Does the law protect non-human interest from prescribed burning fire management policies?

Keywords: bush/wild fire, prescribed burning, non-human, legal geography, methods
Session Type: Virtual Paper Abstract
Day: Saturday
Session Start / End Time: 2/26/2022 09:40 AM (Eastern Time (US & Canada)) - 2/26/2022 11:00 AM (Eastern Time (US & Canada))
Room: Virtual 2

Abstract

Unprecedented bush-wild fire activity is increasing across the world. A catastrophic bushfire event in the Australian summer of 2019-2020 generated worldwide attention. Bush/wildfire destruction means a concomitant loss of biological diversity. Accordingly, fire management/control practices and strategies are under increased scrutiny. In the Anthropocene there is an urgent need to clearly re-articulate fire containment policy frameworks to minimise both human and non-human losses. In our research we consider the extent to which one fire suppression strategy – prescribed burning – takes account of non-human considerations. Our examination of policy settings provides policymakers with a way to account for non-human interests by using a textual analysis of a vast array of regulations and laws through qualitative data analysis software (NVivo) to assess the extent to which prescribed burning practices account for non-human concerns. We argue that this method proves useful to quantify non-human/law encounters.