RELEVANT
FOCUSED
READY

Integrating Indigenous-Led Recovery in BC Wildfire Management
Shahin Hardy

Introduction

British Columbia (BC) faces escalating wildfire risks due to several
factors like warmer temperatures and reduced snowpack as a result of
climate change. Colonial approaches to emergency management have
historically sidelined Indigenous fire stewardship, leading to a decline
in traditional practices that once played a key role in managing fireadapted landscapes. There is a growing need to bridge this gap in
integrating local Indigenous knowledge into wildfire recovery
strategies. This research explores how BC can integrate Indigenous-led
strategies to enhance wildfire resilience and recovery from global
Indigenous-government collaborations (e.g., North America,
Australia).

Background

Indigenous communities in BC have long practiced land stewardship
and fire management through Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK)
to reduce fuel loads, promote biodiversity, and maintain ecosystem
balance. However, the Colonial fire suppression policies criminalized
these practices, leading to flammable fuel accumulation in the forest
area, causing severe wildfires (Hoffman et al., 2022).
Even today, integrating these traditions into mainstream wildfire
management frameworks remains challenging due to concentration
of decision-making authority in federal or provincial government
agencies, resulting in insufficient collaboration with Indigenous
communities (Hoffman et al., 2022). This lack of integration hampers
efforts to create effective, sustainable disaster risk reduction
strategies. Therefore, the research problem centers on the challenges
of integrating Indigenous knowledge into BC's wildfire management
and the need for its inclusion to enhance disaster risk reduction and
support Indigenous-led recovery efforts.

Methods

This research adopts a pragmatic qualitative approach, emphasizing
on practical, adaptable, and culturally respectful solutions. The
research began by identifying key terms such as "Indigenous wildfire
knowledge" AND “BC wildfire management”. A combination of
literature review and case study analysis was conducted, utilizing the
JIBC Library system and Google Scholar, resulting in an initial pool of
over 20,000 articles related to the research topic. The inclusion
criteria focused on the articles published in the last 10 years (2014–
2024). The exclusion criteria eliminated the case studies outside of
North America and Australia. The refined research helped in
narrowing down the focus on nearly 45 articles, from which
approximately 20 articles were selected offering an insight on
indigenous-led wildfire management.

Findings

The key themes emerged from the literature review provided the
following insights:
Lack of Documentation & Representation: Indigenous fire knowledge
is often oral or embedded in cultural practices, leading to
underrepresentation in academic literature. Only 20% of wildfire
studies in Canada focus on Indigenous perspectives (Christianson,
2015).
Worldview Conflicts: Western frameworks promote fire suppression
and "scientific" measures while reducing TEK as unreliable (Mazzocchi
et al., 2018). On contrast, the indigenous viewpoint perceives fire as a
“ritualized process” rather than a hazard (Christianson, 2015).
Systematic Barriers: Jurisdictional overlaps between federal,
provincial, and Indigenous authorities hinder collaboration. Moreover,
liability concerns and lack of funding restrict cultural burning
(Hoffman et al., 2022).
Figure 1 illustrates wildfire trends in
British Columbia from 1919 to 2023.
(a) Displays the locations of historical
(1919–2016) and recent (2017–2023)
wildfires larger than 1,000 hectares.
(b) Shows the ten largest wildfire
seasons since 1919, ranked by total
area burned.
(c) Highlights the ten largest individual
wildfire events based on burned area.
Daniels et al. (2024), Retrieved from
Canadian Journal of Forest Research,
55, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr2024-0092

Global Best Practices: Global collaborations illustrate the benefits of
Indigenous-government co-management. For example, the Tsilhqot’in
Fire Management (BC) resulted in reduced high-severity fires by 40%
(2018–2020) using seasonal burns guided by TEK (Daniels et al., 2024)
and in Australia’s WALFA Project, emissions were cut by 37.7% via
Indigenous-led early dry-season burns (Russell-Smith et al., 2013).

Discussion

Integrating fire management requires challenging the colonial legacy
of wildfire suppression, which has historically prioritized short-term
risk elimination over ecological balance. Indigenous TEK advocates for
stewardship practices aligned with natural rhythms, such as cultural
burns timed to seasonal plant cycles, which reduce fuel loads and
enhance biodiversity. Case studies, including BC’s Tsilhqot’in Fire
Management Program, demonstrate that TEK not only mitigates
wildfire severity but also revitalizes cultural practices, offering a dual
strategy for climate adaptation and Indigenous sovereignty (BC
Wildfire Service, 2022).
However, policy and governance gaps persist. BC’s centralized wildfire
governance system marginalizes Indigenous leadership, perpetuating
power imbalances in decision-making. Co-management models, such
as Australia’s Kakadu National Park partnerships, illustrate how
equitable power-sharing between Indigenous communities and
government agencies can foster sustainable fire management
(Mazzocchi et al., 2018). While BC’s Tsilhqot’in Fire Management
Program (BC Wildfire Service, 2022) marks progress, its impact
remains limited without sustained funding and Indigenous-led
oversight to ensure practices align with community priorities.

Recommendations

To advance Indigenous-led wildfire recovery in BC, policy reforms
must legally recognize Indigenous burning rights and integrate TEK
into BC’s Wildfire Act (Hoffman et al., 2022). Moreover, establishing
co-governance boards with equal Indigenous representation would
decentralize decision-making and ensure Indigenous voices shape
wildfire strategies. Further, capacity-building initiatives, such as
government-funded training programs for Indigenous fire
practitioners and cross-jurisdictional partnerships (e.g., BC-Australia
workshops), could amplify knowledge exchange and skill
development. Lastly, education and reconciliation efforts, such as
mandatory TEK training for wildfire staff and support for Indigenousled documentation projects can be a crucial step toward sustainable
and inclusive environmental management in BC.

References

BC Wildfire Service. (2022, May 5). How cultural burning enhances
landscapes and lives. Government of British Columbia.
https://blog.gov.bc.ca/bcwildfire/how-cultural-burning-enhanceslandscapes-and-lives/
Christianson, A. (2015). Social science research on Indigenous wildfire
management in the 21st century and future research needs.
International Journal of Wildland Fire, 24(2), 190–200.
https://doi.org/10.1071/WF13048
Daniels, L. D., Dickson-Hoyle, S., Baron, J. N., Copes-Gerbitz, K.,
Flannigan, M. D., Castellanos-Acuna, D., Hoffman, K. M.,
Bourbonnais, M., & Gray, R. W. (2024). The 2023 wildfires in British
Columbia, Canada: Impacts, drivers, and transformations to coexist
with wildfire. Canadian Journal of Forest Research.
https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2024-0092
Hoffman, K. M., Christianson, A. C., Dickson-Hoyle, S., Copes-Gerbitz, K.,
Nikolakis, W., Diabo, D. A., & Daniels, L. D. (2022). The right to burn:
Barriers and opportunities for Indigenous-led fire stewardship in
Canada. FACETS, 7(1), 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets2021-0062
Mazzocchi, F., Simandan, D., Demneh, M. T., Morgan, D. R., Ghazinoory,
S., Saghafi, F., & Mirzaei, M. (2018). Why ‘integrating’ Western
science and Indigenous knowledge is not an easy task: What lessons
could be learned for the future of knowledge. Journal of Futures
Studies, 22(3), 19–34.
Russell-Smith, J., Cook, G. D., Cooke, P. M., Edwards, A. C., Lendrum, M.,
Meyer, C., & Whitehead, P. J. (2013). Managing fire regimes in north
Australian savannas: Applying Aboriginal approaches to
contemporary global problems. Frontiers in Ecology and the
Environment, 11(S1), e55–e63. https://doi.org/10.1890/120251

Post-Baccalaureate Diploma in Disaster Management

Justice Institute of British Columbia