Human Behaviour as the Most Significant Cause of Common Instances of Fire - Coursework Example

Topic: Human behaviour Human behaviour has been shown to be the most significant cause of common instances of fire. Studies done in this area indicate that more than 80% of the reported cases of fires are attributable to human error (Duncan, 2005). Similarly, Elaine (2000) reports that rural fire loses can be up to six times greater than when it occurs on city property. Researchers have therefore classified these human related causes as either individual related or group related. At the outset, factors that are classified as relevant to the individual are numerous in comparison to the latter. Thus individuals’ omissions either willfully or accidentally in their actions have contributed to devastating occurrences. Common place accidents such as leaving an iron box on, a dropped cigarette or an electric heater left too close to flammable material have been reported to be major cause of fire fatalities in private residences (Grosse and Malvern, 2004). Consequently, most cigarettes’ related fires begin as a result of the smoker’s carelessness. Similarly, electricity is another commonly reported cause of fire in residential places due to human errors. This has been explained by (Grosse and Malvern, 2004) as emanating from either blown fuses or over warming of hot plugs and sockets. Faulty electrical wiring with exposed naked wires in the wall due to poor workmanship has also been reported to result in short circuiting, consequently starting a fire. Moreover, numerous reports have variously faulted the habit of leaving appliances like lamps, ovens and even baby monitors unplugged for over 24 hours a day. Grosse and Malvern (2004) explain that these implements have occasionally shorted out starting a fire. In the same vein, leaving fireplaces and heating devices such as pots, burners, stoves and lighted candles unattended in rooms have frequently resulted in devastating consequences according to the views of Duncan (2005). Research findings have associated majority of these causes to particular rooms in private residences. Duncan (2005), Elaine (2000) and Grosse and Malvern (2004) have variously demonstrated that the kitchen is the number one cause of domestic fires since it contains numerous hazardous items like the frying pans that can cause fire easily. Furthermore, majority of the mentioned risky items are probably stored in the kitchen. Overloading extension cords in the bedroom with electrical devices such as electric blankets or warmers and heaters with no lab-approval have significantly increased fire risks in the bedroom (Grosse and Malvern, 2004). Finally, Elaine (2000) has stated that since storage areas such as attics, basements and the garage usually contain fire hazards such as gasoline and other flammable liquids, they form high risk zones in residential buildings. Considering the factors which are relevant to group dynamics in regards to human behaviours in response to fires, it is worthy noting that their behaviours are considerably varied. As is the case, there are causes of fire that are associated with groups of individuals as opposed to those related to the individual. Although these factors may be common, it may be noted that children and grandchildren playing with matches are a major source of home fires as illustrated by Elaine (2000). Accordingly, burns are the number one cause of accidental deaths in children under two years. Certainly, matches and lighters in the hands of young children have been identified as a significant factor in fire fatalities. To moderate this problem, Maitra and Sweeney (1996) advise that enlightening parents and grandparents to the seriousness of this issue is of vital importance. Students in boarding schools have been reported to have trouble in fitting comfortably with the numerous social groupings found in the school setup. Many have been found to demonstrate deviant behaviours by organising and participating in school unrests which have resulted in many arson cases. In view of this development, students are found to react differently in response to instances of fire in school buildings as explained by Maitra and Sweeney (1996). Majority interfere with the scene of the fire in the confusion to save their lives, thereby frustrating investigation efforts. It is thus highly recommended to train groups of individuals on evacuation skills in case of a fire outbreak in an effort to aid in the investigation process. This notwithstanding, engineers and architects have made basic assumptions about the occupant behaviour that may have little or no basis in behavioural literature (Grosse and Malvern, 2004). Common sense assumes that occupants of a burning building will instantaneously leave it upon the sounding of the fire alarm system (Cote, 2003). This assumption has been found to be misplaced since even those occupancies with elaborate organizational structures (Grosse and Malvern, 2004) like schools have been found very wanting. Thus to mitigate on the problem of group dynamics in their response to fire, it is inherent to develop human behaviours related to evacuation and refuge-finding in the group. Grosse and Malvern (2004) state that foremost on the agenda is to “focus on behaviours that cause or prevent fires such as occupant firefighting and/or leaving doors open/closed to enhance the evacuation/refuge process”. It is most critical for the group to nurture behaviours that increase or reduce harm as explained by Elaine (2000). Cote (2003) on one hand holds that a timeline is of the essence in ensuring successful evacuation of a group. Cote (2003) further states that “it is clear that each timeline generally depicts the evacuation process wherein occupants become aware of a building fire emergency and experience a variety of mental processes as they plan to reach a place of safety”. During this time, it is explained that people would attempt to alert others as well as check on family members before exiting to a safe location (Maitra and Sweeney, 1996). Fires have been known to produce devastating effects both on lives and the environment in general. May it be accidental or intentional fire as the case may be in pasture management, fires if not correctly checked may get out of control and reign havoc. As is the case with other fires, wildfires are predisposed by the presence of adequate fuels that are an integral part of most wild lands (Duncan, 2005). This is amplified by the fact that all vegetation is potential fuel whether alive or after death. According to Westerkamp (2003), the single most important factor controlling the flammability and consumption of fuels is their moisture content which is largely regulated by environmental factors. In view of this, good understanding of the behaviour and characteristics of most fires is crucial both for managing and predicting the effects of fire (Westerkamp, 2003). But regrettably, many fire behaviours are not directly related to characteristics whose effects are easily predictable. All in all, the impacts of fire are varied but largely oscillate between lives of organisms and the environment. The most outstanding effects of fire are found to be associated with lose of live and property particularly if it is in residential and commercial premises. Research findings by Duncan (2005) and Westerkamp (2003) on wild land fires show that terrestrial wildlife and habitat are adversely affected by fire whose effects are nearly instantaneous. Thus some wildlife species are able to adapt to the rapid change in environment while some cannot (Duncan, 2005). It is further demonstrated that blazing fires produce large volumes of dark smoke which contain injurious chemicals and hence a health hazard to human beings and other animals. Additionally, smoke coats buildings and vegetation reducing their aesthetic value and consequently increasing the cost of maintenance (Westerkamp, 2003). Alternatively, fire has impacted negatively on soils, water, and watersheds on extremely varying degrees. In cases of accelerated erosion due to burned vegetation cover, large volumes of soil are deposited in water bodies leading to siltation, thus affecting aquatic life. On another note, plants are viewed as recipients of the devastating effects of fire. But it is argued that the immediate effects of fire can be modified by post-fire weather and animal use (Duncan, 2005). Fire can cause remarkable and abrupt changes in vegetation, eradicating some species or causing the establishment and re- establishment of others that had not been there before the fire (Westerkamp, 2003). “The habitat for some species is greatly improved, while for others it may be degraded if not eliminated, and there will be endless variation in between” states Westerkamp (2003). This principal has beneficial qualities that have been utilized by pasture managers in improving their graze lands. In a concluding note therefore, mitigating measures can be through the reduction of excessive fuel loads manually or by use of prescribed fires (Cote, 2003). Alternatively, widespread use of fire breaks around wooden structures and a plethora of other valuable resources around the premises which are deemed highly susceptible. This is purposely to avoid fire effects on the listed valuables. In fire investigation, it is critical for the fire investigator to be meticulous and methodical so as to establish the origin and cause of fire. The success of the fire investigation process is hindered by the fact that fire often destroys the key evidence of its origin as explained by Cote (2003). This is further complicated by the mere fact that a fire investigator dependents on the fire remains available to build on the sequence of events that might have led to the start of the fire (Elaine, 2000). Most of these said remains are destroyed in the fire but whatever the case; the investigation process must be conducted by all means. It is recommended that fire investigators work in conjunction with other professionals to cover every aspect of the investigation process. According to Cote (2003), fire investigators conduct their investigations in line with the recommended approach. First, the assignment is received and the investigator is notified of what is expected, after which the investigator plans the investigation and assembles tools, equipment, and personnel (Cote, 2003). The scene is examined and data is collected as explained by Cote (2003) where physical evidence is collected, documented, tested, and evaluated. Finally, the scientific method approach is used to analyse the information obtained according to Cote (2003). Similarly, Cote (2003) names the International Association of Arson Investigators, the National Association of Fire Investigators, the National Volunteer Fire Council and career systems as the different fire safety agencies and personnel participating in fire investigation process. Presenting a critique of specific fire incidents where particular characteristics have influenced the outcome, it becomes imperative for the author to analyse the various handicaps encountered by fire investigators in resolving fire cases. Various reasons have been proffered by researchers as to why fire cases are deemed the most difficult crime to prove (Westerkamp, 2003). It has constantly been indicated that the evidence of the crime is destroyed by fire hence making it difficult for the investigators to start off. Moreover, it is almost impossible for witnesses to see the arsonist start the fire and consequently investigations are rendered ineffective (Cote, 2003). In addition to lack of reliable fire data (Cote, 2003), public agencies involved in the fire problem must cooperate to develop an effective response. Elaine (2000) further suggests that there should be a strong and reliable data dissemination system amongst the involved agencies in the fire investigation. Since firefighters are the first to arrive at the fire scene, Westerkamp (2003) argues that they must be adequately trained to securely handle the fire scene. The constitution need to be clear on the procedures and protocols to be followed in fire handling process to avoid the confusion observed amongst the various agencies involved in the process (Grosse and Malvern, 2004). This should go hand in hand with the clarification of the prosecuting arm of the government in fire cases to stem conflict of interests with insurance companies. It is further indicated by Grosse and Malvern (2004) that insurance companies have been carrying out speedy settlement of claims before the conclusion of the official fire investigation to frustrate the due process of law. This can be resolved through enhanced coordination between public and private fire investigators (Cote, 2003). It is also with regret that insurance immunity law protects the insurance industry from lawsuits even when involved in gross professional misconduct. This, according to Grosse and Malvern (2004) can only be mitigated through encouraging dual investigation. In addition to this, the general public must be sensitized and made aware of the nature and extent of the fire problem to make it a collective responsibility since the cost of every fire is totally borne by the public (Cote, 2003). List of references Cote, A., 2003. Fire Protection Handbook. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy: MA. Duncan, K., 2005. The Causes of Fire Damage. Ezine Publishing Co. NY: New York. Elaine, L., 2000. Fires. Scholastic Library Publishing. Grosse, L and Malvern, F., 2004. Fire Safety in Buildings. National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, Washington, DC. Maitra, A and Sweeney, G., 1996. Are schools safer for children than public places? J Accid Emerg Med; 13:196-7. Westerkamp, T., 2003. Stopping Fire Where it Starts. Maintenance Solutions; Jun 2003 Read More