Do avalanche airbags lead to riskier choices among backcountry and out-of-bounds skiers?

While the effectiveness of airbags for reducing mortality in avalanche involvements has been examined in various studies, the question of whether the added safety benefit might lead to increased risk-taking – a phenomenon referred to as risk compensation or risk homeostasis – has only been tackled by a few researchers. Building on the existing research on airbags, risk compensation, and stated terrain preferences in winter backcountry recreation, we conducted an extensive online survey including a discrete choice experiment to approach the topic of avalanche airbags and risk compensation from multiple perspectives. Our study sample consists of 163 airbag owners and 243 non-owners mainly from Switzerland, Germany, and Austria. The analyses of the survey responses provide both indirect and direct evidence that risk compensation in response to avalanche airbags is likely within at least certain segments of the recreational backcountry and out-of-bounds skiing population. Initial indirect evidence on risk compensation is provided by examining participants’ responses to airbag attitude and use questions using the framework of Hedlund (2000). The stated terrain preferences in our discrete choice experiment with and without airbags indicate that non-owners of airbags might make more aggressive terrain choices when they are given an airbag, whereas the preference patterns of owners did not change when the airbag was taken away from them. Finally, our analysis of avalanche involvement rates with and without airbags offers the most direct evidence that more thrill-seeking backcountry users are taking higher risks when equipped with airbags. The paper concludes with a discussion that highlights that the potential for risk compensation is not a strong argument against the use of avalanche airbags

Do avalanche airbags lead to riskier choices in the backcountry?

While the effectiveness of airbags for reducing mortality in avalanche involvements has been examined in various studies, the nagging question of whether the added safety benefit might actually lead to increased risk-taking – a phenomenon referred to as risk compensation or risk homeostasis – has only been tackled by a few. Building on the existing research on airbags, risk compensation and stated terrain preferences in winter backcountry recreation, we developed an extensive online survey to approach the topic of avalanche airbags and risk compensation from multiple directions. In the spring of 2017, 155 airbag owners and 237 non-owners mainly from Switzerland, Germany and Austria participated in our study. While our analysis of the survey responses indicates that risk compensation behavior in response to airbags is likely among recreational backcountry travelers, the discrete choice experiment included in our survey failed to provide conclusive empirical evidence. To allow backcountry users to make informed choices about airbag use, we recommend the topic of risk compensation to be included in avalanche safety courses and airbag user manuals

Does perceived crowding cause winter backcountry recreationists to displace?

Winter backcountry sports such as skiing and snowshoeing have experienced a tremendous increase in popularity in recent decades in the European Alps. Recreationists commonly encounter other recreationists on their route. Because enjoying solitude and being close to nature are important motivations for pursing winter backcountry activities, crowding on back country routes is highly likely to diminish recreational experiences, with potential consequences for nature and recreationists. This study explored perceptions of and responses to crowding among Swiss backcountry skiers and snowshoers, using an online survey that asked about their motivations for pursing their activity and gauged their perception of crowding using the ‘‘people at one time’’ approach. Each of the 830 participants rated 4 scenarios on a 9-point Likert scale ranging from ‘‘far too few people’’ to ‘‘far too many people’’ and answered follow-up questions about potential displacement choices in response to perceived crowding. Participants rarely perceived backcountry routes as having too few people but often perceived them as crowded. We found only minor differences in perceptions of crowding among participants pursuing different activities or those with different motivations. The most common reaction to perceived crowding was to avoid the route in the future, and the next most common was to adjust a route to avoid the crowd on the day in question. This indicates that crowding is likely to lead to short- and long-term spatial displacement of winter backcountry sport activities. This is likely to have a negative impact on wildlife—as well as on backcountry recreationists’ safety, because they might inadvertently enter avalanche-prone areas

How much recreational exposure to avalanche terrain is there?

Winter backcountry mountain sport operators, outdoor mountain recreation industry experts, and researchers in Europe and North America commonly report that participation in winter backcountry recreation in mountainous terrain has increased tremendously in recent decades. While increasing numbers of backcountry skiers, mountain snowmobile riders, snowshoers, ice climbers, and mountaineers venture into the backcountry, these activities are not without risks. The primary hazard faced by winter backcountry recreationists is snow avalanches. Every winter over the last decade, between 125 and 150 backcountry recreationists have died in avalanches in the mountainous regions of central Europe, Scandinavia, and North America. To be most effective, avalanche-warning services must be based on an in-depth understanding of the size and the characteristics of the winter backcountry recreation community. Meaningful estimates of the size of the community are important for estimating overall and activity-specific accident and fatality rates. An evidence-based understanding of temporal trends of these rates is critical for assessing the effectiveness of existing avalanche awareness initiatives and identifying particularly-at-risk backcountry user segments for new campaigns. Furthermore, an in-depth understanding of recreationists’ needs, strengths, and weaknesses in information seeking, decision-making, and risk management is essential for the development of avalanche warning products and services that resonate with recreationists and allow them to make meaningful decisions about backcountry travel. While there has been considerable growth in human dimensions research in the avalanche safety community, not all the needs listed above have been addressed adequately. Hence, a coordinated effort is required to develop a comprehensive understanding of the winter backcountry user community. However, there is currently no country implementing a comprehensive system to effectively monitor and characterize winter backcountry users as a whole. Fortunately, there are several research fields that have well-established methods for estimating participation rates and population sizes. These research fields include the management of protected areas and wildlife protection, public health research measuring participation rates in sports and recreation activities, and tourism- and recreation-related economic impact studies. Many of the monitoring methods developed in these fields have the potential to be applicable to winter backcountry recreation contexts and provide useful insights for avalanche-warning services

Lawinenairbags & Risikoverhalten

Lawinenairbags verringern bei Lawinenabgängen die Gefahr von Totalverschüttungen von involvierten Trägerinnen und Trägern. Es ist deshalb nicht erstaunlich, dass immer mehr Tourenskifahrer oder Freeriderinnen Lawinenairbags mit sich führen. Aber könnten Lawinenairbags die Nutzenden nicht auch zu risikoreicherem Verhalten verleiten

Exploring the Relationship between Avalanche Hazard and Run List Terrain Choices at a Helicopter Skiing Operation

While guides in mechanized skiing operations use a well-established terrain selection process to limit their exposure to avalanche hazard and keep the residual risk at an acceptable level, the relationship between the open/closed status of runs and environmental factors is complex and has so far only received limited attention from research. Using a large dataset of over 25 000 operational run list codes from a mechanized skiing operation, we applied a general linear mixed-effect model to explore the relationship between skiing terrain that is deemed appropriate for guiding (i.e., status open) and avalanche hazard conditions. Our results show that the magnitude of the effect of avalanche hazard on run list codes depends on the type of terrain that is being assessed by the guiding team. Ski runs in severe alpine terrain with steep lines through large avalanche slopes are much more susceptible to increases in avalanche hazard than less severe terrain. However, our results also highlight the strong effects of recent skiing on the run coding and thus the importance of prior first-hand experience. Expressing these relationships numerically provides an important step towards the development of meaningful decision aids, which can assist commercial operations to manage their avalanche risk more effectively and efficiently