Digital-Based Fire Risk Classification for Preventive Fire Safety Management in Developing Countries Topic Information
Main Article Content
Abstract
Preventive fire safety management is continually challenging in developing countries, which is a global consequence of spontaneous urban growth, excessive infrastructure density, and overworked supervisory resources. Fire risk classification is fundamental for ensuring inspections are prioritized and incidents are minimized, however, many regulatory frameworks still depend on static criteria and isolated reporting. This study presents an approach for a digital based fire risk classification framework, aiming to improve preventive fire governance in developing settings, with a particular case of Uzbekistan. However, the main knowledge gap is the low level of conversion of officially collected inspection data into systematic, multi criteria risk models that would enable for evidence-based supervision.
This research utilizes a mixed method design that integrates regulatory analysis, a systematic analysis of digital inspection data, and algorithmic modeling. To transform compliance indicators, patterns of violations, characteristics of the object into the weighted risk scores, a multi criteria classification algorithm is developed. We employ simulation testing to evaluate the proposed digital and apply comparisons with age-old classification practices.
Results show that utilizing digital categorization not only improves prioritization accuracy and reduces inspections subjectivity but also increase preventive control transparency. The results show that data driven classification allows for more efficient allocation of supervisory resources and increase on the fire safety management predictive capacity. Pragmatic implications are that institutional accountability can be more firmly entrenched, and that regulatory modernization can scale up more readily in other developing countries with similar administrative bottlenecks.
This study lays the groundwork for future research on real time monitoring systems, machine learning analytics, and interoperable safety databases. Digital risk allows for adaptive, preventive fire governance that responds to changing urban and industrial risk environments; we demonstrate this approach as one way forward.
Article Details
Issue
Section
How to Cite
References
[1] National Fire Protection Association, Fire Loss in the United States During 2022. Quincy, MA, USA: NFPA, 2023.
[2] U.S. Fire Administration, Fire in the United States 2009–2018, 17th ed. Washington, DC, USA: FEMA, 2020.
[3] R. Baldwin, M. Cave, and M. Lodge, Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice, 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2012.
[4] J. Black, “Risk Based Regulation: Choices, Practices and Lessons Being Learned,” OECD, 7, 2005.
[5] R. E. Hall Jr., “Fire Risk Analysis and Evaluation,” in SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 5th ed., New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2016.
[6] OECD, Digital Government Review: Enhancing Public Sector Performance Through Data. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2020.
[7] World Bank, GovTech: Putting People First. Washington, DC, USA: World Bank Publications, 2020.
[8] P. Hopkin, Fundamentals of Risk Management, 5th ed. London, UK: Kogan Page, 2018.
[9] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 31000: Risk Management Guidelines, Geneva., 2018.
[10] International Association of Fire and Rescue Services, “World Fire Statistics Report No. 28,” CTIF, Geneva, Switzerland, 2023.
[11] United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, “Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2022,” UNDRR, Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
[12] M. Lodge and K. Wegrich, Managing Regulation: Regulatory Analysis, Politics and Policy. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
[13] OECD, The Governance of Regulators: Best Practice Principles for Regulatory Policy. Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2014.
[14] D. Margetts and P. Dunleavy, Digital Era Governance: IT Corporations, the State, and E Government. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2013.
[15] European Commission, “Fire Safety in the European Union: Statistics and Analysis,” EU Publications Office, Brussels, Belgium, 2021.
[16] International Organization for Standardization, “ISO 22301: Security and Resilience Business Continuity Management Systems.” Geneva, Switzerland, 2019.