the wildfire research agenda, largely ignoring the needs/knowledge of local fire users. Developing tools to sustainably co-exist with fire calls for the decolonisation of wildfire science. This panel examines why and how this should be achieved.
Long Abstract:
In many ways wildfires have become emblematic of the Anthropocene, representing the epitome of natural disasters exacerbated by the climate crisis. Recent years have seen an increase of extreme fires worldwide, even in previously unaffected areas. Mounting reports of their often-devastating consequences on human health and livelihoods as well as on the environment has prompted the UNEP to declare a "Global wildfire crisis". These escalating concerns have given rise to a burgeoning community of wildfire researchers and practitioners aiming to develop the knowledge and tools for a more sustainable co-existence with fire.
In its earliest iterations, wildfire science was limited to understanding the physical characteristics and impacts of fire with management strategies often centred around suppression and risk-mitigation. However, the field has since evolved into a transdisciplinary domain bringing together researchers from a wide spectrum of scholarly backgrounds. Consequently, wildfires are no longer seen as decontextualised biophysical phenomena but are increasingly understood to occur in diverse socionatures (interwoven social, ecological, political, economic, and metaphysical worlds). This shift has also led to the recognition that fires are not universally viewed as disasters. Indeed, controlled fires are often essential to maintaining subsistence-oriented or smallholder livelihoods particularly in the Global South.
Nevertheless, the foundations of wildfire research remain imbued with western hegemonic worldviews and continue to be influenced by colonial legacies. The objective of this panel is to examine how coloniality has influenced the sphere of wildfire research and discuss how researchers can decolonise their practices and processes.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Friday 30 June, 2023, -Paper short abstract:
Colonial legacies persist in fire science, preventing indigenous and local peoples from influencing knowledge production and management. The Leverhulme Centre for Wildfires is running a series of theoretical, experiential, and active inter-cultural workshops to decolonise their fire sciences.
Paper long abstract:
Colonial interpretations of fire as a destructive phenomenon and degradative land management practice have silenced diverse indigenous and local knowledges over the beneficial role of fire in social-ecological environments. The pursuit of a Euro-centric, objective wildfire science has engendered a recent pyric transition; a decline in local community burning due to the enforcement of fire suppression policies and top-down prescribed burning programmes have fostered the conditions for large wildfire events that exceed natural variability levels, as well as driven an increase in fire ignitions related to agrarian political resistance and protest. The Leverhulme Centre for Wildfires, Environment and Society are running a series of Decolonising Fire Science workshops to theoretically, experientially, and actively address the coloniality of research and historical and institutional injustices structured into wildfire science. We bring together researchers in both social and physical sciences, stakeholders, and rightsholders from across the world to think about and apply principles of decolonisation in their fire science, highlighting the importance of experimental learning exchanges that celebrate epistemological freedom and other ways of knowing. Our practices involve intercultural workshops, rich pictures, world café discussions, participatory videos, archival studies, and active burning experiences to invite other knowledges and diverse worldviews to co-create fire-related research and influence the future production of knowledge on wildfires.
Paper short abstract:
We examine changing perspectives of savanna fires in Belize and Guyana, from British colonialism to post-independence, as revealed in development and research texts. We reflect also on our research practice in the context of decoloniality.
Paper long abstract:
Belize and Guyana are the only nation states in mainland Central and South America to have been British colonies, gaining independence in 1981 and 1966, respectively. Both countries contain tropical savanna ecosystems, in which fire is of socio-ecological importance, and used within local livelihoods, for example in hunting. We use colonial and development texts, and our own research (interviews and ethnography) in contemporary Belize and Guyana, to examine how fire in these savannas has been understood by (largely foreign) scientists, colonial officials, and development actors since the 1920s. There have been greater efforts by the Belizean than the Guyanese state over the past century to limit savanna fires, largely owing to economic interests in pine forestry in the savannas. But, in both countries, fire management has been largely funded through colonial/ international development funding, such that global trends in scientific and development discourse have strongly shaped local fire policy and management, rather than empirical research, especially as concerns the needs of local fire users. Resulting fire policies and development projects have largely focused on fire suppression and control. There is a need for new fire management approaches, grounded in the specific political and ecological contexts of Belize and Guyana. We end our paper by reflecting on our own research in light of the history we have outlined.
Paper short abstract:
Social relationships, as much as ecological relationships, produce the forms of fire that emerge in landscapes. Drawing from ethnographic fieldwork at three prescribed burn sites in California, I examine how communities use fire to negotiate relationships with landscapes, colonialism, and the state.
Paper long abstract:
Social relationships, as much as ecological relationships, produce the forms of fire that emerge in landscapes. Drawing from ethnographic fieldwork at three prescribed burn sites in California, I examine how communities use fire to negotiate relationships with landscapes, colonialism, and the state. Before colonization, Indigenous peoples in California burned approximately ten million acres per year, enough to provide flames to every fire-adapted ecosystem in cycles of twenty years. These fires were integral parts of Indigenous economies and food systems. The suppression of fire, therefore, was central to European colonial efforts in California. Indigenous burning was originally criminalized by the first Spanish governor of Alta California in 1793. Fifty-three years later, when California became part of the United States, the first state legislature substantiated this criminalization as part of Indigenous genocide. Throughout the 20th century, the United States Forest Service formalized and enforced these colonial lines of fire exclusion with the weight of the federal government. Today, the state of California recognizes that ecologically appropriate burns can make forests more resilient to climate change and reduce wildfire hazards. This recognition has resulted in a state goal of treating one million acres of public land per year. Yet, even as public officials invoke Indigenous fire histories to justify state goals, many communities fear that Indigenous fire knowledge is being extracted, appropriated, and commodified to maintain and strengthen colonial structures in California society. This work shows how diverse communities in California use fire to negotiate relationships between themselves, landscapes, colonialism, and the state.
Paper short abstract:
A reflection on my methodology in the context of decolonisation of fire research of my PhD, whether it satisfies aspects of decolonised research or not. And how using mixed methods might be useful in decolonised research practice.
Paper long abstract:
Having completed my PhD thesis entitled Relationships Between Fire and Protected Areas: A Mixed Methods Approach for Mozambique I reflect on my methodology in the context of decolonisation of fire research. I used mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) to examine the effects of some physical and human drivers on the occurrence of burned areas due to wildfires in the context of Mozambique, with particular consideration of protected areas. For the qualitative data collection, Grounded Theory data collection in and around Gorongosa National Park worked well and satisfies aspects of critical reflexivity. Having a cultural insider for and to having lived and worked in Mozambique for many years was extremely helpful in embracing ‘Other(ed)’ ways of knowing. Reciprocity and respect for self-determination was much harder to achieve interviewing community members and possibly due to barriers as well as my association with the park administration, given limited time and resource constraints. As well as a deteriorating political situation and Covid-19 making returning unfeasible. Integrated quantitative methods with social science approaches to link research ‘to the ground’ for relevance and context and to be able to translate and make research and results usable, for example, to develop strategies for fire management and policy. I argue that using mixed methods also allows for a better embodying of a transformative praxis. The qualitative component addressing the questions the community wants to explore and values, and the quantitative aspects providing some of the services and capabilities the researcher may offer.