A new study in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management indicates that prescribed burns could play a key role in mitigating risks of wildfire like those still active in Los Angeles, California. This photo of the Palisades Fire was taken from the Playa Vista neighborhood in western Los Angeles Jan. 7. (Photo via Wikimedia Commons)
Originally published here by the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. Written by Maria M. Lameiras.
As shocking images of the fire-blasted hills around Los Angeles demonstrate, wildfires have become an increasing concern in the United States, particularly in regions where suppression strategies have dominated for decades. A new study by University of Georgia researcher Yukiko Hashida examines how prescribed burns could play a key role in mitigating wildfire risks.
“In the past couple of decades, we’ve been suppressing fires, irrespective of whether they’re naturally occurring fires that could be beneficial,” said Hashida, assistant professor in the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, part of the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. “But because homes are right next to wildfire areas, and people like being close to woods, suppression has been the default approach.”
In “Prescribed fires as a climate change adaptation tool,” a paper published in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Hashida examines how planned burns can help prevent the kind of massive out-of-control wildfires that have decimated millions of acres and caused billions in damages in the U.S.
Suppression strategies aren’t enough to prevent wildfires
Demographic changes are also contributing to increased wildfire risks. “People can’t afford houses in some coastal areas, so they’re moving inland, which is more prone to wildfires,” she said. “Rather than just suppressing wildfires, we need a more holistic approach.”
One approach borrows from the traditional practice of prescribed fires that Indigenous communities have used for centuries. However, more than 80% of forests in the Southeast are privately owned, while in the West, most forests are owned by federal agencies. Despite its success in the Southeast, Hashida pointed out that prescribed burn use is not as common in the West because of more complex landowner configurations between public and private entities, differing agendas among federal agencies, and regional legal statutes.
“Prescribed fire has been used extensively in the Southeast for many years,” said Hashida, who has used data collected by Tall Timbers, a nongovernmental organization that collaborates with state agencies to gather and digitize information on prescribed burns. “Our future work involves expanding this approach to Western states where wildfire risks are high.”

Prescribed burns, a proven practice in the Southeast
Prescribed burns are carried out under strict regulations in the Southeast U.S., but legal thresholds for prescribed burns are much more lenient compared to those in the West.
“Certified burners must go through training, create contingency plans, and ensure proper fire barriers and weather monitoring,” Hashida said. “Our burn permit data primarily includes forested areas rather than agricultural land. One of the primary goals is wildfire mitigation, but prescribed burns also serve ecological purposes, like creating habitats for game hunting.”
While care must be taken to prevent fires from spreading out of control or happening too frequently, fire plays a natural role in maintaining the health of forest ecosystems, Hashida explained.
“Longleaf and loblolly pines are fire-resilient species that require regular burning for regeneration,” she said. “For centuries, Indigenous communities have understood the importance of this natural cycle, but modern forest management practices shifted toward suppression. Suppressing fire has caused more fuel to build up in forests, which can make wildfires worse,” she said.
Expanding prescribed fire strategies across U.S. regions
Hashida said her team’s future goals are to expand the study to cover the entire U.S. to formulate different strategies for different geographic regions.
“What works in the Southeast may not work in the West or Midwest,” she said. “Regional differences in climate and fire characteristics will help determine the most effective forest management practices.”
Hashida, who is collaborating on the research with colleagues at Oregon State University and the U.S. Forest Service Southern Research Station, said the findings will directly benefit agencies like the U.S. Forest Service.
“They have been advocating for prescribed burning, but it’s hard to convince people without quantitative evidence. This study provides that evidence,” Hashida said.
As concerns about wildfires grow, Hashida hopes her research will foster increased understanding and adoption of prescribed burning as a viable forest management tool, as well as inform training and outreach efforts to promote better forest management practices.
“It might sound strange to fight fire with fire, but prescribed burns offer significant benefits, from wildfire mitigation to ecological restoration,” she said.