The globe is facing an increasing rate of frequent, intense wildfires. From the record fire years in California to wildfires in unexpected areas in southwestern Chinese forests, the wildfire threat is no longer exclusive to regions of known fire risk. Aside from immediate loss of homes and human life, these disasters alter ecosystems, overwhelm first-responder systems, and test preparedness models. Amidst all of these, though, remains an oft-overlooked group of individuals: young adults.
Youth are not only passive spectators of the climate crisis, they are also future decision-makers, voters, and leaders who will make choices about their future environment. Youth risk perception of environmental hazards like wildfires is critical for enhancing long-term resilience. My research examines the influence of sociocultural variables on wildfire risk perception and mitigative action of young adults in the United States and China, two globally important but culturally different countries.
Why focus on youth—and compare the United States and China?
Historically, wildfire scholarship tended to concentrate on homeowners, especially in wildfire-prone regions. These are the individuals immediately in charge of maintaining land and evacuation. College-aged adults are not usually studied despite their rising political and social influence. These young adults are also digital natives who consume both information and disinformation about wildfires in different ways, such as through social media instead of formal sources.
The United States-China contrast offers an insightful frame for analyzing the impact of culture and institutions on perceiving risk. Wildfire prevention in the United States typically prioritizes individual action: homeowners must clear vegetation, receive alerts, and make autonomous choices. The equivalent in China is collective coordination, with government agencies spearheading risk communication as well as response. These cultural and structural variations create rich terrain for examining how young people in both societies internalize risk.
Methods and Theoretical Framework
The survey involved 263 university students, 78 of them from the United States, and 185 from China, using an online questionnaire. Wildfire risk perception, self-perceived mitigating behavior, personal experience of wildfire, frequency of discussions with other people, beliefs regarding climate change, exposure to media, and cultural orientation (using Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism scale) were all measured using 7 and 5-point Likert scales.
Theoretically, the work is grounded in Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), which describes how humans appraise threats and their capability for dealing with them, and Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory, which explains how national cultural characteristics impact attitudes as well as behavior. PMT is used for specifically determining why an individual decides to take, or avoid, precautionary action, whereas Hofstede’s work is used for placing such choices in larger cultural contexts.
Statistical analysis involved multiple linear regressions and t-tests, used for both universal predictors as well as cultural contrasts.
Key Findings
The results provide both common predictors as well as cross-country variation. For both populations, three predictors emerged as robust, consistent predictors of wildfire risk perception and intent to mitigate.
Previous wildfire exposure: Individuals with previous wildfire exposure, either directly or through relatives, noticed increased risk and were more apt to respond.
Interpersonal conversation: Discussion of wildfires with family members or friends raised awareness as well as preparedness.
Climate change beliefs: Students who believed in the phenomenon of climate change were also found to be significantly more likely to judge wildfire as an increasing threat.
Conversely, cultural orientation (collectivism vs. individualism)—widely presumed to play an important role—failed to significantly foretell wildfire perception or action. This contradicts long-standing assumptions regarding East-West risk responses.
Yet, some key differences did emerge. Chinese students showed greater risk perception and greater intent toward mitigation with lower media exposure and less personal experience. The American respondents were found to be higher on individualism, watched more wildfire-related media, believed in climate change, yet were not as urgent in their behavioral action. The seeming paradox indicates that risk perception is not always equated with exposure to information or with belief systems—the perception is also derived from emotional proximity as well as peer reinforcement.
Interestingly, while not actually measured, institutional trust must have affected the responses. In China, respondents may have absorbed risk messaging more readily because they have greater faith in government institutions. In the U.S., suspicion of authority can blunt the effectiveness of official messages, leaving more power in the hands of peer and personal experience.
Final Thoughts
Across the hills of California and the mountains of Chongqing, the risk of wildfire is increasing. The issue is not where fire happens, but how humans react. This analysis demonstrates that young adults are not a passive audience for cultural values or national identity. Instead, young adults’ actions are guided by experience, peer influence, and awareness of the climate, not cultural values or national identity.
With increased environmental risks looming in our future, educating young people through informed, culturally attuned messaging is no longer discretionary—it’s imperative. Governments, educators, and communicators have no choice but to go where young people are: online, in discussion, and where experience meets belief. Only then can we fundamentally create a fire-resilient generation.
Yangzheng Wu is a Junior who majors in Environmental Management and minor in Economics. He finished his undergraduate in three years and plans to pursue a master degree in environmental fields after graduating from Indiana University-Bloomington.
Leave a Reply