Perceived vulnerability to wildfire diverges from parcel-level hazard assessments: evidence from nordic Valley, Utah (USA).

Communities in the wildland-urban interface face rising wildfire risk, making it essential to understand how residents perceive their vulnerability and decide whether to mitigate. We combine parcel-level Wildfire Hazard Lot Assessments (WHLAs) with semi-structured interviews in Nordic Valley, Utah (USA), to compare the physical vulnerability of residents' parcels to what these individuals think and do. Most parcels scored in the moderate range and exhibited several good-practice features (e.g., screened vents, enclosed eaves). Yet interviews showed that residents' perceptions and actions were shaped less by on-parcel scores and more by neighborhood spillovers (neighbors' fuels and upkeep), part-time or absentee ownership, and the community's mountain/forest setting. We did not find a clear relationship between WHLA scores and the presence of interview themes, indicating that mitigation behaviors are filtered through socially embedded perceptions that can align with-or diverge from-the physical vulnerability of residents' parcels. These findings suggest practical steps: tailor communication and assistance to the (mis)alignment between perceived and assessed vulnerability and act at neighborhood/community scales to leverage the important role of social norms. By pairing rapid assessments with resident narratives, the study offers an approach for turning multiple sources of vulnerability information into proactive wildfire risk mitigation efforts.