Wildland–urban interface expansion: Towards comprehensive planning processes

Abstract Wildland–urban interface (WUI) expansion is accelerating in numerous regions around the world due to increasing amenity‐led migration processes, defined as the movement of people seeking higher environmental quality. While WUI areas are complex social–ecological systems requiring holistic planning and management, they are usually approached from wildfire risk mitigation perspectives that overlook broader people–nature relations. We explored the drivers of WUI expansion and the planning and management practices used to address WUI expansion‐related issues through two case studies: the Roaring Fork Valley (US) and San Martín de los Andes (Argentina). Through semi‐structured interviews, we assessed stakeholders' perceptions regarding current WUI planning and management practices and potential strategies for improvement, identifying opportunities to implement transdisciplinary landscape planning and management approaches in these systems. In particular, we highlighted WUI planning and management aspects that go beyond wildfire mitigation, addressing underlying causes of WUI expansion like amenity‐led migration. The drivers of WUI expansion in the study areas mirror those of amenity‐led migration, with a perceived higher life quality as compared to fully urban areas. The interaction of WUI areas with the tourism industry and the consequent rise in real estate prices increases the demand for housing solutions for both low‐ and high‐income sectors, putting pressure on WUI and wildland areas to serve as sites for new construction. This challenges the conception of amenity‐led migration as a process that solely affects wealthy sectors. In addition, different socioeconomic sectors may have varying vulnerability to WUI‐related risks. To improve WUI planning and management approaches, participants emphasized the need to integrate environmental and ecological considerations, such as changes in ecosystem services provision to identify potential sites for future housing development as well as housing density criteria. This latter idea proved contentious, with different stakeholders advocating for low‐density and high‐density developments, options that should be discussed through participatory processes. This study invites reflection on the benefits of transdisciplinarity (knowledge integration, bridging science and practice and enhancing stakeholder engagement) in the context of WUI social–ecological systems, providing insights into more comprehensive and collaborative approaches to WUI planning and management that consider people–nature relations. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.