Statistical Modeling of Wildfire Extremes Based on Extreme Value Theory

Main Article Content

N. Deetae, S. Piros, P. Khamrot, P. Wachirawongsakorn, M. Thongprom, T. Gaketem

Abstract

Wildfires have become an increasingly severe environmental hazard in the lower northern region of Thailand, causing substantial ecological degradation, economic loss, and public health impacts. Understanding the behavior of extreme wildfire events is essential for long-term risk management and mitigation planning. This study applies Extreme Value Theory (EVT) to model annual maximum burned areas in five provinces—Tak, Phitsanulok, Sukhothai, Phetchabun, and Uttaradit—using official wildfire records from the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation covering the period 1998–2024. The Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) distribution was fitted using maximum likelihood estimation under the block maxima framework. Model adequacy was assessed using goodnessof-fit diagnostics and graphical tools. Return levels were estimated for multiple recurrence intervals, including 10, 20, 50, and 100 year horizons. Results reveal pronounced spatial heterogeneity in extreme wildfire behavior across provinces. Tak province exhibits the heaviest tail and the highest projected 100-year return level, followed by Phitsanulok, whereas Uttaradit demonstrates comparatively lower extreme magnitude. A normalized spatial risk index was constructed to facilitate comparative hazard ranking. The findings indicate that extreme wildfire risk is strongly localized and non-uniform across the region, emphasizing the necessity of province-specific mitigation strategies. The integration of EVT-based return level analysis with spatial risk ranking provides a quantitative decision-support framework for wildfire hazard assessment in climate-sensitive regions.

Article Details

References

  1. D.M.J.S. Bowman, J.K. Balch, P. Artaxo, W.J. Bond, J.M. Carlson, et al., Fire in the Earth System, Science 324 (2009), 481–484. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1163886.
  2. IPCC, Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, Cambridge University Press, 2021.
  3. F.H. Johnston, S.B. Henderson, Y. Chen, J.T. Randerson, M. Marlier, et al., Estimated Global Mortality Attributable to Smoke from Landscape Fires, Environ. Health Perspect. 120 (2012), 695–701. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1104422.
  4. G.R. van der Werf, J.T. Randerson, L. Giglio, G.J. Collatz, P.S. Kasibhatla, et al., Interannual Variability in Global Biomass Burning Emissions from 1997 to 2004, Atmospheric Chem. Phys. 6 (2006), 3423–3441. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-3423-2006.
  5. C.L. Reddington, L. Conibear, S. Robinson, C. Knote, S.R. Arnold, et al., Air Pollution from Forest and Vegetation Fires in Southeast Asia Disproportionately Impacts the Poor, GeoHealth 5 (2021), e2021GH000418. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021gh000418.
  6. P. Paluang, W. Thavorntam, W. Phairuang, The Spatial–Temporal Emission of Air Pollutants from Biomass Burning during Haze Episodes in Northern Thailand, Fire 7 (2024), 122. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire7040122.
  7. Pollution Control Department (PCD), Thailand Air Quality and Situation Report, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Thailand, 2023.
  8. Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA), Thailand Forest Fire and Hotspot Monitoring Report, Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation, Thailand, 2023.
  9. N.T.K. Oanh, N. Upadhyay, Y.H. Zhuang, Z.P. Hao, D. Murthy, et al., Particulate Air Pollution in Six Asian Cities: Spatial and Temporal Distributions, and Associated Sources, Atmospheric Environ. 40 (2006), 3367–3380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.01.050.
  10. G. Evin, T. Curt, N. Eckert, Has Fire Policy Decreased the Return Period of the Largest Wildfire Events in France? A Bayesian Assessment Based on Extreme Value Theory, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 18 (2018), 2641–2651. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2641-2018.
  11. J. Koh, Gradient Boosting with Extreme-Value Theory for Wildfire Prediction, Extremes 26 (2023), 273–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10687-022-00454-6.
  12. P.D.Z. Bermudez, J. Mendes, J.M.C. Pereira, K.F. Turkman, M.J.P. Vasconcelos, Spatial and Temporal Extremes of Wildfire Sizes in Portugal (1984–2004), Int. J. Wildland Fire 18 (2009), 983–991. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf07044.
  13. C. Hernandez, C. Keribin, P. Drobinski, S. Turquety, Statistical Modelling of Wildfire Size and Intensity: A Step Toward Meteorological Forecasting of Summer Extreme Fire Risk, Ann. Geophys. 33 (2015), 1495–1506. https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-33-1495-2015.
  14. D. Rypkema, S. Tuljapurkar, Modeling Extreme Climatic Events Using the Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) Distribution, Handb. Stat. 44 (2021), 39–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.host.2020.12.002.
  15. N. Deetae, P. Khamrot, K. Jampachaisri, A New Extended Kumaraswamy Generalized Pareto Distribution with Rainfall Application, IEEE Access 13 (2025), 68259–68269. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2025.3561150.
  16. N. Deetae, P. Khamrot, K. Jampachaisri, Modelling Extreme Rainfall Using Extended Generalized Extreme Value Distribution, Int. J. Anal. Appl. 23 (2025), 73. https://doi.org/10.28924/2291-8639-23-2025-73.
  17. D.J. Dupuis, S. Engelke, L. Trapin, Modeling Panels of Extremes, Ann. Appl. Stat. 17 (2023), 498–517. https://doi.org/10.1214/22-AOAS1639.
  18. S. El Adlouni, T.B.M.J. Ouarda, X. Zhang, R. Roy, B. Bobée, Generalized Maximum Likelihood Estimators for the Nonstationary Generalized Extreme Value Model, Water Resour. Res. 43 (2007), 2005WR004545. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004545.