Determining the direct benefits and costs of prescribed burning: A case study of the Langeberg Mountain veld area, Western Cape, South Africa

This study assessed the direct benefits and costs of prescribed burning in the Langeberg Mountain veld area, Western Cape, South Africa. Primary data was collected through questionnaires. Subsequently, a financial cost-benefit analysis (CBA) was conducted to compare costs and benefits systematically. The findings indicated that potential benefits from prescribed burning far outweigh the costs. The study suggested that society would benefit from prescribed burning, as evidenced by potential private farm profits and savings from wildfire suppression. Although implementation costs exist, they are not higher than the potential costs of wildfire suppression. Historically, prescribed burning was used in South Africa to rejuvenate fire-dependent vegetation and reduce fuel loads; currently, a “caller pays” principle is applied. This has become a limiting factor, as 69% of farmers avoided burning the veld due to fears of financial liability if prescribed fires spread beyond their property. Nonetheless, the financial CBA suggests that prescribed burning should be recommended to farmers and landowners in the Langeberg Mountain veld area, as benefits surpass costs. This does not eliminate the risks associated with prescribed burning, since controlled burns can become wildfires, cause damage and risking safety, with farmers potentially held legally liable. As farmers tend to be risk-averse, additional incentives are necessary to encourage participation in prescribed burning. • The benefits of controlled burning were generally higher than the costs incurred. • The CBA gave an overall benefit of burning the Langeberg Mountain veld area. • Both controlled and non-burning farmers experienced wildfires in the last 30 years • The total damage experienced by farmers who did not use controlled burns was high • Fire intensity, fuel, and weather impact suppression and fire-related costs