Wildfires vs. sustainable forest partitioning

G.-F. Sargentis, R. Ioannidis, I. Bairaktaris, E. Frangedaki, P. Dimitriadis, T. Iliopoulou, D. Koutsoyiannis, and N. D. Lagaros, Wildfires vs. sustainable forest partitioning, Conservation, 2 (1), 195–218, doi:10.3390/conservation2010013, 2022.



There is a widespread perception that every year wildfires are intensifying on a global scale, something that is often used as an indicator of the adverse impacts of global warming. However, from the analysis of wildfires that have occurred in the US, Canada, and Mediterranean countries, a trend that justifies this perception could not be identified. Arguably, instead of blaming climate change, research on the mitigation of wildfires should be re-directed to forest management policy and practices. Forests are admirable and complex natural ecosystems, and fires, albeit devastating, can be attributed to both human activity and to natural processes that contribute to their rebirth, with the latter constituting an intrinsic and perpetual process of the forest ecosystem. Other than their important ecological value, forests are, in the 21st century, also a capital resource, for many people’s livelihoods depend on them. In this study, we proposed a method for taking mitigation measures against wildfires based on the partitioning of forests, considering both the protection of the ecosystem and the inhabitants and aiming to utilize their co-dependent nature for the general protection and preservation of forests. As a case study, we analyzed the current devastating fire in Euboea (occurred in August 2021), initially in terms of the spatio-temporal progression of the actual wildfire that lasted several days and then by examining how an implementation of the proposed method in the study area could contribute to both the recovery of the ecosystem and the enhancement of the quality of life of the inhabitants as well as their long-term protection.

PDF Full text (13186 KB)

Our works referenced by this work:

1. D. Koutsoyiannis, Broken line smoothing: A simple method for interpolating and smoothing data series, Environmental Modelling and Software, 15 (2), 139–149, 2000.
2. D. Koutsoyiannis, Scale of water resources development and sustainability: Small is beautiful, large is great, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 56 (4), 553–575, doi:10.1080/02626667.2011.579076, 2011.
3. N. Malamos, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Broken line smoothing for data series interpolation by incorporating an explanatory variable with denser observations: Application to soil-water and rainfall data, Hydrological Sciences Journal, doi:10.1080/02626667.2014.899703, 2015.
4. G.-F. Sargentis, R. Ioannidis, G. Karakatsanis, S. Sigourou, N. D. Lagaros, and D. Koutsoyiannis, The development of the Athens water supply system and inferences for optimizing the scale of water infrastructures, Sustainability, 11 (9), 2657, doi:10.3390/su11092657, 2019.
5. G.-F. Sargentis, P. Dimitriadis, R. Ioannidis, T. Iliopoulou, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Stochastic evaluation of landscapes transformed by renewable energy installations and civil works, Energies, 12 (4), 2817, doi:10.3390/en12142817, 2019.
6. R. Ioannidis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact, Applied Energy, 276, 115367, doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115367, 2020.
7. G.-F. Sargentis, T. Iliopoulou, S. Sigourou, P. Dimitriadis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Evolution of clustering quantified by a stochastic method — Case studies on natural and human social structures, Sustainability, 12 (19), 7972, doi:10.3390/su12197972, 2020.
8. I. Bairaktaris, The issue of scale in hydroelectic energy: Many small works or a large one?, Diploma thesis, 124 pages, Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering – National Technical University of Athens, November 2020.
9. N. Mamassis, A. Efstratiadis, P. Dimitriadis, T. Iliopoulou, R. Ioannidis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Water and Energy, Handbook of Water Resources Management: Discourses, Concepts and Examples, edited by J.J. Bogardi, T. Tingsanchali, K.D.W. Nandalal, J. Gupta, L. Salamé, R.R.P. van Nooijen, A.G. Kolechkina, N. Kumar, and A. Bhaduri, Chapter 20, 617–655, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-60147-8_20, Springer Nature, Switzerland, 2021.
10. G.-F. Sargentis, P. Siamparina, G.-K. Sakki, A. Efstratiadis, M. Chiotinis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Agricultural land or photovoltaic parks? The water–energy–food nexus and land development perspectives in the Thessaly plain, Greece, Sustainability, 13 (16), 8935, doi:10.3390/su13168935, 2021.
11. P. Dimitriadis, T. Iliopoulou, G.-F. Sargentis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Spatial Hurst–Kolmogorov Clustering, Encyclopedia, 1 (4), 1010–1025, doi:10.3390/encyclopedia1040077, 2021.
12. R. Ioannidis, G.-F. Sargentis, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Landscape design in infrastructure projects - is it an extravagance? A cost-benefit investigation of practices in dams, Landscape Research, doi:10.1080/01426397.2022.2039109, 2022.

Our works that reference this work:

1. G.-F. Sargentis, N. D. Lagaros, G.L. Cascella, and D. Koutsoyiannis, Threats in Water–Energy–Food–Land Nexus by the 2022 Military and Economic Conflict, Land, doi:10.3390/land11091569, 2022.
2. G.-F. Sargentis, N. Mamassis, O. Kitsou, and D. Koutsoyiannis, The role of technology in the water–energy–food nexus. A case study: Kerinthos, North Euboea, Greece, Frontiers in Water, 6, 1343344, doi:10.3389/frwa.2024.1343344, 2024.