Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Review of Sociological Issues in Fire Safety Regulation

  • Published:
Fire Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents an overview of contemporary sociological issues in fire safety. The most obviously social aspects of fire safety—those that relate to the socioeconomic distribution of fire casualties and damage—are discussed first. The means that society uses to mitigate fire risks through regulation are treated next; focusing on the shift towards fire engineered solutions and the particular challenges this poses for the social distribution and communication of fire safety knowledge and expertise. Finally, the social construction of fire safety knowledge is discussed, raising questions about whether the confidence in the application of this knowledge by the full range of participants in the fire safety design and approvals process is always justified, given the specific assumptions involved in both the production of the knowledge and its extension to applications significantly removed from the original knowledge production; and the requisite competence that is therefore needed to apply this knowledge. The overarching objective is to argue that the fire safety professions ought to be more reflexive and informed about the nature of the knowledge and expertise that they develop and apply, and to suggest that fire safety scientists and engineers ought to actively collaborate with social scientists in research designed to study the way people interact with fire safety technology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. FEMA (2011) Fire death rate trends: an international perspective, Topical Fire Report Series, 12(8), https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v12i8.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2016

  2. Bijker W, Hughes T, Pinch T (eds) (1988) The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bijker W, Law J (eds) (1992) Shaping technology/building society. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  4. MacKenzie D, Wajcman J (eds) (1999) The social shaping of technology, 2nd edn. Open University Press, Buckingham (1st edition 1985)

  5. Latour B, Woolgar S [1986 (1979)] Laboratory life: the construction of scientific facts. Princeton University Press, Princeton

  6. Barnes B, Bloor D, Henry J (1996) Scientific knowledge: a sociological analysis. Athlone and Chicago University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  7. Collins H, Pinch T (2014) The Golem at large: what you should know about technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Bullock M, Monaghan A (2014) The development of competency in fire engineering. Int Fire Prof 7:14–17

    Google Scholar 

  9. [9] Jennings CR (1999) Socioeconomic characteristics and their relationship to fire incidence: a review of the literature. Fire Technol 35(1):7–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Department for Communities and Local Government (2012) Fire Statistics Great Britain April 2013 to March 2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/456652/Fire_Statistics_Great_Britain_2013-14___PDF_Version_.pdf Accessed 4 Nov 2015

  11. Department of Transport (2014) Reported Road Casualties in Great Britain: Main Results 2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-main-results-2014 Accessed 4 Jan 2016

  12. The Scottish Government (2012) Fire Statistics Scotland, 2011–2012. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0040/00403593.pdf. Accessed 15 Sep 2014

  13. Ahrens M (2014) Smoke alarms in US home fires. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy

    Google Scholar 

  14. Haynes HJG (2015) Fire Loss in the United States During 2014. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy

    Google Scholar 

  15. Federal Emergency Management Agency (1997) Socioeconomic factors and the incidence of fire. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  16. Neavling S (2013) As Detroit breaks down, scourge of arson burns out of control. Reuters (July 13 2013)

  17. http://www.clevelandfire.gov.uk/news-and-events/campaigns/arson-prevention/. Accessed 21 Aug 2013

  18. Palmer EJ, Caulfield LS, Hollin CR (2007) Interventions with arsonists and young fire setters: a survey of the national picture in England and Wales’. Legal Criminol Psychol 12:101–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. [19] Wolski A, Dembsey NA, Meacham BJ (2000) Accommodating perceptions of risk in performance-based building fire safety code development. Fire Saf J 34(3):297–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. [20] Meacham BJ (2010) Risk‐informed performance‐based approach to building regulation. J Risk Res 13(7):877–893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Health & Safety Executive (1988) The tolerability of risk from nuclear power stations, HMSO, London (revised 1992)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fraser-Mitchell J, Williams C (2012) Cost benefit analysis of residential sprinklers for Wales—Report of cost benefit analysis, BRE Global, 27 April

  23. [23] Roberts H, Curtis K, Liabo K, Rowland D, DiGuiseppi C, Roberts I (2004) Putting public health evidence into practice: increasing the prevalence of working smoke alarms in disadvantaged inner city housing. J Epidemical Commun Health 58:280–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Duncan C, Wade C (2011) Cost-effective domestic fire sprinkler systems. BRANZ Conference Paper 91. In: Presented at the CIB World Building Congress

  25. UK National Archives file SP 9/171

  26. Ross L (2012) Invitation and escape: technical standards and tacit knowledge in the design studio. In E. de Vos (ed.) Theory by design: architectural research made explicit in the design teaching studio. ASP, Antwerp

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cullen WD (1990) The public inquiry into the Piper Alpha disaster. HM Stationery Office, London

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fennell D (1988) Investigation into the King’s cross underground fire. Department of Transport, London

    Google Scholar 

  29. The Stationery Office Limited (2010) Schedule 1, Part 2 of Building and Buildings, England and Wales, The Building Regulations, UK http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/2214/pdfs/uksi_20102214_en.pdf Accessed 4th Jan 2016

  30. Hansen G, Condon E (1989) Denial of disaster. Cameron & Company, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  31. Branner JC (1913) Earthquakes and structural engineering. Bull Seismol Soc Am 3(1):1–5

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Fradkin PL (2005) The great earthquake and firestorms of 1906: how San Francisco nearly destroyed itself. University of California Press, Berkeley, p. 244

    Google Scholar 

  33. Drysdale D (2010) The origins of fire safety engineering in the UK. http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/FIRESEAT/files10/Slides_FIRESEAT2010_Drysdale.pdf. Accessed 15 Sep 2014

  34. International Civil Aviation Organization (2001) Annex 13 to the convention on international civil aviation aircraft accident and incident investigation, http://www.emsa.europa.eu/retro/Docs/marine_casualties/annex_13.pdf

  35. Caird RG (1996) Fire safety engineering: role in performance-based codes. In: 3rd Asia-Oceania Symposium on Fire Science and Technology

  36. Meacham BJ (1996) The evolution of performance-based codes and fire safety design methods. National Institute of Standards and Technology, http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire98/PDF/f98125.pdf. Accessed 15 Sep 2014

  37. [37] Department of Communities and Local Government (2010) Approved Document B, Building Regulations 2010. HM Government, London

    Google Scholar 

  38. Law M, Beever P (1995) Magic numbers and golden rules. Fire Technol 31(1):77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. [39] Albano JM, Fitzgerald L, Meacham BJ (2006) Performance-based structural fire safety. J Perform Constr Facil 20(1):45–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Meacham BJ, Bowen R, Traw J, Moore A (2005) Performance-based building regulation: current situation and future needs. Build Res Inf 33(2):91–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. May PJ (2007) Regulatory regimes and accountability. Regul Gov 1:8–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. [42] Alvarez A, Meacham BJ, Dembsey NA, Thomas JR (2013) Twenty years of performance based fire protection design: challenges faced and a look ahead. J Fire Prot Eng 23(4):249–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lewis K (2004) A world apart? http://www.building.co.uk/Story.aspx?storyCode=3042560. Accessed 20 Dec 2014

  44. [44] Downer J (2010) Trust and technology: the social foundations of aviation regulation. Br J Sociol 61(1):83–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. [45] Downer J (2011) On audits and airplanes: redundancy and reliability-assessment in high technologies. Acc Organ Soc 36:269–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Bullock M, Monaghan A (2012) The development of competency in fire engineering. Int Fire Prof 2012(7):14–17

    Google Scholar 

  47. Fleischmann CM (2011) Is prescription the future of performance-based design? Fire Saf Sci 10:77–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. International Code Council (2015) International Building Code. http://codes.iccsafe.org/app/book/content/2015-I-Codes/2015%20IBC%20HTML/Chapter%201.html

  49. Ferreira MJ, Rosenbaum ER, Ballard MS, Schultheis B (2002) UBC Section 905.0—Smoke Control, A Case Study of the Implementation of Performance-Based Building Codes in the United States. In: 4th International Conference on Performance-Based Codes and Fire Safety

  50. Wade C, Beever P, Fleischmann CM, Lester J, Llyodd D, Moule A, Saunders N, Thorby P (2007) Developing Fire Performance Criteria for New Zealand’s Performance Based Building Code. In: Paper presented at the Fire Safety Engineering International Seminar, 26–27 April, Paris, France. http://www.branz.co.nz/cms_show_download.php?id=f8f5f396ba47ccae10e62e5c335d917d4d9301c0 Accessed 14 Sep 2014

  51. Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (2013) C/VM2, Verification method: framework for fire safety design

  52. Beever P (2013) Presentation at the Lloyd’s Register Foundation/University of Edinburgh Seminar in Fire Safety Engineering, Gullane, Scotland, 30 April 2013

  53. Davies C (1991) May: How it was built. Archit Rev

  54. Bullock M, Monaghan A (2014) Code compliance or fire engineering for safety design—have we moved on? Int Fire Prof 8:25–28

    Google Scholar 

  55. Bullock M, Monaghan A (2014) Shouldering the responsibility. Int Fire Prof 9:29–32

    Google Scholar 

  56. Bullock M, Monaghan A (2014) Have you got the time? Int Fire Prof 10:33–36

    Google Scholar 

  57. Sachs EO (1903) Suggested Standards of Fire Resistance. In: Woolson IH (ed) Report of the Proceedings of the International Fire Protection Congress, pp. 243–248

  58. Woolson IH (1903) Report of the Proceedings of the International Fire Protection Congress, London

  59. Babrauskas V, Williamson RB (1978) The historical basis of fire resistance testing—Part I. Fire Technol 14(3):184–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. [60] Babrauskas V, Williamson RB (1978) The historical basis of fire resistance testing—Part II. Fire Technol 14(4):304–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wessel R, Gardner M (2004) What do fire resistance ratings really mean? The Construction Specifier, pp 46–52

  62. Rakic J (2014) Understanding fire ratings, http://www.pfpa.com.au/docs/Fire%20ratings/rakic_understanding_fire_ratings.pdf?phpMyAdmin=ZlesLyIQHdlTOtrt-8XBatCVvU6. Accessed 14 Sep 2014

  63. Harmathy TZ, Lie TT (1970) Fire Test Standard in the Light of Fire Research, Fire Test Performance—ASTM STP 464. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  64. Law M (1981) Designing fire safety for steel—recent work. In: Proceedings of the ASCE Spring Convention. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York

  65. Maluk C, Bisby LA, Krajcovic M, Torero JL (2015) The heat-transfer rate inducing system (H-TRIS) test method, Fire Saf J (submitted March)

  66. Beyler C, Beitel J, Iwankiw N, Lattimer B (2007) Fire resistance testing for performance based design of buildings. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg

    Google Scholar 

  67. BS EN 1991-1-2 (2002) Eurocode 1: Actions on structures—Part 1–2: General actions—Actions on structures exposed to fire.

  68. Reddaway TF (1940) The Rebuilding of London after the Great Fire (Jonathan Cape)

  69. Rasbash D (1974) Inaugural Lecture at the University of Edinburgh. https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/5574

  70. [70] Emmons HW (1985) The further history of fire science. Fire Technol 21(3):230–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Drysdale DD (1985) An introduction to fire dynamics. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  72. Quintiere JG (1997) Principles of fire behaviour. Thomson, Albany

    Google Scholar 

  73. Buc EC (2008) Fire testing and fire reality: what do fire tests really tell us about materials? http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/FIRESEAT/files08/06-Buc.pdf. Accessed 14 Sep 2014

  74. Lennon T (no date) BRE Cardington Steel Framed Building Fire Tests, The Building Research Establishment, UK, http://data.bre.co.uk/dataset/8296db4d-4a80-4a32-ae09-00821678e6ee/resource/bc6bc291-4ab5-498a-8ee2-8726402f1d21/download/BRE-Cardington-Steel-Framed-Building-Fire-Tests-SM.pdf Accessed 12 June 2016

  75. Lamont S (2001) The Behaviour of Multi-story Composite Steel Framed Structures in Response to Compartment Fires. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh, UK

  76. Wang Y, Burgess I, Wald F, Gillie M (2013) Performance-based fire engineering of structures. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Collette KA (2007) Comparisons of structural design fires. M.Sc. thesis, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester

  78. Rein G, Torero JL, Jahn W, Stern-Gottfried J, Ryder NL, Desanghere S, Lazaro M, Mowrer F, Coles A, Joyeux D, Alvear D, Capote JA, Jowsey A, Abecassis-Empis C, Reszka P (2009) Round-robin study of a priori modelling predictions of the Dalmarnock Fire Test One. Fire Saf J 44:590–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Johansson N (2015) ‘User Impact on FDS simulations: Reflections Based on the Results from a Round-Robin Study’ at the SFPE conference, Copenhagen, June 4–5. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.sfpe.org/resource/resmgr/2015_Europe_Presentations/Fri_PM_GS.pdf

  80. MacKenzie D, Rüdig W, Spinardi G (1988) Social research on technology and the policy agenda: an example from the strategic arms race. In: Brian Elliot B (ed), Technology and social process. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  81. Spearpoint M, MacLennan HA (2012) The effect of an ageing and less fit population on the ability of people to egress buildings. Saf Sci 50:1675–1684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. [82] Ronchi E, Nilsson D (2013) Fire evacuation in high-rise buildings: a review of human behaviour and modelling research. Fire Sci Rev 2:7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. May PJ (2003) Performance-based regulation and regulatory regimes: the Saga of leaky buildings. Law Policy 25(4):381–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Many of the ideas leading to this paper originated from The 2013 Lloyd’s Register Foundation Global Technical Leadership Seminar in Fire Safety Engineering, held in Gullane, Scotland. The Seminar was majority funded by The Lloyd’s Register Foundation (LRF). The authors would like to acknowledge the intellectual contributions the Seminar participants, as well as the in-kind support provided by their respective organizations in allowing them to attend. We are grateful for the support of The Royal Academy of Engineering.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Ove Arup Foundation/Royal Academy of Engineering Senior Research Fellow, Science, Technology, and Innovation Studies, University of Edinburgh, High School Yards, Edinburgh, EH11LZ, UK

    Graham Spinardi

  2. Chair of Fire and Structures, School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh, The King’s Buildings, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh, EH93JL, UK

    Luke Bisby

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia

    Jose Torero

Authors
  1. Graham Spinardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luke Bisby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jose Torero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luke Bisby.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Spinardi, G., Bisby, L. & Torero, J. A Review of Sociological Issues in Fire Safety Regulation. Fire Technol 53, 1011–1037 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-016-0615-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-016-0615-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation