Geographical information systems in territory ordering: A review of

GIS applications in the evaluation of fire risk in the urban-rural

interface

Daniela Fraga 1 a
1Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Quinta de Prados, Vila Real, Portugal
2Escola de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinária, Vila Real, Portugal

danielafraga@live.com.pt

Keywords: Forest Fire, Wildfire, Urban Forest, Interface, Spatial Analysis

Abstract: Forest fires are, at the same time, a destructive phenomenon and a phenomenon admired by many who try to
understand it. It is present every year in our forests due to the Mediterranean an climate that is felt and the
human desertification of rural areas, presenting increasingly devastating effects. The urban-rural interface
areas are characterized by the coexistence between human infrastructures and forest spots, which, in turn,
have historical, sentimental, aesthetic and biodiversity value. The interface areas lack an approach where
several players can coexist with different interests, avoiding tensions and conflicts. Through this research, we
found that the work developed by researchers worldwide on this subject is significant, considering the growing
relevance of this environmental problem. It is extremely important to standardize the methodologies used, in
order to facilitate knowledge sharing and promote cooperation and interdisciplinarity.

1 INTRODUCTION in land use and occupation, and with no culture to avoid

Fires in the urban-rural interface are frequent because we
increasingly observe the growth of urbanizations in the
center of the forest space and the forest space developing
on the edges of the houses, as well as risky behaviors.
More and more people are not taking the desired care, thus
creating conditions for this phenomenon to develop,
potentiating panic, social alarm and damage to buildings.
The abandonment of agricultural areas and their invasion
by spontaneous herbaceous and arboreal vegetation with
scattered trees, facilitates the spread of fires even near
buildings. It should be noted that these areas, when
cultivated, functioned as a buffer for the progression of fires
and as a parking area for firefighters, which facilitated
combat.
The changes in land use and occupation that have happened
in recent years have changed the anticipating these changes
danger, and not enough sensitization campaigns by the
official agencies it will not be difficult to foresee the trend
that is expected in the worsening of situations of fires in the
urban-rural interface. People who live in urban and
residential areas outside the forests, hardly realize the
potential for destruction caused by rural fires, unless they
have suffered its effects in an experience of the past.
It is necessary to knowledge the factors that make housing
and other infrastructures vulnerable to fires in the urban-
rural interface and it is also necessary to take self-protection
measures adapted to local specificities. In addition to these
prevention / mitigation measures, a change in strategy in
terms of suppression can be foreseen, knowing that the
means of combat have been trained to deal with rural fires
and not so much with interface fires. However, there are
differences that must be introduced in the training they
receive, in order to understand the behavior of fire in
interface areas.

a https://orcid.org/0000-0000-0000-0000
The physical conditions of a given territory determine in a
decisive way the susceptibility of occurrence in all its
aspects, and its dynamics, allowing the possibility to predict
the phenomena, and to take appropriate measures to protect
them. The susceptibility to the occurrence of a certain
phenomenon, in our case rural fire, is determined by the
combination of permanent factors in this territory.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) appear in this
context as a vital tool in the context of the knowledge,
planning and management processes of urban-rural
interface areas. They also allow the organization of all
available information in order to grant the spatial analysis
of rural spaces, as well as the possible need for
improvements or the identification of spaces with greater
risk.
2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 – Planning review and question
formulation
The present state-of-the-art review on the topic, Geographic
Information Systems in Spatial Planning: a review of GIS
applications in Fire Risk Assessment in the Urban-Rural
Interface, was proposed in the Course, Seminar I, as a
means of assessment for the completion of the master's
degree in Geographic Information Systems in Agronomic
and Forest Sciences.
The search terms used for the state-of-the-art review were:
“Wildland Urban Interface”
“GIS”
“Forest Fire”
2.2 – Selection and review of articles
The importance and interest related to the use of
Geographic Information Systems in the assessment of fire
risk in the rural urban interface, has been growing
significantly. For a better understanding and
comprehensiveness of the studies on its relevance in the
referred context, a brief Systematic Literature Review was
carried out in order to analyze in more detail the State of the
Art. This method is characterized by the use of a rigorous,
replicable, scientific and transparent process (Eichler &
Schwarz, 2019).
The Scopus database was used. This is a multidisciplinary
database, produced by Elsiver since 2004, with coverage
since 1960. It includes citations and links to full text of
articles when available. The database searches,
simultaneously, the content of articles indexed on its own
platform, on the web (through the Elsevier Scirus Search
Engine for pages with scientific content) and also patent
bases on the researched subject.
The search was carried out using the terms mentioned in the
previous point, without considering the word order or
adding quotation marks, as the language or the date were
not taken into account, resulting in 201 documents.
The search was being reduced, as we added search criteria,
as in the first criterion we chose as the time period, the last
5 years, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, making a total of 71
documents, in the second article we chose to choose only
articles and book chapters, totaling 66 documents. Finally,
in the third criterion, we selected the most relevant
keywords, highlighting “Wildfire”, “Wildland Urban
Interface, GIS”, adding up to 40 documents (figure 1).
• “Wildland Urban Interface”
• “GIS”
201 • “Forest Fire”
• 1º Criterion
• Last 5 years
71 • 2016; 2017; 2018; 2019; 2020
• 2º Criterion
• Article/ Book Chapter
66
• 3º Criterion
• Keyword= Wildfire; Wildland Urban Interface; GIS;
40
Figure 1 - Graph of the workflow followed for the systematic review
At the end of this phase, we used the Mendeley software to
do the bibliometric analysis. Bibliometrics is a quantitative
and statistical technique for measuring production indexes
and the dissemination of knowledge, as well as monitoring
the development of several scientific areas and the patterns
of authorship, publication and use of research results. The
evaluation of scientific production, important for the
recognition of researchers from the scientific community, is
done through the application of several bibliometric
indicators.
We added the respective file in this format, to verify that
there were no duplicate documents. We proceeded to read
the Abstract to optimize our results, thus rejecting 17 of the
documents, as they did not meet what was intended, they
were focused on the evacuation of the interface zones, on
climate vulnerabilities, human behavior in emergency 3 RESULTS ANALYSIS
situations, risk perception by population share, fire
distribution. And it was not possible to access one of the 3.1 Descriptive
articles. Therefore, 21 documents were left for analysis.
3.1.1 Annual Variation in the Number of
Articles
Total Though the research was carried out in the database for the
40
time frame from 1993 to 2021, due to the filters used, the
documents included for analysis date from 2016 to 2020.
Thus, analyzing the evolution of publications confirms an
emergence of the 2019 theme. to 2020. About 52% of the
articles were published in the last two years. It should be
Excclude
18 21 noted that in 2019, 6 articles were published which makes
up 29% of the published articles.

Ner Article/ Year

8
No Access
1 6

4
Figure 2 – Number of final documents 2

2.3 – Analysis 0
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016

The questions asked, in order to understand the State of the Article

Art on the subject under study, “GIS in assessing the risk of
rural fire in urban-rural interface areas” were as follows:
Graph 1 – Temporal distribution of the number of published articles

Interface concepts applied to WUI; 3.1.2 Articles by Countries

Methodologies for identifying and delineating WUI; With regard to countries of origin, the United States has the
What software are used? largest number of published articles (8), which corresponds
Data type (raster or vector) and resolution; to 38.1%, followed by Spain (3), with 14.3%. In the
remaining countries, only 1 copy was verified. Graph 2
Satellite images used?
shows the distribution of the referred data.
Simulation software?
Which keywords are repeated?
Number of articles per year of publication;
Places / Countries of application;

Descriptive statistics were calculated for each of the factors

listed above, we performed comparative analyzes, time
series to reveal patterns and trends of GIS in the assessment
of rural fire risk in urban-rural interface areas. During the
research in the chosen database, the research chronology,
last 5 years, was immediately imposed (2016 to 2020).

Graph 2 – Countries with published articles

 3.1.3 Which key words are repeated
Analyzing the keywords that are repeated throughout the
articles under study, we have a very significant presence of
the word “Wildfire”, with a percentage of 57%, following
the concept of “Wildlife Urban Interface”, represented by
43% and by end “GIS” making up a percentage of 19%, as
shown in graph 3.
Keywords
GIS
Wildfire
Wildlife-urban interface
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Graph 3 – Most representative keywords
3.2 Descriptive Analysis
3.2.1 Interface concepts applied to WUI
The concept of Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) was
applied and described for the very first time by C. P. Butler
(1974) as “any point (area) where fuel consumed by a fire
changes from being natural fuel (trees, bushes, and grass)
to artificial or man-created fuel (houses, annexes, …)”
(cited in Cohen, 1999), causing problems in residential
areas when the fire draws too close to them in order to ignite
either by proximity or by projecting flaming particles.[3]
The book by A. G. Bradley (1984) on the WUI resource
management also contributed greatly to raising attention to
these matters. In addition, H. Vaux (1982) had already
characterized the WUI as a “hot seat of forestry” urging
specialists to its importance.[3]
In spite of these important contributions, discussions on the
WUI had decreased by the end of the 1980s when Davis
(1990) suddenly brought back this subject by characterizing
it as a scenario where fire is a problem and where conflicts
arise regarding the responsibility to protect homes from
fire.[3]
The 1997 edition of the Journal of Forestry included two
articles on the WUI, which emphasized the issues
surrounding the planning and management of fire in these
areas (Greenberg and Bradley, 1997; Plevel, 1997).[3]
In the publication “Human Influences on Forest
Ecosystems: The Southern Wildland-Urban Interface
Evaluation”, the interface is defined from a perspective of
natural resources as an area where the highest human
influence and converted land-uses are changing resource
management techniques, services, and goods (Macie and
Hermansen, 2002). With this definition, the WUI comprises
a set of conditions affecting resources and the way in which
these may be managed rather than being just a geographical
location.[3]
Of the many ways in which the WUI may be defined, the
most commonly accepted definitions are those that treat it
as an area where urban areas are in contact and interact with
forest areas, which include the limits of the large cities and
small agglomerations (Vince et al., 2005), where the
structures resulting from human development – such as
homes and other human infrastructures – are located either
14 inside or in contact with natural vegetation – fuel
(Summerfelt, 2001; Sanchez Guisandez et al., 2003;
Collins, 2005).[3]
The definition of WUI published in the Federal Register of
the US, in association with the National Fire Plan, certifies
that “the WUI community exists where humans and their
development meet or intermix with wildland fuels” (USDA
and USDI, 2001). In this context, the interface and intermix
communities are differentiated. Interface communities are
defined as those “where structures directly about wildland
fuels. There is a clear line of demarcation between
residential, business, and public structures and wildland
fuels”. On the other hand, in intermix communities
“structures are scattered throughout a wildland area. There
is no clear line of demarcation; wildland fuels are
continuous outsider of and within the developed area”. “In
both interface and intermix WUI, housing must meet or
exceed a minimum density of 6.18 houses per km2 (one
structure per 40 acres) and meet particular vegetation
conditions” (Martinuzzi et al., 2015).[3]
To Mowery (2018), the WUI is generally described as the
area where structures and other human developments meet
or intermingles with wildland vegetation, such as
grasslands, forests, or shrubs. Therefore, WUI can exist in
a range of urban environments (Fig. 3). The wildland-urban
interface exists along a continuum of wildland to urban
densities. Different WUI types can be correlated with
development patterns which transition across zones, similar
to the transect model.[3]
In its report (PAS Report 594), the American Planning
Association (Mowery et al., 2019), define WUI as any
developed area where conditions affecting the
combustibility of natural and cultivated vegetation
(wildland fuels) and structures or infrastructure (built fuels)
allow for the ignition and spread of fire through these
combined fuels. This combination of development and
vegetation is where wildfires have the greatest potential to
result in negative impacts on a community, such as property
damage, injuries, or deaths.[3]
From then on, the term WUI is almost exclusively used in
the context of wildfires (Stewart et al., 2007) and images of
the communities under flames around the cities have often
been used in order to describe it.[3]
Despite the generalized use of the term WUI (for Wildland-
Urban Interface) related with fire occurrence, some authors
refer to it as Rural- Urban Interface (RUI; Bouillon et al.,
2014; Sirca et al., 2017) or Urban - Bush Interface (UBI;
Solangaarachchi et al., 2012). Nonetheless, the termWUI is
being extensively used in other thematic areas without
direct relation with forest fires (population and settlement:
Harper, 1987; as a recreational environment: Ewert,
1993).[3]
Figure 3 - Continuum of wildland to urban densities.
3.2.2 Methodologies for identifying and
delineating WUI
In spite of there being a relative consensus regarding the
definition, which constitutes an arduous task in virtue of the
differences inherent to the physical characteristics of the
different territories and the multiple forms and intensities of
human occupancy and urban development (Vieira et al.,
2009). [3]
This way, as a consequence of the enormous landscape
diversity, even if only the Mediterranean Basin is
considered, some different WUI typologies are described
for each of the different countries. In fact, the wide range of
fire, vegetation, and infrastructure characteristics in WUI
makes the analysis of WUI fires site specific (Fox et al.,
2015), forcing the adoption of specific site evaluations and
WUI identification. [3]
For example, in France, the methodology for typifying and
mapping wildland-urban interfaces using GIS software –
developed by the CEMAGREF in the methodological guide
‘Caractérisation et cartographie des interfaces habitat-forêt
pour la prévention du risque d'incendie de forêt’2 (Lampin-
Maillet et al., 2010b) –, is based on the combination of two
quantitative criteria: metric aggregation of vegetation (three
classes) and housing density (four classes), resulting in 12
interface types (Fig. 4). [3]
A mapping of WUI was elaborated – and applied to a study
area – based on these types, hence producing a new map of
the territory. In fact, the territory is now compartmentalized
in accordance with a new classification: the spaces
designated as ‘interface’ (according to the interface types,
which have been characterized into twelve types) and the
spaces that are outside the interface area, which are called
‘non-interconnected spaces’3 (spaces built around the
interfaces – OWUI – and the rest of the territory N100m
(328 ft) away from the buildings – REST) (Lampim-Maillet
et al., 2010a; 2010b; Lampin-Maillet and Bouillon, 2011a).
[3]
The ultimate goal is to introduce an innovative method for
assessing the overall risks of fires, based on a method that
consists in relating spatial planning through mapping the
WUI and the history of wildfires. The risk of a fire is
established based on three risk indicators: density of the
outbreak points (points d'éclosion DE), wildfires
(d'incendie de forêt DI), and the rate of burnt areas (taux de
surfaces brûlées SB). [3]
The three risk indicators defined (density of the outbreak
points, wildfires, and the rate of burnt areas) enable us to
understand the basics of the fire risk. Each one of these
indicators contains some or all information on risks and
their vulnerability. Hence, density of the outbreak points
and wildfires contribute to the occurrence of the fire
phenomenon (the probability of an outbreak and the
probability of a fire), while the rate of burnt areas allows for
measuring the intensity of a fire (to be considered in terms
of danger and vulnerability) and the rate of damages,
particularly its impact on natural spaces. From the
combination of these three basic risk indicators – density of
the outbreak points, density of wildfires, and the rate of
burnt areas – Lampim-Maillet et al. (2011), have created a
global, synthetic, and original risk index. [3]
The methodology developed enables us to characterize and
map the wildland-urban interface on a large scale in vast
areas, hence contributing towards first-hand knowledge of
the territories, which is essential for supporting fire fighting
and raising the public's awareness of the risks and in
planning interface spaces, although this does not replace the
need for prevention plans regarding the risk of wildfires.
The final goal is to assess the long-term risk of a wildfire in
qualitative and quantitative terms, particularly in wildland-
urban interfaces within a context of global change. [3]

Other authors have followed similar methodology to

identify WUI in southern France (Fox et al., 2015) and in
Spain (Chas-Amil et al., 2013; Herrero-Corral et al., 2012).

On another hand within the scope of the WARM (Wildland-

Urban Area Fire Risk Management) European project,
Caballero et al. (2007) also elaborated a catalogue of
different interface typical situations summing up what has
been found in the Spanish context and providing a simple,
yet significant, interpretation of this reality (Fig. 4).

This is particularly a basis for assisting in a quick, yet

precise and intuitive identification of the most frequent
situations and assimilation of any interface area to each one
of the typified classes in order to estimate the associated fire
Figure 4 - Synthesis of the methodologies used to define WUI.
risk. [3]
3.2.3 Software GIS

After the evaluation and reading of the documents under

analysis, it is possible to verity the software used is
ARCGIS. From the analysis of a sample of 21 articles it is
possible to validate that 8 refer to the software used. In short
38.10 % use ARCGIS, 19.10% use GIS software but do not
specify which one. Another tool used was Google Earth,
corresponding to 4 articles of those studied, representing
19.10%

Software used in the articles

Don`t use 23,70%

Other 19,10%

Google Earth 19,10%

ArcGis 42,85%

0,00% 10,00% 20,00% 30,00% 40,00% 50,00%

Graph 4 - Software used in the articles

The digital image processing and spatial analysis were
accomplished utilizing ENVI (5.5, Harris Geospatial
Solutions, USA), ArcGIS (10.5.1, Environmental Systems
Research Institute, Redlands, CA, USA) and SNAP (6.0,
European Space Agency) software.[1]
High-resolution maps of land cover in Catalonia, taken
from the Land CoverMap of Cataloniamade by the Centre
for Ecological Research and Forestry Applications
(CREAF), helped in the analysis of landscape dynamics for
1993 and 2009, using GIS ArcGis (ESRI, 2016) and
MiraMon (CREAF, 2010, 2016).[2]
All computations were performed with ArcGIS_ 10.2.2 by
ESRI and Geomedia Professional 6.0 by Intergraph.[12]
To scale up fuel data from plot to landscape, as required for
the wildfire simulation, we applied ordinary kriging using
ArcGIS to canopy cover, stand height, canopy base height
(CBH), and canopy bulk density (CBD).[13]
Software required: ArcGis™ 9.3 or higher.[14]
ArcGIS software (10.1 version)[16]
To delineate discrete communities, we attached SILVIS
WUI with the U.S. Census Bureau populated places (U.S.
Census Bureau 2016) using a travel time estimated with the
Cost Allocation ArcGIS tool.[20]
Based on the historical large-fire start locations archived in
the FOD, we used the Kernel Density tool of ERSI ArcGIS
(with a 30 km search neighborhood and a 2 km pixel size)
to create an ignition density grid (IDG).[21]
3.2.4 Data type (raster or vector) and
resolution
After analyzing the GIS software used in the different
articles, we observe the type of data and its resolution. We
concluded that 43% of the articles use Raster data, and 19%
apply vector data.
Regarding spatial resolution, as Sentinel 2 images vary
from 10/20 to 60 meters depending on the band used. Like
the resolution of the Landsat images. The FSim Simulator
uses the same resolution in both article 11 and article 21. In
article 7 and article 16 the images and the resolution of the
Landsat images also coincide, at 30m. The DEM resolution
used in article 13 and article 17 are also identical. As Table
1.
Table 1 – Spatial resolution
3.2.5 Satellite Images Used
After analysing the articles selected to carry out our study,
we can verify that more than 61.90% of the sample does not
use satellite images, 8 of the articles use 30.77% Landsat
images, 3 of the articles use sentinel images, only 1 uses
images MODIS and SPOT 5.
Sentinel-2 (S2) it is an optical satellite, which delivers very
high spatial analysis imagery having a temporal resolution
of five days. S2 is equipped with the MSI (Multi-Spectral
Imager) sensor that operates on 13 different bands at a
spatial resolution of 10 (4 bands), 20 (6 bands) and 60 (3
bands) m. Its data have significant usage in researches
dealing with land cover monitoring and change detection
(Psomiadis et al., 2019).[1]
Landsat-5 (L5) was the fifth satellite of the Landsat
mission, equipped with Thematic Mapper (TM) that
operates on six multispectral bands (30m pixel size) and a
thermal band (pixel size 60 m). Moreover, the Copernicus
program of the European Space Agency (ESA) provides
innovative and continuous satellite data.[1]
The spectral information with 15m spatial resolution for
both sites was received from the Landsat 8 multispectral
satellite imagery mission.[9]
MODIS (or Moderate Resolution Imaging
Spectroradiometer) is a key instrument aboard the Terra
(EOS AM) and Aqua (EOS PM) satellites. Terra's orbit
around the Earth is timed so that it passes from north to
south across the equator in the morning, while Aqua passes
south to north over the equator in the afternoon.
SPOT-5 is the fifth satellite in the SPOT series of CNES
(Space Agency of France), placed into orbit by an Ariane
launcher. Since the first SPOT satellite was launched in
1986, the SPOT system has sought to provide continuity of
service and constantly improved the quality of its products
for the global user community.
Satelite Images Used
Don`t use
Modis 3,85
SPOT 5 3,85
Landsat 30,77
Sentinel 11,54
0,00 10,00 20,00 30,00 40,00 50,00 60,00 70,00
Graphic 5 – Satellite images used in the articles under study
3.2.6 Simulation software
When analyzing the different articles, we found that
some of them use forest fire simulators. We highlight the
use of FSim, FlamMap and RUImap.
The FSim program generates wildfire scenarios for a large
number (e.g., 50,000) of hypothetical wildfire seasons
using relationships between Energy Release Component
(ERC) and fire occurrence.[5]
FlamMap is a spatially-explicit wildfire simulation model
that calculates potential fire behavior under given
environmental conditions. The model predicts the effect of
spatial fuel arrangement and topography on fire behavior
(Finney, 2006). As fire behavior indicators we used flame
length, rate of fire spread, crown fire activity, burn
probability, and fire size (Scott et al., 2013).[13]
RUI map is, essentially, a geographical tool aiming to
detect where the RUI is located and its main features with
respect to the housing and vegetation, allowing to:
i) come up with user-defined rules for RUI mapping
through the application of adjustable parameters (buffer
distances, housing, and vegetation characteristics);
ii) produce data on RUI areas (location, size,
characteristics) and on fire issues through the analysis of
ignitions and burned areas.
4 CONCLUSIONS
The development of policies to define Interfaces is essential
for the development of strategies to prevent and reduce fire
risk in these areas (Hammer et al., 2009), especially at a
time when we witness a new reality characterized by large
forest fires/extreme fires/megafires, increasingly recurrent
and destructive (Ferreira-Leite et al., 2015, 2017). In this
context, European scientists have increasingly focused their
61,90 work on interface issues, with particular attention to their
characterization and mapping (e.g. Fire Paradox project,
targeting the countries of Mediterranean Europe), and fire
risk assessment in these areas (Lampin-Maillet et al., 2009,
2010b; Caballero, 2004, 2007; Ribeiro, 2011; Bouillon et
al., 2014; Modugno et al., 2016; Alcasena et al., 2018; Fox
et al., 2018; Oliveira et al., 2018; Pereira et al., 2018; Badia
et al., 2019).
In Chile, Castillo (2016) holds that there is clearly a deficit
in applied research and the development of strategies and
programs for more effective and direct prevention, as well
as in the implementation of joint programs for the different
areas of defense of the State, which face the lack of
financial resources to endow properly fire management
programs in the regions with greater severity of fires. In
other areas of fire knowledge of interface, it is possible to
indicate that there are important advances, especially in
regard to simulation of fire behavior and levels of severity
potential as useful forecasting elements for the decision
making.
In the US, Canada, and Australia, prevention and education
strategies have been developed specifically for the
populations of the interface areas, in order to make the
management of these areas and the fires affecting them
more effective. Some of these strategies involve
implementing plans to raise awareness among owners and
evacuate residents and communities that are threatened or
at risk (for example, the “Fire Wise” program in the USA
or the “Fire Smart” program in Canada), while others go
towards planning their own infrastructure and housing
(Shelter in Place program, implemented in the USA),
increasing their resilience to fire (Godwin and Kobziar,
2006).
Although fires in WUI are an ancient reality, the important
socioeconomic changes that have occurred in the last
decades contributed to an increase in wildfires and their
intensity, affecting with severity WUI areas all over the
world.
These new realities require a significant investment not
only in the research of the causes and effects of wildfires in
the WUI, but also in the understanding of the human
perception and in their intrinsic characteristics (WUI have
quite different characteristics from country to country, and
within each country, and, even in some cases, there are
enormous differences from region to region) leading to the
implementation of new evaluation methodologies and tools.
Despite the broad consensus surrounding the main concepts
regarding the WUI, its use remains quite ambiguous in
several points of the globe where this problem is more
pertinent, particularly regarding its evaluation.
In fact, it is essential to standardize and reconcile
methodologies making them comparable in order to
facilitate the transfer of knowledge and promote
cooperation and to develop strategies to prevent and reduce
fire risk in these areas.
More than ever, an interdisciplinary and collaborative
approach is necessary at all levels of research on wildfires
in the WUI to understand the complexity of its intrinsic
characteristics.
Regarding the use of Geographic Information Systems, we
found that 62% of the analyzed articles use these tools for
the preparation of basic information and creation of the
final product. We can say that GIS are an asset for the study
of fire risk in the urban - rural interface. It allows working
and overlapping several layers, such as altimetry, slope,
exposure, use and occupation of the soil, until reaching the
desired. With the use of these tools we can reach a coherent,
concise and consequent information sharing, where it can
be understood and replicated in any part of the world.
Satellite images are already in force and are beginning to
gain ground. In this study, LANDSAT images are the most
used and their spatial resolution is very varied. Following
are the images of SENTINEL, MODIS and SPOT5.
The use of GIS and simultaneously with fire simulation
software allows to implement strategies in terms of
planning and prevention, with regard to the planning of
urban-rural space as well as in the prevention and defense
of the forest against fires, as well as in operations fighting
them.
REFERENCES
[1] Efthimiou, N., Psomiadis, E., & Panagos, P. (2020).
Fire severity and soil erosion susceptibility mapping
using multi-temporal Earth Observation data: The
case of Mati fatal wildfire in Eastern Attica, Greece.
Catena, 187.
[2] Badia, A., Pallares-Barbera, M., Valldeperas, N., &
Gisbert, M. (2019). Wildfires in the wildland-urban
interface in Catalonia: Vulnerability analysis based
on land use and land cover change. Science of the
Total Environment, 673, 184–196.
[3] Bento-Gonçalves, A., & Vieira, A. (2020). Wildfires
in the wildland-urban interface: Key concepts and
evaluation methodologies. Science of the Total
Environment, 707.
[4] Sarricolea, P., Serrano-Notivoli, R., Fuentealba, M.,
Hernández-Mora, M., de la Barrera, F., Smith, P., &
Meseguer-Ruiz, Ó. (2020). Recent wildfires in
Central Chile: Detecting links between burned areas
and population exposure in the wildland urban
interface. Science of the Total Environment, 706.
[5] Ager, A. A., Day, M. A., Short, K. C., & Evers, C. R.
(2016). Assessing the impacts of federal forest
planning on wildfire risk mitigation in the Pacific
Northwest, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning,
147, 1–17.
[6] Ghermandi, L., Beletzky, N. A., de Torres Curth, M.
I., & Oddi, F. J. (2016). From leaves to landscape: A
multiscale approach to assess fire hazard in wildland-
urban interface areas. Journal of Environmental
Management, 183, 925–937.
[7] Argañaraz, J. P., Radeloff, V. C., Bar-Massada, A.,
Gavier-Pizarro, G. I., Scavuzzo, C. M., & Bellis, L.
M. (2017). Assessing wildfire exposure in the
Wildland-Urban Interface area of the mountains of
central Argentina. Journal of Environmental
Management, 196, 499–510.
[8] Alcasena, F. J., Ager, A. A., Bailey, J. D., Pineda, N.,
& Vega-García, C. (2019). Towards a comprehensive
wildfire management strategy for Mediterranean
areas: Framework development and implementation
in Catalonia, Spain. Journal of Environmental
Management, 231, 303–320.
[9] Polinova, M., Wittenberg, L., Kutiel, H., & Brook,
A. (2019). Reconstructing pre-fire vegetation
 condition in the wildland urban interface (WUI) using
artificial neural network. Journal of Environmental
Management, 238, 224–234.
[10] Zhou, S., & Erdogan, A. (2019). A spatial
optimization model for resource allocation for
wildfire suppression and resident evacuation.
Computers and Industrial Engineering, 138.
[11] Scott, J. H., Thompson, M. P., & Gilbertson-Day, J.
W. (2016). Examining alternative fuel management
strategies and the relative contribution of National
Forest System land to wildfire risk to adjacent homes
- A pilot assessment on the Sierra National Forest,
California, USA. Forest Ecology and Management,
362, 29–37.
[12] Calviño-Cancela, M., Chas-Amil, M. L., García-
Martínez, E. D., & Touza, J. (2016). Wildfire risk
associated with different vegetation types within and
outside wildland-urban interfaces. Forest Ecology
and Management, 372, 1–9.
[13] Vilà-Vilardell, L., Keeton, W. S., Thom, D.,
Gyeltshen, C., Tshering, K., & Gratzer, G. (2020).
Climate change effects on wildfire hazards in the
wildland-urban-interface – Blue pine forests of
Bhutan. Forest Ecology and Management, 461.
[18] Andersen, L. M., & Sugg, M. M. (2019). Geographic
multi-criteria evaluation and validation: A case study
of wildfire vulnerability in Western North Carolina,
USA following the 2016 wildfires. International
Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 39.
[19] Kaim, D., Radeloff, V. C., Szwagrzyk, M., Dobosz,
M., & Ostafin, K. (2018). Long-term changes of the
wildland–urban interface in the polish carpathians.
ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information,
7(4).
[20] Ager, A. A., Day, M. A., Palaiologou, P., Houtman,
R. M., Ringo, C., & Evers, C. R. (2019). Cross-
boundary wildfire and community exposure: A
framework and application in the western u.s. USDA
Forest Service - General Technical Report RMRS-
GTR, 2019(392), ii–34.
[21] Scott, J. H., Thompson, M. P., & Gilbertson-Day, J.
W. (2017). Exploring how alternative mapping
approaches influence fireshed assessment and human
community exposure to wildfire. GeoJournal, 82(1),
201–215.

[14] Sirca, C., Casula, F., Bouillon, C., García, B. F.,

Fernández Ramiro, M. M., Molina, B. V, &
Spano, D. (2017). A wildfire risk-oriented GIS
tool for mapping Rural-Urban Interfaces.
Environmental Modelling and Software, 94, 36–
47.

[15] Mancini, L. D., Barbati, A., & Corona, P. (2017).

Geospatial analysis of woodland fire occurrence &
recurrence in Italy. Annals of Silvicultural Research,
41(1), 41–47.

[16] Ahmed, L., Amina, B., & Djamel, A. (2020).

Mapping the wildland-urban interfaces for forest fire
prevention in the province of Mila (Algeria).
Environmental Research, Engineering and
Management, 76(2), 76–90.

[17] P.M. Alexandre, S. I. Stewart, M.H. Mockrin, N.S.

Keuler, A.D. Syphard, A. Bar-Massada, M.K.
Clayton, V.C. Radeloff, The relative impacts of
vegetation, topography and spatial arrangement on
building loss to wildfires in case studies of California
and Colorado