Following the loss of homes to wildfire, when risk has been made apparent, homeowners must decide whether to rebuild, and choose materials and vegetation, while local governments guide recovery and rebuilding. As wildfires are smaller and more localised than other disasters, it is unclear if recovery after wildfire results in policy change and adaptation, decreasing assets at risk, or if recovery encourages reinvestment in hazard-prone areas. We studied three wildfires on the Colorado Front Range from 2010 to 2012 that each destroyed over 150 homes, describing policy response and characterising the built environment after wildfire. In each location, we found some adaptation, through better-mitigated homes and stronger building and vegetation mitigation standards, but also extensive reinvestment in hazard-prone environments, with governmental support. Despite suggestions that disaster can lead to substantial policy change and elevate the role of land-use planning, we saw only modest reforms: local governments did not revise land-use regulations; a statewide task force considered but did not require standards for building and vegetation mitigation; and only one jurisdiction strengthened its building and vegetation mitigation standards. Experiences in Colorado suggest that time after wildfire either does not provide extensive opportunities for adaptation in the built environment, or that these opportunities are easily missed.
Land Use Regulations, Migration and Rising House Price Dispersion in the U.S.