Enhancing Forest Fire Communication: A Case Study of Oregon Government Social Media
Abstract
Forest fires pose an escalating threat, demanding effective communication strategies for communities. While past research underscores the importance of community involvement and transparent communication, the dominance of social media in today's media landscape calls for a reassessment. This study investigates the utilization of social media, specifically Facebook, by the Oregon government during the 2022 fire season in Cedar Creek and Double Creek regions. Through Facepager, 4576 posts and comments were collected and then analyzed using the multi-coder approach and Vader Algorithm focusing on post frequency, thematic content, and user sentiments. The result reveals that positive sentiment polarity scores were observed with 0.61 and 0.71 for Cedar Creek and Double Creek respectively, however, the thematic and post-frequency analysis suggests a need for government agencies to diversify content, emphasizing scientific aspects and addressing community concerns. The findings offer valuable insights for enhancing risk communication strategies, promoting informed public engagement, and guiding effective government communication in wildfire scenarios.
References
Avilés Irahola, D., Mora-Motta, A., Barbosa Pereira, A., Bharati, L., Biber-Freudenberger, L., Petersheim, C., Quispe-Zuniga, M. R., Schmitt, C. B., & Youkhana, E. (2022). Integrating scientific and local knowledge to address environmental conflicts: The role of academia. Human Ecology, 50(5), 911–923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-022-00344-2
Beggs, J. C. (2018). Applications: Disaster communication and community engagement. In J. A. Horney (Ed.), Disaster epidemiology (pp. 163–169). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809318-4.00022-8
Brynielsson, J., Granåsen, M., Lindquist, S., Narganes Quijano, M., Nilsson, S., & Trnka, J. (2018). Informing crisis alerts using social media: Best practices and proof of concept. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12195
Chang, P. F., Choi, Y. H., Bazarova, N. N., & Löckenhoff, C. E. (2015). Age differences in online social networking: Extending socioemotional selectivity theory to social network sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(2), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1029126
Cheng, Y. (2018). How social media is changing crisis communication strategies: Evidence from the updated literature. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12130
Cooper, R., & Duncan, R. (2023). Special report: Wildland firefightershidden heroes of the mental health effects of climate change. Psychiatric News, 58(5), appi.pn.2023.05.5.38. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.pn.2023.05.5.38
Coughlan, M. R., Huber-Stearns, H., Clark, B., & Deak, A. (2022). Oregon wildfire smoke communications and impacts: An evaluation of the 2020 wildfire season [Working Paper]. Ecosystem Workforce Program, Institute for a Sustainable Environment, University of Oregon. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/27179
Data USA. (2021). Lane County. https://datausa.io/profile/geo/lane-county-or
Data USA. (2021). Wallowa County. https://datausa.io/profile/geo/wallowa-county-or
Eriksson, M. (2018). Lessons for crisis communication on social media: A systematic review of what research tells the practice. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(5), 526–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1510405
Faas, A. J., Velez, A. K., FitzGerald, C., Nowell, B. L., & Steelman, T. A. (2017). Patterns of preference and practice: Bridging actors in wildfire response networks in the American Northwest. Disasters, 41(3), 527–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12211
Glik, D. C. (2007). Risk communication for public health emergencies. Annual Review of Public Health, 28(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144123
Guo, J., Liu, N., Wu, Y., & Zhang, C. (2021). Why do citizens participate on government social media accounts during crises? A civic voluntarism perspective. Information & Management, 58(1), 103286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2020.103286
Hagler, G. S. W., Henderson, S. B., McCaffrey, S., Johnston, F. H., Stone, S., Rappold, A., & Cascio, W. E. (2021). Editorial: Understanding and communicating wildland fire smoke risk. Frontiers in Public Health, 9, 721823. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.721823
Heath, R. L., Pearce, W. B., Shotter, J., Taylor, J. R., Kersten, A., Zorn, T., Roper, J., Motion, J., & Deetz, S. (2006). The processes of dialogue: Participation and legitimation. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(3), 341–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318905282208
Higuera, P. E., Cook, M. C., Balch, J. K., Stavros, E. N., Mahood, A. L., & St. Denis, L. A. (2023). Shifting social-ecological fire regimes explain increasing structure loss from Western wildfires. PNAS Nexus, 2(3), pgad005. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad005
Houston, J. B., Hawthorne, J., Perreault, M. F., Park, E. H., Goldstein Hode, M., Halliwell, M. R., Turner McGowen, S. E., Davis, R., Vaid, S., McElderry, J. A., & Griffith, S. A. (2015). Social media and disasters: A functional framework for social media use in disaster planning, response, and research. Disasters, 39(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12092
Hutto, C., & Gilbert, E. (2014). VADER: A parsimonious rule-based model for sentiment analysis of social media text. AAI Publications, Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
Jünger, J., & Keyling, T. (2019). Facepager. An application for automated data retrieval on the web. GitHub.
Johnston, K. A., Taylor, M., & Ryan, B. (2020). Emergency management communication: The paradox of the positive in public communication for preparedness. Public Relations Review, 46(2), 101903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.101903
Luna, S., & Pennock, M. J. (2018). Social media applications and emergency management: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 28, 565–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.01.006
Lovari, A., & Bowen, S. A. (2020). Social media in disaster communication: A case study of strategies, barriers, and ethical implications. Journal of Public Affairs, 20(1), e1967. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1967
Mahajan, S., Hausladen, C. I., Argota Sánchez-Vaquerizo, J., Korecki, M., & Helbing, D. (2022). Participatory resilience: Surviving, recovering and improving together. Sustainable Cities and Society, 83, 103942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103942
McEvoy, A., Nielsen-Pincus, M., Holz, A., Catalano, A. J., & Gleason, K. E. (2020). Projected impact of mid-21st century climate change on wildfire hazard in a major urban watershed outside Portland, Oregon USA. Fire, 3(4), 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire3040070
Morehouse, B. J., & Sonnett, J. (2010). Narratives of wildfire: Coverage in four U. S. Newspapers, 19992003. Organization & Environment, 23(4), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026610385901
Muhammed T, S., & Mathew, S. K. (2022). The disaster of misinformation: A review of research in social media. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics, 13(4), 271–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41060-022-00311-6
[NWCC] Northwest Interagency Coordination Center. (2022). Northwest interagency coordination center. Retrieved from https://gacc.nifc.gov/nwcc/admin/publications
[ODF] Oregon Department of Forestry. (2016). Reports: State of Oregon. Retrieved from https://www.oregon.gov/odf/pages/reports.aspx
[ODF] Oregon Department of Forestry. (2020). Reports: State of Oregon. Retrieved from https://www.oregon.gov/odf/pages/reports.aspx
Palttala, P., Boano, C., Lund, R., & Vos, M. (2012). Communication gaps in disaster management: Perceptions by experts from governmental and non‐governmental organizations. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 20(1), 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2011.00656.x
Palen, L., & Liu, S. B. (2007). Citizen communications in crisis: Anticipating a future of ICT-supported public participation. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 727–736. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240736
Pan, S., Pan, G., Leidner, D., & Baylor University. (2012). Crisis response information networks. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(1), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00283
Paveglio, T., Carroll, M. S., Absher, J. D., & Norton, T. (2009). Just blowing smoke? Residents’ social construction of communication about wildfire. Environmental Communication, 3(1), 76–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524030802704971
Paveglio, T., Prato, T., Dalenberg, D., & Venn, T. (2014). Understanding evacuation preferences and wildfire mitigations among Northwest Montana residents. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 23(3), 435. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF13057
Plutchik, R. (2014). Emotions: A general psychevolutionary theory. In K. R. Scherer, & P. Ekman (Eds.), Approaches to emotion. London: Psychology Press.
Reed, A. E., Chan, L., & Mikels, J. A. (2014). Meta-analysis of the age-related positivity effect: Age differences in preferences for positive over negative information. Psychology and Aging, 29(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035194
Reynolds, B., & W. Seeger, M. (2005). Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model. Journal of Health Communication, 10(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730590904571
Riehl, C. (2021). Spread like wildfire: Assessing the utility of local Facebook groups to inspire citizen communication during a disaster [thesis]. Portland State University. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.7592
Ryan, B., Johnston, K. A., Taylor, M., & McAndrew, R. (2020). Community engagement for disaster preparedness: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 49, 101655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101655
Scolobig, A., Prior, T., Schröter, D., Jörin, J., & Patt, A. (2015). Towards people-centred approaches for effective disaster risk management: Balancing rhetoric with reality. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 12, 202–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.01.006
Sharifian, N., Kraal, A. Z., Zaheed, A. B., Sol, K., Morris, E. P., & Zahodne, L. B. (2021). Measurement invariance of social media use in younger and older adults and links to socioemotional health. Innovation in Aging, 5(2), igab009. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igab009
Shittu, E., Parker, G., & Mock, N. (2018). Improving communication resilience for effective disaster relief operations. Environment Systems and Decisions, 38(3), 379–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9694-5
Sigerson, L., & Cheng, C. (2018). Scales for measuring user engagement with social network sites: A systematic review of psychometric properties. Computers in Human Behavior, 83, 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.01.023
Simon, T., Goldberg, A., & Adini, B. (2015). Socializing in emergenciesA review of the use of social media in emergency situations. International Journal of Information Management, 35(5), 609–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.07.001
Sutton, J., Gibson, C. B., Phillips, N. E., Spiro, E. S., League, C., Johnson, B., Fitzhugh, S. M., & Butts, C. T. (2015). A cross-hazard analysis of terse message retransmission on Twitter. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(48), 14793–14798. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1508916112
Taylor, J., Gillette, S. C., Hodgson, R. W., & Downing, J. L. (2007). Communicating with wildland interface communities during wildfire (Open-File Report 2005-1061). U.S. Geological Survey. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1061/report.pdf
University of Maine. (2021). Undiscovered Maine. Retrieved from https://umaine.edu/undiscoveredmaine/small-business/resources/marketing-for-small-business/social-media-tools/social-media-statistics-details/
USDA Forest Service. (2013). Quality of information. Retrieved from https://www.fs.usda.gov/about-agency/quality-of-information
US Incident Information System. (2022). Cedar Creek Fire Incident Overview. http://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident-information/orwif-cedar-creek-fire
US Incident Information System. (2022). Double Creek Fire Incident Overview. https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident-information/orwwf-double-creek-fire
Vargo, J., Lappe, B., Mirabelli, M. C., & Conlon, K. C. (2023). Social vulnerability in US communities affected by wildfire smoke, 2011 to 2021. American Journal of Public Health, 113(7), 759–767. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307286
Veil, S. R., Anthony, K. E., Sellnow, T. L., Staricek, N., Young, L. E., & Cupp, P. (2020). Revisiting the best practices in risk and crisis communication: A multi‐case analysis. In H. D. O’Hair & M. J. O’Hair (Eds.), The handbook of applied communication research (pp. 377–396). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119399926.ch23
Velez, A.-L. K., Diaz, J. M., & Wall, T. U. (2017). Public information seeking, place-based risk messaging and wildfire preparedness in southern California. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 26(6), 469477. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF16219
Vigliano Relva, J., & Jung, J. (2021). Through the eyes of another: Using a narrative lens to navigate complex social-ecological systems and to embrace multiple ways of knowing. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8, 678796. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.678796
Wang, Y., Hao, H., & Kang, S. (2023). Disaster risk communication and digital vulnerability among subsidized housing residents. Natural Hazards Center Mitigation Matters Research Report Series, 12. Boulder, CO: Natural Hazards Center, University of Colorado Boulder.
Wei, J., Bu, B., Guo, X., & Gollagher, M. (2014). The process of crisis information dissemination: Impacts of the strength of ties in social networks. Kybernetes, 43(2), 178–191. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-03-2013-0043
Yovi, E. Y., Nastiti, A., & Kuncahyo, B. (2023). Heat-related knowledge, risk perception, and precautionary behavior among Indonesian forestry workers and farmers: Implications for occupational health promotion in the face of climate change impacts. Forests, 14(7), 1455. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071455
Authors
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika is an open access journal which means that all contents is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.