|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|6461377||1361837||2017||4 صفحه PDF||ندارد||دانلود کنید|
â¢MourÃ£o and Marinho (2016) have used inconsistent fire data.â¢Fire damage is independent from number and mean size of fire events.â¢Fire legislation relevance is not measured by quantity.â¢Fire legislation ensues fire crises.
Portugal struggles with an abnormally high forest fire incidence in the context of southern Europe. In an earlier issue of the journal, MourÃ£o and Martinho applied time-series analysis to official forest fire data (1980â2013) and legislation in Portugal and concluded that fire-related legislation is issued as a reaction to fire occurrence. In this viewpoint paper we show that MourÃ£o and Martinho analysis is compromised because of poorly chosen fire variables that are inconsistent across time and do not depict fire damage. Identification of the pertinent legislation was subjective and incomplete, therefore biasing the results, and its relevance was equated to the volume of laws and regulations produced. Moreover, added production of legislation in the aftermath of catastrophic fires reflects a variety of responses, from ordinary adjustments to paradigm changes, including proactive elements therein. We ultimately argue that surges in fire legislation activity should not be simply interpreted or categorized as âreactiveâ or âproactiveâ.
Journal: Land Use Policy - Volume 60, January 2017, Pages 12-15