Co-managing wildfire suppression in southwestern Utah

2 pagesIn a given area, there are commonly multiple agencies that manage wildfire suppression on different jurisdictions. These agencies can face divergent or even competing missions and mandates, yet must also address the cross-boundary nature of managing wildfire risk. Therefore, how can they more effectively co-manage fire suppression? Co-management in this context refers to communication, coordination, and collaboration between entities for meaningful collective action that shares the resources, costs, and burdens of managing fire risk. We examine factors that facilitated and limited co-management in a case study in southwestern Utah.FUNDER: Joint Fire Science Program

Attitudes, norms and controls influencing lifestyle risk factor management in general practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>With increasing rates of chronic disease associated with lifestyle behavioural risk factors, there is urgent need for intervention strategies in primary health care. Currently there is a gap in the knowledge of factors that influence the delivery of preventive strategies by General Practitioners (GPs) around interventions for smoking, nutrition, alcohol consumption and physical activity (SNAP). This qualitative study explores the delivery of lifestyle behavioural risk factor screening and management by GPs within a 45–49 year old health check consultation. The aims of this research are to identify the influences affecting GPs' choosing to screen and choosing to manage SNAP lifestyle risk factors, as well as identify influences on screening and management when multiple SNAP factors exist.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 29 audio-taped interviews were conducted with 15 GPs and one practice nurse over two stages. Transcripts from the interviews were thematically analysed, and a model of influencing factors on preventive care behaviour was developed using the Theory of Planned Behaviour as a structural framework.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>GPs felt that assessing smoking status was straightforward, however some found assessing alcohol intake only possible during a formal health check. Diet and physical activity were often inferred from appearance, only being assessed if the patient was overweight. The frequency and thoroughness of assessment were influenced by the GPs' personal interests and perceived congruence with their role, the level of risk to the patient, the capacity of the practice and availability of time. All GPs considered advising and educating patients part of their professional responsibility. However their attempts to motivate patients were influenced by perceptions of their own effectiveness, with smoking causing the most frustration. Active follow-up and referral of patients appeared to depend on the GPs' orientation to preventive care, the patient's motivation, and cost and accessibility of services to patients.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>General practitioner attitudes, normative influences from both patients and the profession, and perceived external control factors (time, cost, availability and practice capacity) all influence management of behavioural risk factors. Provider education, community awareness raising, support and capacity building may improve the uptake of lifestyle modification interventions.</p

Attitudes to colorectal cancer screening among ethnic minority groups in the UK

Background: Colorectal screening by Flexible Sigmoidoscopy (FS) is under evaluation in the UK. Evidence from existing cancer screening programmes indicates lower participation among minority ethnic groups than the white-British population. To ensure equality of access, it is important to understand attitudes towards screening in all ethnic groups so that barriers to screening acceptance can be addressed.Methods: Open- and closed-ended questions on knowledge about colorectal cancer and attitudes to FS screening were added to Ethnibus (TM) - a monthly, nationwide survey of the main ethnic minority communities living in the UK (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Caribbean, African, and Chinese). Interviews (n = 875) were conducted, face-to-face, by multilingual field-workers, including 125 interviews with white-British adults.Results: All respondents showed a notable lack of knowledge about causes of colorectal cancer, which was more pronounced in ethnic minority than white-British adults. Interest in FS screening was uniformly high (> 60%), with more than 90% of those interested saying it would provide 'peace of mind'. The most frequently cited barrier to screening 'in your community' was embarrassment, particularly among ethnic minority groups.Conclusion: Educational materials should recognise that non-white groups may be less knowledgeable about colorectal cancer. The findings of the current study suggest that embarrassment may be a greater deterrent to participation to FS screening among ethnic minority groups, but this result requires exploration in further research

Tackling health inequalities. An All-Ireland approach to social determinants.

The report by the Institute of Public Health in Ireland and Combat Poverty Agency has highlighted the extent to which health outcomes are influenced by social factors, such as poor housing, nutrition and education

Afterword: The Best of Times, the Worst of Times: Some Personal Reflections on Researching the Literature of the 1930s

Description to be added.Cannot be left empt

Code Descriptions for “Managed wildfire: A strategy limited by terminology, risk perception, and ownership boundaries.”

Files include README and Codebook in two formats.Federal land managers in the United States are permitted to manage wildfires with strategies other than full suppression under appropriate conditions to achieve natural resource objectives. However, policy and scientific support for “managed wildfire” appear insufficient to support its broad use. We conducted case studies in northern New Mexico and southwestern Utah to examine how managers and stakeholders navigated shifting barriers and opportunities to use managed wildfire from 2018-2021. Use of managed wildfire was fostered through an active network of civil society partnerships in one case, and strong interagency cooperation and existing policies and plans in the other. In both, the COVID-19 pandemic, drought, and agency direction curtailed recent use. Local context shapes wildfire response strategies, yet centralized decision making and policy also can enable or constrain them. Future research could refine understanding of social factors in incident decision making, and evaluation of risks and tradeoffs in wildfire response.This project was funded by the Joint Fire Science Program (Project # 17-1-06-6) in 2017 with the objective exploring how entities involved in wildfire mitigation and suppression can better coordinate actions before, during, and after wildfires. A total of 40 government agency and civil society actors engaged in wildfire mitigation and response in two different case studies: northern New Mexico (Santa Fe and Carson National Forests) and southwestern Utah (Dixie National Forest) were interviewed between fall 2018 and spring 2019. Repeat interviews of 12 selected interviewees in each case study occurred during spring-summer 2021. These data consist of themes used to code these interviews, such as factors shaping wildfire response strategies, examples of using managed fire, and pandemic impacts