Historical Perspective of Community Safety - Literature review Example

Literature Review Name: Institution: Historical perspective of community safety Shields and Proulx 1999, asserts that, development of studies on human behavior in response to fire is as a result of awareness that merely engineering explanations to fire safety are inadequate to realize effectual or satisfactory outcomes. In his book, Bryan 2002, shows a changed focus in research relating to human behavior in incidents of fire ever since the first studies that were carried out in early 1900’s which eventually resulted in the current performance based safety codes that tend to place a lot of emphasis on the evacuation methods. He categorizes the development into three major phases that is the pre-recognition years (1900’s-1970’s), productive years (1970’s- 1980’s) and the performance code incentive years (1990’s to present). Based on Bryan study, an increase in the population density has resulted in a lot of emphasis been laid in relation to safety in most entertainments centers, high buildings and also in transportation systems. This in one way shows the potentially high number of casualties in these sceneries demonstrated in various serious occurrences. The abundant casualties tend to pose a heightened level of risk in relation to civil and criminal charges for the owners and designers of those buildings, alongside with unpleasant political and media interest. This has eventually led to improved levels of performance of the fire codes that are currently in place. Paradoxically, with the high level of focus on the densely populated areas a lesser level of attention have been placed on the residential fires which in return leads to a greater number of injuries and deaths even though as a small number and single casualties are affected over time. Bryan 2002, also asserts that with the early focus been on regulatory approaches when it comes to issues related to fire safety and it reflects the supremacy of engineering since it tend to offer a number of solutions. Engineering was used to solve the problems of mounting developed centers with increasing populations and amplified dangers from fire. Industrial development led to rising use of numerous tenancies high rise buildings as some of them became working places and other dwellings places. The later use of behavioral science in the study of fire occurred from wider use in the 1950’s past the traditional psychological locale of study. As a result, the existing performance based fire codes came as a result of combination of engineering and behavioral methods in which emotional factors are progressively been accepted as having a harmonizing role in the development of successful reactions to the threats that are posed by fire incidents. The study on the cause of fire has not been taken seriously by researchers. One central feature of engineering tradition is that it tends to focus more on the management of the effects that are brought about by fire rather than focus more on the causes. However the viewpoint that human agency is entirely ‘accidental’ which has, until lately, outshined the deliberation of causes owing to a human being ‘error’ had directed individuals into focusing on preventive measures as a mechanical engineering contemplation sooner than as a feature of training and management (Canter 1980). Development of community safety Over time community safety has development to a great level in that the community now places a high value for it. Development of community safety has developed in that currently a great number of people tend to take all the necessary measures so as to ensure that they live in a secure and safe community. In relation to this all the people who are concerned with community safety have adapted measures such as emergency response and educating the community what they are supposed to do so as to maintain safety in the areas that they live in Panic as a response to fire Fire is an inveterate plague throughout the history of humans. Numerous blazes have inflicted terrible costs on communities as well as on organizations all over the globe, and also on a large number of great cities all over which have been destroyed by fire. A popular representation of these catastrophes is of a general population running away in a situation of terror and dismay. Such popular insights of panic have extensively tinted thoughts on fire safety, in particular in places which are highly concentrated for example, in the urban centers and also in places of public congregation. Traditionally, the management of fires that involves a lot of people place a lot of emphasis on tackling ‘panic’ and the urgent need to make certain that the crowds are orderly and that they are moved securely to safe places. This importance over time achieved prevalence in various kinds of fires since high loss of life was accredited to confusion, panic as well as to the lack of an orderly behavior (e.g. Coconut Grove Night Club, 1942; Iroquois Theatre, 1903; Beverley Hills Supper Club, 1977). In the above examples high loss of life was not only as a result to the great exposure to fire (i.e. burns, inhalation of toxic smoke and from thermal injuries) but it also came along as a result of crushing as most of the people contained therein tried to escape from the fire (Chertkoff & Kushigian 1999). Whilst panic is detailed as a probable behavior in fires, there exist some debated on the true degree of communal disorganization, and certainly whether it really occurs. Some authors asserts that panic is a myth or of doubtful descriptive value (Quarantelli 1981; Mawson 1979; Keating 1982; Johnson 1988; Sime 1985; Proulx 2001). Most debates relating to panic encompasses the accurateness of explanations of behaviors whilst crowds actually act in panic when an emergency occurs, and on understanding of the reasonableness or else of measures described as that are described as been a result of the panic. Interpretations of actions in definite fire condition propose that panic is not a typical occurrence. Various researches have been carried out in the exploration of a variety of variable that can be said to explain the behavior of individuals in fires. Some of the studies note that, apart from panic, individuals depicts a lack of response in some instances (Bryan 2003; Sime 1980; Proulx 1997, 2002, 2003). The compromise is based on the fact that panic is not a precise phrase to illustrate the behavior of individuals who are confronted with fire, do a good number of people take steps in unreasonable impetuous conduct in such situation (e.g. Sime 1980; Keating 1982; Bryan 2003). To a certain extent, a multifaceted array of behaviors comes into play based on the scrupulous features associated with the fire. In general, it is evident that individuals caught in the fire take actions with selfless, obliging behavior, and wherever inapt behavior is shown, it is mostly as a result of insufficient or vague information about the location and the size of the fire threat. Overview of behaviors in fires The responses of individuals who are confronted with fire tend to be complex, with erratic features coming into play with diverse individuals and groups. Yet traditional deliberations tend to assume consistency in reactions to fire incidents. At the center of this are suppositions that manipulate performance based rules relating to fire safety and accommodating behavioral modeling. Brennan & Thomas (2001) argue that there seems to be an obscurity with the conventional suppositions that dwellers faced by fire will respond to, rather than interact with, fire. The two authors propose a pattern that tends to shift from a reactive model into an interactive one towards fire. In the reactive assumption occupants tend to react to various fire cues such as smoke, safety warning, sounds and developing smoke. This assumption is solely based on the facts that fire growth, cue generation and fire ignition are independents of the occupants, fire seems to be an externally imposed event and lastly the occupants are usually subjected to the fire. In the interactive assumptions occupants of the premises tend to have an interaction with fire and may at times be inadvertently involved with the ignition of the fire. These assumptions ascertains that occupants may be the cause of fire by engaging in certain customary activities, occupants can encourage, facilitate the growth of the fire as well as the speed with which it spreads and there seems to be am primitive connection between humans and fire which may include attempts by human belongs to fight the fire and may eventually lead to fatalities. Popular of fire injuries and fatalities tend to occur in most residential buildings and they are not common in entertainment, occupation and education centers. In the residential fires, occupants of the buildings are more likely to be closely caught up in connections with fire in both its spread and also in its causation in the course of their indirect and direct behavior. Most studies which have been conducted on the behavior in fire have outlined various cognitive, perceptual, emotional and motor procedures that affect the response to fire. These procedures tend to work together with other factors for example culture, socio-economic, age, health and employment status. Bryan observes that the relationship that exists between the social environment and the physical environment in which the behavior tend to occur is complex. The situation seems to be complicated by each individual’s perception of the fire cues, which are said to be influenced by the person’s general knowledge as well as a previous experience with fire. Fire cue are usually a result of a swiftly changing energetic process that constantly alters the decisions been made by the occupants of the building (Bryan 2003). Types of fires There are two most common types of fires which are industrial and residential fires .In the residential fires, most common causes are due to mishandling kitchen activities that involve fire such as cooking. The reason behind the kitchen being a source believed to have many fire hazards is because this is the meeting point of heat, electricity and water (Baselt 2004). The most common type of fire seen in the kitchen is grease fire where grease is known to be dangerous for its nature of spreading quickly with no control. A situation where this kind of fire is seen is when people leave frying pans on the gas unattended. It can also occur when one overheats a cooking pan and if grease gets into contact with fire, there can be serious damage caused. Oven fires and other electrical appliances while in contact with water can also cause massive damage by producing much fire. Faulty electrical appliances and naked electrical wires can be a major cause of electrical fire not forgetting the lighting available in the kitchen. If there is improper wiring that has been done, bulbs might have high voltage which they cannot handle hence breaking the circuit. In residential houses, heaters are known to be the most common cause of fire particularly in the months of December to February (Ward 2004). Coils heaters are the most dangerous because they burn everything around them. Another type of residential fire is smoke related fire where people smoke in places vulnerable to catching fire like in gas stations. Industrial fires are caused by things that can easily consume like papers and cardboards. Materials that have been exposed to oil can also be a major cause of industrial fires. Electrical problems that occur in the industries can be another cause especially in the industrial sector where there is mishandling of electrical material or in situations where there are many switches that have not been properly installed. Any equipment using electricity can be a cause of fire in industries. In case of machines that have not been attended for long hence have no adequate lubrication are prone to catching fire due to the defects that it might have mechanically. Specific risk factors In the literature review, various risk factors have been identified that are the major causes of fire. Though having a concentrated study on one specific country, the factors are a representation of all other countries that have experienced accidental fires both in the residents and factories. In the following study, there will be identification of the various factors that are associated with fire accidents. Smoking For many years, tobacco has been used as a recreational drug where there were proper ways of disposal but over the years, changes have emerged where cigarette smokers have improper ways of disposing them. In a Canadian health journal published in 2002, most fires in Canada were as a result of careless use of fire by smokers which caused more than 70 people being killed in a year. Holborn (2001) states that compared to industrial deaths caused by fire, most residential deaths were as a result of fire caused by careless smoking. Alcohol Alcohol affects an individual’s way of coordinating things and as a result causes cognitive impairment where there is no coordination of activities one does. Even in low consumption, alcohol has been said to cause hazardous effects when it comes to fire breakouts. In a study which was conducted by Schmidt and De Lint (1972), the risk of being exposed to fire when one is in a drunken condition is 9.7 times more than a person who is sober. Kawamini et al (1990) says that the role of alcohol as a fire factor has not only been caused by physiological effects but is also as a result of pharmacological effects that suppresses the immune system. FEMA (2003) said that fire causalities emerge as a result of problematic and careless drinking behavior. As a result, FEMA advises that there should be increased awareness to alcohol users. Socioeconomic status Some of the literature that exists relating to socioeconomic factors that were attributed to fire were conducted in the late 1970.The level of income is a major cause of fire risk. Schaenman et al (1977) attempted to establish and analyze the relationship between fire outbreaks and the level of income. In their findings, the authors established that there were differences in different cities on the rates of fires experienced. Among the factors that caused variation in causing fire was the presence of parents in the houses or the number of children under the minority age that lived with both parents. Poverty was also another factor that would cause residential fire rates to increase which had a link with people who were under-educated. Compared to the people who had a good education and had high income levels, the study showed that there was low risk of fire outbreak in their households compared to the low income and illiterate people. Karter and Donner (1978) in their study concluded that there was a relationship between the socioeconomic characteristic and the building characteristic which was a cause of increased fire risks. Buildings are most concentrated in cities which are very sensitive when it comes to population shifts. Most people who move into the cities where there are isolated houses without safety measures when it comes to fires are mostly poor income earners while the middle and high income earners move to the suburbs where there is safety precaution observed. In his conclusion the quality of housing unit matters a lot when it comes to safety in fires. Age related risks Both the aged and the young are the people who can be adversely affected by fire risks. This is because they are weak and vulnerable to accidents and at the same case they have little or no knowledge in handling fire situations. When it comes to the aged, they have slow response even if they are aware of fire accidents. Robert(1995) says that the young are frequently exposed to fire accidents because they have limited movement as most of them are confined in their beds .They also have limited knowledge when it comes to experimenting with fire or anything that is flammable. The young are very vulnerable and do NOT have the ability to recognize where fire threat can occur. Sekizawa (2004) says that even though they can be easily saved from fire accidents, they depend on adults which can be a confusing situation if the rescuers are people under the influence of alcohol. Williams (1998) claims that the aged present the same risk that children have as they have limited movement and response to notice where there are easy exit points in case of fire emergencies. They have declined physical ability which indicates that there is a need for added care when they are alone. Their judgment and alertness is also difficult and delayed making them have difficulties in responding to fire events. Due to their old age, they are unable to detect places that they can be vulnerable to fire hence engage in risky activities such as overheating food and placing heaters in highly flammable surfaces. Study on types of fires in UAE In the United Arab Emirates County, the type of fire that is mostly experienced is industrial fire due to its growth in the industrial sector not forgetting that this region is an oil producing region. This therefore indicates that the likelihood of experiencing fire incidents is high hence adequate measures should be taken in order to enhance safety.UAE as a country is known to be the largest oil producer and as a result many people who are residents in this country use fuel made from oil or petroleum products.LPG gas that is mostly used raises high risk security when it comes to fires experienced in both residential and industrial settings. Starting from its handling to its usage, the gas is a major threat in human activities and a major cause of accidents. Community safety is wanting when it comes to being prepared for such kind of fires which has become a concern to the government and other stakeholders concerned.UAE has come up with a risk against fire security where there is adequate preparedness when it comes to rescuing missions of fire accidents. In the UAE country, it is hard to predict the cause because many factors are attributable to fire; insecurity in industries has been a major cause where there are accidents that can be caused as a result of terrorist activities. Over the past years, fire safety has become an issue where it has prompted the country to improve on their security levels when it comes to fire safety. Mentioned earlier, industrial fires are mostly common than residential fires and in a study carried out by. Manuel (2003), Close to 10 warehouses in the Sharjah industrial area experienced fire breakout and later in September, 2 industrial fires broke out in the same region. Other regions affected by industrial fires are Jebel Ali where textile industries caught fire. Residential buildings such as Tecom also experienced fire. With the above information, the government has taken basic steps in ensuring that every individual is safe when handling fire matters. Effects of improved community safety Community safety seems to be a core aspect that all communities should embrace so as to ensure that they live in a community that is secure and safe. With an improvement in community safety, there have been fewer risks experienced in fires as more measures have been adopted to cope with fire issues. People working and leaving near industrial sites have adopted measures that have been successful in case of accidental fires. Materials used in building seem to be less prone to fire and thus there seems to be fewer instances of fires. Another effect of community safety is that since it is improved investments are high and thus leading to employment opportunities for the people living around the industrial sites thus better living standards for them. References Appy, M 2002, ‘Panic is a Misunderstood Concept’, National Fire Protection Agency Journal, vol. 54. Baselt, R. C 2004 Disposition of Toxic Drugs and Chemical in man. 7th Edition. Chemical Toxicology Institute; CA. Brennan, P & Thomas, I 2001, Victims of Fire? Predicting Outcomes in Residential Fires, In Human Behaviour in Fire: Proceedings of the 2ndt International Symposium, Interscience Communications, Boston, London. Bryan, J 2002, ‘A Selected Historical Review of Human Behaviour in Fire’, Fire Protection Engineering, vol. 16. Bryan, J 2003, Human Behaviour and Fire, National Fire Protection Agency, Quincy, MA. Canter, D 1980, Fires and Human Behaviour, John Wiley & Sons, London. Chertkoff, J & Kushigian, R 1999, Don’t Panic: The Psychology of Emergency Egress and Ingress, Connecticut, Praeger. Council of Canadian Fire Marshals 2000, Annual Report: Fire Losses in Canada. Council of Canadian Fire Marshals and Fire Commissioners, Ottawa. Health Canada 2002, Regulatory Proposal for Reducing Fire Risks from Cigarettes: A Consultation Paper. Tobacco Control Programme, Ottawa. Holborn, P.G 2001, The Real Fire Library: Analysis of Fatal Fires 1996-2000.London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority. London. Johnson, N 1988, ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater: A Descriptive Analysis of the Emergence of Panic’, Int. J. Mass Emergencies & Disasters, vol. 6, pp. 7-26. Karter, Jr., Micheal J & Donner, A 1978, The Effects of Demographics on Fire Rates. Fire Journal, 72, 1 p.53-65. Keating, J 1982, ‘The Myth of Panic’, Fire Journal, vol. 147, pp. 57-61. Manuel, J 2003, 'The quest for fire: hazards of a daily struggle', Environmental Health Perspectives, 111, 1, pp. A28-A33. Mawson, A 1979, Panic Behaviour: A Review and a New Hypothesis. 9th World Congress of Sociology. (Cited in Feinberg and Johnson, 2001). 'Medical school damaged by fire' 1992, Lancet, 340, 8814, p. 300 Proulx, G 1997, ‘Misconceptions about Human Behaviour in Fire Emergencies’, Canadian Consulting Engineer, pp. 36-38. Proulx, G 2001, Occupant Behaviour and Evacuation, NRC Report NRCC-44983. Proulx, G 2002, ‘Cool under Fire’, Fire Protection Engineering, vol. 16, pp. 23-25. Proulx, G 2003, Playing With Fire: Understanding Human Behaviour in Burning Buildings, ASHRAE Journal, vol. 45, pp. 733-35. Quarantelli, E 1981, Panic Behaviour in Fire Situations: Findings and a Model from the English Language Literature, University of Delaware, Disaster Research Centre. Roberts, I 1995, Deaths of Children in House Fires. British Medical Journal.311:1381-82 Schaenman et al 1977, Procedures for improving the Measurement of Local Fire Protection Effectiveness. Boston: National Fire Protection Association, p. 53-71. Schimind, W & De Lint, J. A 1972, Causes of Death in Alcoholics .Quarterly journal on Studies on Alcohol.33, 1, p. 171-185. Sekizawa, A 2004, Care of Vulnerable Populations: Who are Vulnerable to Fire and What Care is needed for their Safety? (In Human Behaviour in Fire: Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium, Belfast. London: Interscience.) Shields, T & Proulx, G 1999, The Science of Human Behaviour: Past Research Endeavors, Current Developments and Fashioning a Research Agenda, IAFSS Conference, Poitiers. Sime, J 1980, The Concept of Panic. (In Canter, D. (Ed). Fires and Human Behaviour. John Wiley & Sons, London. Ward, C 2004, Quiet Disasters: House fires Destroy Lives Every Day. Disaster Relief. Consultation org. Williams, D 1998, New Study Shows Who Survives in Fatal Residential Fires. Read More