Abstract
BACKGROUND: Wildfire is a complex chemical, physical, and sociological phenomenon deeply rooted in the historical relationship between humans and fire. Today the wildfire risk is one of the human challenges. Effective management requires collaboration among multiple stakeholders across different levels. The risk perception and vulnerability at the local community level explain why and how individuals consider certain policies or mitigation behaviors. Thus, wildfire risk fits within the framework of socio-ecological systems.This study focused on four fire-prone areas in Tuscany, Italy, aiming to explore local wildfire risk perception. Risk perception is a social parameter, derived from media habits, memory, history, concerns, and beliefs. Two different surveys were used to consult two groups: experts (e.g., wildfire technicians, policymakers, business activities, and rural associations) and non-experts (e.g., random residents, students, and tourists), then compared to investigate possible gaps. Several questions were asked regarding demographics, relationship with the territory, current management system, relationship with fire and media, risk perception, and others.Results were compared according to the critical area or the type of respondents, and several analyses were conducted to identify weaknesses, strengths, and areas for improvement to raise awareness and lower the risk. RESULTS: Findings revealed differences in perception, more between the two groups than across locations, highlighting gaps that need to be addressed. A general underestimation of risk, with an overall optimism, was found in the non-expert group, indicating the need for further qualitative research to understand these aspects better. The interviews suggest public action as the main component to implement change. CONCLUSIONS: The paradigm shift toward prevention represents a core change and challenge. An exchange between scientific and local knowledge is desirable to address many gaps. We propose awareness raising as a possible starting point and to encourage collective actions in line with suggestions from the interviewees. Continuous monitoring and evaluation of response patterns can inform policy adjustments and resource allocation to enhance resilience and response effectiveness in future emergencies. Further research could aim to develop tools to promote a culture of fire and risk and deepen the analysis of risk perception in the most critical areas. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s42408-025-00380-5.