Psychosocial Responses to Fire

Exposure to forest fires impacts psychosocial wellbeing (Evans and Kantrowitz 2002). Adverse psychosocial consequences of forest fires range from temporary frustration, to the temporary or permanent reduction of health related quality of life (HRQL), to post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Beneficial consequences of forest fires include positive transformations in interpersonal relations, financial profit, and community cooperation.

Air pollution is a source of psychological distress. Ozone is associated with negative emotions and aggressive behaviors (Evans and Kantrowitz 2002). Air pollution and bad-smelling air are associated with increases in depression, anxiety, and with increases in hospital admissions for psychiatric problems (American Thoracic Society 2000). Studies show that the bad odors that often accompany air pollution episodes cause evaluative and cognitive deficiencies as well as behavioral disorders (Rotton 1983). Sensory stress from bad odors impair cognitive and intellectual functioning by interfering with an individual’s ability to complete complex proof reading tasks, but does not decrease abilities to complete simple arithmetic tasks (Rotton 1983). One of the ways that sensory stress effects behavior is that when a person has little control, he/she becomes frustrated more easily (Rotton 1983).

Property loss, such as the destruction of a home or workplace or damage to personal goods, can be a source of grief. Feelings of helplessness may arise among people whose lives and property are threatened by wildland fires (Machlis 2002). In some cases fire may cause the disruption of communities, which is also a source of grief (Oliver-Smith 1996).

Forest fires potentially induce other profound forms of stress and serious psychological illnesses, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Jones and others 2002; Patz, Engelberg, and Last 2000). PTSD can occur among people who live in areas that have been affected by fires. Following a fire in 1985, members of the Baldwin Hills (Los Angeles) community exhibited an array of post-traumatic stress symptoms including trouble sleeping, nightmares, jumpiness, disturbing memories, and depression (Maida 1989). Destruction of ‘place’ is a trauma that evokes PTSD symptoms (Oliver-Smith 1996). PTSD symptoms emerge following dislocation from home including frustration, fatigue, stress, and panic (Machlis 2002). Similarly, the evacuations that sometimes occur when forest fires threaten homes and businesses or when biomass smoke reaches unhealthy levels (Mutch 2002; Therriault 2001; Wade 1998) create psychological distress. Although it has not been demonstrated in scientific studies, we might hypothesize that some portion of the thousands of people who were evacuated from their homes in Florida in 1998 experienced some degree of psychological distress. Other fire-related events that evoke PTSD symptoms in adults are threats to life, physical injury, and the injury or death of a loved one (Jones and others 2002).

Perceptions of forest fires may change following a fire. Direct experience with a forest fire causes people to perceive a higher risk of future fires or to become more fearful of fire (Machlis 2002). In some cases, prescribed fires may be less acceptable to people who previously had direct experience with fires (Machlis 2002). In other cases, prescribed fires may positively affect aesthetic values leading to greater satisfaction with one’s living environment by reducing the potential for severe wildland fires to cause more dramatic disruptions of the landscape. Beyond perceptions, forest fires may affect the ‘real’ future vulnerability and resiliency of a community (Machlis 2002) due to changes in ecosystem traits, material infrastructure, cultural characteristics, and social relations.

Communities and the Psychology of Fire

Fires have been referred to as “engines of change” (Force, Machlis, and Zhang 2000) in communities. In fact, in human history some disasters have spawned social transformations monumental enough to be labeled “cultural evolution” (Oliver-Smith 1996: 312). Communication patterns among community members may change during and after a forest fire (Machlis 2002). Social relationships may change as a result of forest fires. Relationships may change between individual citizens, subgroups within a population, and between citizens and organizations (e.g., land and fire management teams). There may also be changes in relations between individuals, communities, and cultural or ethnic groups (Gordon and others 1995).

Fires, like other disasters, can instigate changes in cultural values. For instance, values regarding marriage may shift from a long-term commitment to an immediate means for gaining security (Oliver-Smith 1996). Significant religious changes follow major disasters. Transformations in symbols and rituals occur as a consequence of natural disasters (Oliver-Smith 1996). People may mourn for symbols of self and community that are damaged or destroyed by forest fires (Oliver-Smith 1996).

Fires, as natural disasters, affect self-identity and the lived experiences of individuals (Oliver-Smith 1996). Fires can alter community-identity. Fires affect future perceptions and decisions related to self and community; for example, perceptions of forest fire risks and decisions about landscape management.

Researchers have found that disasters change political dynamics in communities (Oliver-Smith 1996). We might extrapolate from those studies to suggest that catastrophic wildland fires – as a type of disaster – create conditions that encourage the reorganization of power relations, the formation of new alliances and agendas, and the emergence of activism (Oliver-Smith 1996). The politics of representation are a critical factor for communities experiencing forest fires. The power to portray forest fires and communities who experience fires influences perceptions held by insiders and outsiders of the community.

Oliver-Smith (1996: 302) describes disasters as “challenges to the structure and organization of a society.” Forest fires may change community infrastructure (Machlis 2002). Interruptions in social services and damage to infrastructure cause individual and group stress (Oliver-Smith 1996). There may be significant changes in social structure as a result of a fire. Individuals who experience a rise in social status may benefit from forest fires; for instance, community members who successfully control part of a wildland fire or firefighters who keep a fire from damaging local structures. Other members of the community may not benefit from social changes. In some communities fires, like natural hazards in general, confer a negative image upon, or stigmatize, a particular place, person, or subgroup of the population (Machlis 2002).