Madagascar—the name of this tropical island in the Indian Ocean is intrinsically linked to the country's fame of being one of the most valued hotspots for biodiversity, but also to its more tragic reputation of being one of the poorest countries in the world. Madagascar's struggle to overcome the increasingly accentuated dilemma between socioeconomic development and conservation is most prominently exemplified by an omnipresent and controversial phenomenon: the continuous burning of vegetation by peasants across the island, from the extensive grasslands and pastures in the western highlands to the remaining forests and fallow lands on the eastern escarpment.

Christian Kull devotes his book to the so-called “fire problem” of Madagascar, which in reality is a century-long conflict over appropriate resource use between local farmers and external stakeholders. This view counters a well-established conviction that fires are ruining the island's natural heritage and preventing efficient use of natural resources, and that something must be done to stop the burning. This conviction, which the author calls the “antifire received wisdom,” permeates almost all discussions of Madagascar as part of a larger discourse of environmental degradation. Given the serious impasse created by such perspectives with regard to harmonizing (local) livelihood needs and (external) conservation interests, Madagascar's fire problem was ripe for such a political-ecological analysis.

In the first part of the book, the author lays out the fire problem, documents the theoretical and empirical bases of his work and introduces the reader to Madagascar. Having presented the chosen perspective of political ecology, he proceeds to outline the historical dimension of the topic. The dispute about fire is not a new problem but rather a century-old struggle among different interest groups over access and characterization of resources, and the politics of conflict between them. Subsequently, Kull develops an elegant framework to analyze fire in Madagascar, which distinguishes causes or goals of fire from the effects of burning, and looks at contextual factors that mediate their relation.

The analytic framework sets the stage for the second part of the book, which looks at how fire fits into land users' livelihood strategies around the island. Based on his own fieldwork and a thorough analysis of existing research, Kull examines 8 case studies, enabling him to develop a profound understanding of 3 distinct contexts: the agropastoral logic of fire in a grassland environment; the use and consequences of fire in the tapia woodlands; and the role of fire in a slash-and-burn context on a forest frontier of the eastern escarpment. It is a meticulous account of farmers' realities skillfully triangulated by ecological and socioeconomic research perspectives. Three important qualities make this an outstanding section of the book. First, the empirical basis acquired through exhaustive fieldwork and the authors' competence as a precise observer. Second, the in-depth analysis and compilation of existing studies, which offers at the same time an excellent state of research on environment and development in Madagascar. Third, the analytical focus on distinct contexts of fire use, which allows the author to balance the account of inherent complexity and a meaningful generalization of main comparable characteristics.

The third and final part of the book focuses on the historical and current politics of fire. The author demonstrates the mechanisms by which the state criminalized fire, and how the peasants resisted this criminalization. By taking advantage of the state's distended nature and of strategic village solidarity, and by harnessing fire's own ambiguities, the peasants have succeeded in defending their livelihoods and meeting their landscape management goals. Kull chronicles the pattern of criminalization and resistance through the history of Malagasy fire politics, revealing distinct historical periods in response to political, economic, and ideological changes. Finally, he critically reviews the most recent attempts to break the impasse between farmers and state over fire through community-based natural resource management. He assesses an imbalanced delegation of rights and duties in relation to the use of fire rooted in the ever-persisting antifire received wisdom. He notes that it is based in Western, urban culture, rooted in the ideas and institutions of natural sciences and biodiversity conservation, and fuelled by the economic interests of powerful international donors.

Such indications nourish the curiosity of the reader to extend the political ecological analysis beyond the duality of peasants versus state actors, namely to explore the role of conservation and development agencies, donors and scientists in shaping and influencing what is the Malagasy state today. A more explicit attribution of responsibilities to the latter actors in supporting unavoidable tradeoffs between development and environment objectives would have benefited the rather pragmatic conclusions, where Kull proposes elements of a contextually differentiated fire policy.

I highly recommend this book, not only to readers interested in fire as a resource management tool, but also to a broader public interested in scientific knowledge production that aims at innovative strategies allowing for integration of socioeconomic development and conservation objectives. In this respect, the book implicitly contains the following important elements, which may be promising aspects to be taken up in future by human geography in particular, and sustainable-development-oriented science in general.

First, the study is clearly motivated by a socially perceived problem and not by a scientific agenda. This determines the selection of a wide range of useful and relevant analytical tools leading to a truly interdisciplinary investigation. The fruitful mutual enrichment of diverging approaches is clearly demonstrated, and we observe that an artificial differentiation between fundamental and applied research is unfounded. Second, the author explicitly addresses the normative dimension inherent in questions related to sustainable natural resource management. By taking an ethical position close to peasants' livelihood needs, he does not obscure the analysis but rather increases transparency. Third, the study is guided by an approach that attributes different case studies to comparable contexts which are characterized by common ecological, socioeconomic, and political factors. On the one hand, this makes it possible to point out the high diversity of human–environment interactions without overwhelming readers with the complexity of each case study. On the other hand, it enables a meaningful generalization of insights and avoids oversimplification.

I am convinced that the production of such contextual knowledge represents a promising way to further enhance the relevance of sustainability-oriented research for informed decision-making.