The increasing frequency of wildfire-related power outages and energy infrastructure-related wildfires requires cross-sector collaboration. We aimed to characterize the roles and responsibilities, decision-making processes, and informational needs and sharing practices among cross-sector organizations, including how these differ between single-hazard and interacting hazard contexts and how social vulnerability is incorporated into operational decision-making. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 practitioners from electric utilities, fire and emergency management, infrastructure and transportation, and public health and health care organizations serving Alaska communities, at local, regional and statewide levels. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using inductive and deductive content and thematic analysis informed by systems thinking and complexity theory. Discussion centered on communication/coordination during response to wildfire or power outages as distinct hazards, with attention to their interactions primarily among sectors with direct operational experience. Three inter-related themes were identified: (1) hazard familiarity, sectoral roles and the limited integration of social vulnerability, (2) cross-sector interdependence in power outage and wildfire management, and (3) relational and structural conditions shaping coordination and collaboration. Despite growing interdependence among organizations, this did not consistently translate into cross-sector collaboration during planning and preparedness stages. New and compounding hazards may require new forms of collaboration among less familiar organizations and alignment around shared goals to safeguard public health. These findings highlight the need to move beyond reactive coordination during response toward more proactive collaboration in mitigation, prevention, and preparedness. Strengthening cross-sector engagement will require improved understanding of interdependence and the development of formal and informal relationships and is needed for achieving equitable energy resilience, particularly for socially vulnerable households.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Richards et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: