Integrated Fire Disaster Risk Reduction: A Literature Review

Prof. Dr. Vladimir M. Cvetković – Disaster Risk Management Expert Vladimir M. Cvetković – Expertise in Disaster Risk Management and Security

UDC: 351:614.84(497.11)

Review paper

Diplomacy and Security

Cvetković, V. M., Protić, D., & Stefanović, D. INTEGRATED FIRE DISASTER RISK REDUCTION: A LITERATURE REVIEW. Diplomatija I bezbednost, 37.

Volume VI Number 2/2023. Page: 37-70.

Vladimir M. CvetkovićDarko Protić2

Dejan Stefanović3

INTEGRATED FIRE DISASTER RISK REDUCTION: A LITERATURE REVIEW

Abstract

All over the world, different types of fires do not cease to cause serious material and non-material consequences, forcing people and their institutions to design and implement various preventive (construction, mechanical, electrical, architec- tural, etc.) measures with the aim of mitigating the risk of such events. Using an integrated disaster risk reduction approach ensures a higher level of efficiency in mitigating the likelihood and consequences of future fires. The subject of the paper is a comprehensive analysis and description of various preventive fire protection measures, fire protection systems with reference to equipment, education programs in the field of fire protection and training of citizens, preparedness for response as well as tactical elements for effective response in disasters caused by fires. In order to carry out a review of the literature on the integrated reduction of the risk of disasters caused by fires, a historical and comparative method were used, as well as a content analysis method. The results of the literature review can be used to improve the reduction of the risk of disasters caused by fires in Serbia.

Keywords: disasters, fires, risk reduction, mitigation, prevention, response, reaction, tactical elements.

 

University of Belgrade, Faculty of Security, Belgrade (Serbia); Scientific and Professional Society for Risk Management in Emergency Situations, Belgrade (Serbia); International Institute for Dis- aster Research, Belgrade; vmc@fb.bg.ac.rs.

RS Ministry of Internal Affairs, Belgrade (Serbia); Scientific and Professional Society for Risk Management in Emergency Situations, Belgrade (Serbia); proticd91@gmail.com.

Ministry of Internal Affairs, Belgrade (Serbia); Scientific and Professional Society for Risk Man- agement in Emergency Situations, Belgrade (Serbia); destefanovic@gmail.com.

INTRODUCTION

Although fire throughout history has played a fundamental role in improv- ing the conditions of the everyday life of mankind, by providing protection, de- veloping technology and industry, it also represented a permanent danger from the occurrence of disasters caused by fires (Cavallini, Papagni, & Preis, 2007), in addition to other sources of safety threats (Jevtić, 2019; Jovićević, 2021; Krga, 2019; Vučić, 2020). Fire research is, therefore, of great use for producing knowl- edge about the ways and reasons for their occurrence and development in certain ways, the effectiveness of various safety measures and the reasons for their (in)ef- fectiveness, for learning about the likely behavior of people in fires, as well as discovering new trends in society and their implications for fire protection. Fire data are valuable to various branches of fire safety science as they lead to more proactive fire management as well as revisions to regulations in this area (Steen- Hansen, Storesund, & Sesseng, 2020). Regardless of the type of disaster, the dis- aster management process usually consists of four life cycles – mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. The disaster management paradigm has re- cently shifted its focus from disaster relief to disaster preparedness, risk mitigation, and vulnerability reduction (Kwon & Ryu, 2020).

A large number of residential fires in the past were the result of careless dis- posal of smoking materials in waste paper baskets, as well as a lack of prevention and safety regulations (Cavallini et al., 2007; Leistikow, Martin, & Milano, 2000). Although, as a result of the ban on smoking in most buildings, such fires have be- come less frequent, electronic office equipment, i.e. the use of faulty, modified or unapproved electrical equipment, malfunctioning of the electricity distribution sys- tem, insufficient space between the electrical heating equipment and combustible materials, etc. have become the main causes of fires in residential buildings in the modern world (Rather). The critical concern of residential fires is illustrated by the fact that 39.7% of all fires occur there, to which society has responded in a variety of ways, including firefighter interventions, insurance, building rules, fire hazard education, control of the use of materials and products in buildings and building de- sign to resist the effects of fire (Vučić, 2020; Xin & Huang, 2013).

Many empirical studies have shown that the preparedness of residents (Proroković, 2018; Jerić, 2021) for disasters is crucial for their coping with the impact of disasters (Godschalk, Rose, Mittler, Porter, & West, 2009; Hoffmann & Muttarak, 2017; Iftikhar & Iqbal, 2023; Janković, Sakač, & Iričanin, 2023; Lin- dell, 2013; Rajani, Tuhin, & Rina, 2023; Xu et al., 2019). One of the prominent ways to mitigate the threat of disasters is the personal preparedness of citizens. Despite this, a large degree of unpreparedness of states and citizens for disasters

is evident, which resulted in increasing emphasis on the importance of researching the way people perceive and deal with dangers, instead of focusing exclusively on physical dangers (V. Cvetković, Adem, & Aleksandar, 2019; Gaillard , Liam- zon, & Villanueva, 2007; Mercer, Kelman, Lloyd, & Suchet‐Pearson, 2008; Ocal, Cvetković, Baytiyeh, Tedim, & Zečević, 2020; van Manen, 2014).

Historically, the focus of fire preparedness research has primarily been on identifying the most effective ways of communicating disaster risk and encour- aging preparedness behavior through public campaigns and programs for disaster education and risk communication (Akter, Roy, & Aktar, 2023; Baruh, Dey, & Dutta, 2023; Cvetković, Romanić, & Beriša, 2023; Sergey & Gennadiy, 2022; Shibru, Operea, Omondi, & Gichaba, 2022). Today, new possibilities for inform- ing and improving community preparedness for extreme events have been created through technologies based on the Internet and mobile devices, although the in- sensitivity of information to the social context often appears as their drawback (Verrucci et al., 2016). That is why the first step in the implementation of effective information and preparedness strategies, based on new technologies, is to identify the different levels of vulnerability of individuals and households and the factors that influence the way of preparation, response and recovery from a disaster (El- Mougher, 2022; Hossen, Nawaz, & Kabir, 2022; Kabir, Hossain, & Haque, 2022; Mohammed & Maysaa, 2022; Odero & Mahiri, 2022; Podder, Hasan, & Islam, 2022; Teo, Goonetilleke, Ahankoob, Deilami, & Lawie, 2018).

DEFINITION AND CLASSIFICATION OF FIRES

In addition to endangering human lives, fire disasters cause significant economic and environmental damage, while their occurrence is generally associ- ated with various human errors or system failures (Muhammad, Ahmad, & Baik, 2018). Fire is one of the main disasters in the urban environment (Rather), as well as in rural communities, especially among those who live in wooden housing structures and have a lower socioeconomic status, that thus often bear a higher level of disaster risk (Chan et al., 2018). Over the past decade, the number of natu- ral and technological disasters has increased manifold. According to statistics, the number of disasters per year increased by 60% in the period 1999-2001, compared to the previous period from 1994 to 1998. The greatest increase was recorded in countries of low economic development, where an increase of 142% was regis- tered (Khan, Vasilescu, & Khan, 2008), although the prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting of fires (Lambie, Best, Tran, Ioane, & Shepherd, 2015). Fires cause more than 300,000 deaths annually worldwide, and millions of people

are left with permanent injuries: around 95% of fire-related deaths are in low- and middle-income countries (Twigg, Christie, Haworth, Osuteye, & Skarlatidou, 2017). Also, approximately 80% of all fire deaths in Europe and the United States occur in domestic settings (Hahm, Knuth, Kehl, & Schmidt, 2016).

The Law on Fire Protection defines fire as a process of uncontrolled com- bustion that endangers the life and health of people, material goods and the en- vironment (“Službeni glasnik RS”, No. 111/09, 20/15, 87/18). According to Cvetković (2020), fires can be classified based on several different criteria, such as size: small, medium, large, catastrophic, that is, block; places of origin: internal and external; while the stages of fire development are divided into the initial stage, the flare-up stage, and the live fire pits stage. According to the international clas- sification of fires, based on the fuel, fires are divided into 5 basic categories A – F: class A includes fires of solid combustible materials, class B fires of flammable liquids, class C fires of flammable gases, class D fires of combustible metals and to class E oil and grease fires (Ponomarenko et al., 2019).

In the last 40 years, several large fires have occurred in Brazil, resulting in human and material losses. This led to community-led initiatives that, together with gaps in national legislation, caused a diversity of building fire safety regula- tions that were applicable only in certain cases (Rodrigues, Rodrigues, & da Silva Filho, 2017). The absence of a central authority in emergency risk management and the lack of coordination within and between fire-related organizations is the reason for an inefficient and ineffective risk management system. At the state level, mitigation measures are oriented towards structural aspects, neglecting non- structural elements such as knowledge and capacity of individuals/community. By increasing individual response capacities, the impact of fires could be signifi- cantly reduced (Khan et al., 2008). The case of Delhi, a city of regulatory chaos, poverty, ignorance and non-compliance, provides evidence that well-run fire ser- vices, together with market incentives and solutions, manage to provide relatively high levels of protection, despite dysfunctional or non-existent legislation (Cobin, 2013; Cvetković and Protić, 2021).

Current fire protection measures lead to uneven levels of fire protection in buildings, provide minimal risk mitigation strategies and do not take into ac- count contemporary fire challenges, risks and threats. Essential measures to miti- gate the risk of fire in buildings include reliable fire protection systems, enforcement of building codes, proper use of electrical appliances, and raising public awareness. Research shows that it is necessary to conduct training to im- prove fire safety, as well as the introduction of new performance-based materials (Kodur, Kumar, & Rafi, 2019). The European standard EN 13501-1 provides a fire resistance classification for all products and building elements. Construction

products are classified in Euroclasses A1, A2, B, C, D, E and F. Products classified in A1 and A2 classes are non-combustible materials (cement, concrete, glass, stone, ceramics), while materials from B to F are combustible. in ascending order (European Standard EN 13501-1:2010).

In Europe, there is a trend towards increasing the quality and enforcement of regulations. In 2017, the EU Commission established the European Fire In- formation Exchange Commission (FIEP). The platform brings together member states to facilitate the exchange of information between them, and is planned to be used to promote best practices across Europe. The Alliance of Modern Build- ings is a framework that aims to provide member states with a clear basis for building legislation, with a structured list of elements to achieve fire protection in high-rise and mid-rise buildings. This framework mandates respect for the prin- ciple of subsidiarity (de Hults & El Houssami). The core of fire protection systems in buildings are technical and scientific knowledge applied in the fields of engin- eering, architecture and urban planning, because despite multidisciplinary knowl- edge that includes human behavior in fire situations, fire protection in residential buildings involves the application and maintenance of active and passive protec- tion systems, as well as training emergency personnel (Rodrigues et al., 2017).

The fire protection strategy for the period 2002-2017 assesses the situation in the field of fire protection in the Republic of Serbia as unsatisfactory. The fol- lowing are recognized as the most important problems in this document: insuffi- cient preparation of protection and rescue entities for the implementation of preventive measures; lack of risk management plans; the safety culture of the population is at an extremely low level; the number of firefighters and rescuers is below the European level, the traffic structure is unsatisfactory, as is the capacity of the public water supply network. In the same document, it was proposed to im- prove the current situation in the fire protection system by engaging all fire pro- tection entities through the exchange of relevant information (“Službeni glasnik RS”, No. 21/2012). In order to achieve an optimal state of safety in the field of fire protection, the strategy states the achievement of the following specific goals: adopt new legal solutions; improve the system of preventive protection; improve meteorological monitoring and forecasting of meteorological conditions for the occurrence of fires in forest areas; ensure functional integration of all services; improve cooperation, coordination and availability of information; improve the speed and efficiency of response, improve international and regional cooperation, improve the knowledge and technical equipment of the subjects of the fire pro- tection system, develop the safety culture of citizens (Cvetković and Protić, 2021). Fire risk can be seen as the probability of fire occurrence and the consequences or disruption/damage that can be expected if a fire occurs (Watts & Hall, 2016).

STRUCTURAL AND NON-STRUCTURAL FIRE PROTECTION PREVENTIVE MEASURES

With the aim of reducing the number of fires in residential units, fire pre- vention strategies began to be used massively by fire and rescue services (Shai, 2006; Cvetković and Protić, 2021). In the United Kingdom, the “Safe and Well Checked” program has been developed, by which the person responsible for safety identifies the potential risk in the residential building, informs the tenants what to do to reduce and prevent the risk of fire, creates an evacuation plan in the event of a fire and ensures that there are functional smoke detectors in residential buildings. The program is primarily intended for categories of the population exposed to greater risk, and it also covers other risks that may be present, such as vulnerable categories of the population (Diekman et al., 2008; Cvetković & Protić, 2021).

There are several different preventive measures that can contribute to re- ducing the number of injuries and deaths in residential fires, but there is no reliable information about which measures are effective for which group of residents. As a result, general measures were often applied to all population groups, which turned out to be ineffective compared to the application of specific measures to specific groups, such as the elderly, disabled, children, etc. (Runefors, Johansson & van Hees, 2017). One of the recommendations (Bruck & Thomas, 2008) is to look at the population from the aspect of fire protection and to divide the population into two basic groups that require different strategies. The first group would be the most vulnerable category (elderly, disabled), and the second would be the general public. This division is necessary and important because the effectiveness of measures varies significantly between groups. When it comes to the first group, the installa- tion of a fire suppression system could reduce the risk of fire occurrence by 80%- 85%, and the number of deaths by 14%. Also, these systems should be aimed at protecting the bedroom and kitchen. In the second group, smoke detectors should be promoted, while efforts to improve the performance of these devices should be the responsibility of persons responsible for safety (Bruck & Thomas, 2008). When it comes to smoke detectors, Son (Son, 2014) suggests that heat detectors (slow- sensing) give way to smoke detectors due to their ability to detect fires in the early stages. Also, tests of the effectiveness of smoke detectors showed that photoelectric detectors should have an advantage over ionization detectors, given their signifi- cantly higher reaction speed than ionization detectors in a smoldering fire, while for flaming fires, ionization detectors were slightly faster than optical detectors (Steen-Hansen et al., 2020). The best type of insurance against loss of property and life caused by fire is the adoption of proactive protection measures, a protection and rescue plan combined with different types of fire detection and extinguishing

systems (Nyankuru, Omuterema, & Nyandiko, 2017; Cvetković & Protić, 2021). A very significant step in drastically reducing the number of fires involves shifting the focus from firefighting and emergency response to systematic fire pre- vention. Certainly, such a turnaround requires improvement of education, taking in- itiative, use of statistics, methodology and other tools for systematic prevention, i.e. fire prevention (Rosenberg, 1999). Beringer (Beringer, 2000) found out in his re- search that more than 50% of respondents share the opinion that their homes would be protected by firefighters in the event of a fire. This study points to the need to further develop community awareness, educate the population and focus on building resilience among residents in rural and urban areas. Education and resilience are key to building self-protection in the event of a fire, and taking such actions can greatly facilitate and help the operation of the fire department (Cvetković & Protić, 2021).

The level of protection depends on the readiness of the residents to react in a given situation, but also on the level of preparedness, which includes measures such as evacuation planning, organizing and conducting training and simulations, defining safe exits, safe zones, etc. In the research conducted by Hanea et al. (Hanea & Ale, 2009) it was determined that in facilities where fire response train- ing was conducted once every three years, the chances of not being victims in- creased by as much as 91.4%. These measures can help reduce the time needed to evacuate and encourage residents to move more quickly and provide assistance to those in need. In addition, the fire protection measures taken by the competent fire services are reflected in the existence of a certain number of firefighters in fire units, available equipment and the ability to provide efficient rescue and fire extinguishing (Xin & Huang, 2013; Cvetković & Protić, 2021).

Low-cost housing has the highest number of fire incidents compared to other building types, with the causes of fires being the presence of a large number of ignition sources, inadequate fire-fighting equipment, lack of training of resi- dents on risks and improving safety. Recommendations include considering new room layouts, improving active and passive protection systems, conducting train- ing to improve awareness and knowledge of fire safety (Akashah, Baaki, & Lee, 2017). According to the results of a study conducted by Runefors, Johansson and Van Hees (Runefors, Johansson & Van Hees, 2016), approximately 80%-90% of all fire-related deaths occur in residential areas. The results show that fire sup- pression systems (sprinklers) have the highest percentage of efficiency (68%), followed by detector activated systems in the bedroom and living room (59%) and smoke detectors (37%). In addition, the authors determined that the effective- ness of the measures differs significantly among different population groups, and therefore suggested that a statistical analysis be conducted to analyze the char- acteristics of the population, and then implement adequate protection measures

(Runefors, Johansson & Van Hees, 2016; Cvetković and Protić, 2021). Research conducted in Kenya focused on the effectiveness of fire response training and residents’ response and found that fire safety training is essential to fire prevention, as it provides residents with the knowledge of how different types of fires start and the skills necessary to their suppression and extinction (Nyankuru, Omu- terema, & Nyandiko, 2017; Cvetković & Protić, 2021; Cvetković et al., 2022).

FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS WITH REFERENCE TO FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT

The concept of total fire protection in buildings can be achieved by improv- ing passive building construction for fire protection, active fire protection systems and fire safety management (Chow, 2004). Fire protection measures are usually a combination of active and passive fire protection systems. Active protection systems control fire, i.e. its effects by taking action by an individual or devices that are auto- matically activated. Passive protection measures are those implemented in the con- struction phase of the facility itself. The most important component of passive protection is fire resistance, which prevents the spread of fire and the collapse of the building (Buchanan & Abu, 2017). Preventive protection measures include the use of safe, i.e. fire-resistant materials, wooden furniture (wood has a slower burning process), fire-resistant constructions, ensuring a safe exit and entrance to the build- ing, as well as fire extinguishing agents. Smoke suppression devices should be avail- able in every residential building, as the majority of fire deaths occur as a result of suffocation rather than direct exposure to flames (Chow, 2004).

According to Hall (Hall, 2000), protection and early warning systems play a significant role in reducing the consequences of fires, including smoke detection systems, automatic fire extinguishing systems (sprinklers) and the use of non- combustible materials in construction. However, special safety equipment such as alarms, although designed to give residents enough time to leave the building, is not enough; the safety of the residents to the greatest extent depends on them- selves, whether people are ready to react when a fire occurs (Hall, 2000). Alarms are devices that indicate a situation that requires immediate action and usually send a call for evacuation. There are two types of alarm systems: simple and com- plex. The basic function of simple systems is to warn and alert the residents, while complex systems are networked with certain fire departments to which a direct signal is sent in the event of a fire (OSHA, 2015). Examples include: manual pull stations, sprinkler detectors, smoke detectors, heat detectors, flame detectors, op- tical detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, dry chemical fire extinguishing sys-

tems, wet chemical fire extinguishing systems, carbon dioxide detectors and other gas detection systems ( OSHA, 2015).

The fire protection strategy for tall buildings is fundamentally related to the function of time. It contains two basic components: the time required to exit and the performance of the building. Building performance includes the structure,

i.e. the construction of the building and the equipment that mitigates the spread of fire. Building performance refers to the amount of time a building can withstand the effects of a fire without collapsing while remaining functional. The time as- sociated with evacuation is usually expressed in minutes, while the structural com- ponent is measured in hours. The risk occurs when these two times overlap, that is, if the building collapses during evacuation, as was the case with the World Trade Center (Cowlard, Bittern, Abecassis-Empis, & Torero, 2013).

Research conducted by Juneja (Juneja, 2005) indicated the impact and im- portance of a functional fire protection system in residential buildings. Namely, residential buildings recorded the highest percentage of deaths due to fire (95%), the highest percentage of injuries (80%), the highest percentage of incidents (72%) and the highest level of property losses (59%) due to fire. In residential buildings, there are fire protection systems that control the growth of fire and the spread of smoke, such as ventilation systems, heating systems, smoke extraction systems and sprinklers. Regular maintenance of these systems is crucial if we want reliable activation in the event of an accident. For example, a sprinkler system can signifi- cantly reduce the effects of a fire by suppressing and controlling the fire. Statistics show that fire deaths are reduced by 81% in residential buildings that have a sprinkler system compared to those that do not (Xin & Huang, 2013). Fire sprinkler systems enable early fire detection, control and extinguishing. If properly installed and maintained, fire sprinkler systems are extremely useful in fighting fires. Along with them, it is important to mention the system of fire hoses that supply water for manual fire extinguishing in large buildings. Water is supplied to these systems automatically or via a water supply connection. These systems are extremely im- portant when it comes to the response of the fire crew inside the building itself, while their absence can have catastrophic consequences (OSHA, 2015).

In residential buildings, both active and passive protection measures are used. Active fire protection systems include automatic fire detection and fire sup- pression systems, while the main purpose of passive systems is to try to slow the spread of fire. The goal of using the fire protection system is to keep the tempera- ture in the building below the critical temperature during the fire (so that the elec- trical installations and the structure itself are not endangered), but also to contain the fire in the part where it broke out and prevent further spread (Mróz, Hager, & Korniejenko, 2016). In order to improve active protection systems, Chow proposes

the development and implementation of new technologies for detecting and sup- pressing fire and smoke, equipment for faster movement of firefighters and res- cuers, as well as the implementation of water networks in urban areas for firefighting purposes (Chow, 2004).

The safety of residential buildings is measured by the time it takes to evacuate all occupants outside the building. The shorter the evacuation time, the safer the building is considered. The height of many modern buildings today, com- bined with the limited number of vertical exits, increases the time necessary for evacuation. Therefore, the stairs must be designed as a safe zone that will provide residents with safe evacuation and transition from endangered places to a safe zone. For any fire rescue operation to be successfully carried out, the stairwell must remain free of smoke and heat, and the building structure must be solid, tak- ing into account the time the residents spend in the stairwell during evacuation. Without adequate protection and adequate stair width, when smoke spreads through the building and corridors, evacuation becomes almost impossible. A common method of ensuring that a stairwell is protected from smoke ingress is the installation of a pressure maintenance system (Cowlard et al., 2013). Modern architecture is characterized by glass structures, which could create additional problems in the event of a fire. Cracking and falling of glass due to high tempera- tures would only increase the flow of oxygen and thereby accelerate the combus- tion phase, which would lead to greater material damage and human losses (Chow, 2006). One of the solutions in limiting fires is the use of different materials in construction, such as concrete and plaster. However, although concrete is con- sidered a good insulating barrier, in cases where it is dense and impermeable, it can lead to explosive cracking due to fire. Another group of protective materials are ablative materials used to protect steel structures (Mróz et al., 2016).

The requirements that residential buildings must meet in China in terms of fire protection are as follows: passive construction – use of fire-resistant ma- terials, means of escape and means of access; active protection systems known as fire service installations – alarms and other fire detection systems, fire suppression systems, smoke management systems, auxiliary systems such as basic supply and emergency lighting systems (Chow, 2006). In 16 federal states in Germany, the obligation to introduce smoke detectors has been introduced to reduce the risk of fire in residential buildings. The analysis indicates that the implementation of this measure contributes to saving lives. To analyze the effectiveness of this measure, fire risks are compared before and after the introduction of the obligation to install smoke detectors, and the results should be verified when the practice is transferred to other countries (Festag, 2020).

In order to improve the efficiency of residential fire detection systems, certain authors (Seebamrungsat, Praising, & Riyamongkol) designed and proposed a special building fire detection system. The system uses HSV and YcbCr color models with the ability to distinguish orange, yellow and high light from the back- ground. The HSV color model is used to collect color and light information, while YcbCr is used for light detection and analysis, as it distinguishes bright photos more effectively than any other model. Fire growth is checked based on different frames. The authors state that this system detects fire much faster by tracking and analyzing light, and the end result is a significant reduction in loss of life and property. The accuracy of this system has been experimentally verified to be more than 90%, proving its effectiveness and usefulness. Hagen studied whether a sys- tem of gas sensors and thermocouples was capable of detecting and distinguishing between different types of fires. Research results show that a gas sensor system is capable of detecting a fire faster than a smoke detector system, without an in- creased false alarm rate. In addition, the gas sensor system is able to distinguish between raging fires and smoldering fires and detect sources of disturbance (Hagen & Milke, 2000).

EDUCATION IN THE FIELD OF FIRE PROTECTION AND TRAINING

Unless disaster plans, like those for any other type of rescue operation, are tested in various training programs, made comprehensible to the general public, sup- ported by adequate resources, and updated as necessary, they will be ineffective. The acquisition of emergency capabilities by ordinary people is a sign of civic and cultural progress, but the most important factor of all is disaster preparedness (Masellis, Fer- rara, & Gunn, 1999; Cvetković & Protić, 2021). The importance of advanced disaster preparedness is reflected in saving lives, reducing injuries, preventing damage to property and critical infrastructure, while allowing communities to recover more quickly (Kagawa & Selby, 2012; Petal & Izadkhah; Shaw, Shiwaku, & Takeuchi, 2011). One way to reduce the negative impacts of disasters that is gaining importance is disaster education, which includes education about disaster risks, mitigation strat- egies, and preparedness (Johnson, Ronan, Johnston, & Peace, 2014).

Disaster education should not be limited to school students but should be promoted among families and communities. When developing and providing dis- aster education programs, it is necessary to take into account the needs of all popu- lation groups and their level of preparedness for disasters. In addition, having a network to share current disaster-related information within and outside the family is of great importance (Jung, Kim, & Choi, 2020). The combination of theoretical

and practical activities in school, family, community and self-education programs seems to achieve the best results (Codreanu, Celenza, & Jacobs, 2014; Cvetković & Protić, 2021). Certainly, based on the fact that children are the most vulnerable group in society, disaster education today prioritizes ways to improve their level of resilience and transfer information to reduce disaster risks in their homes (Lid- stone, 1996; Ronan, Alisic, Towers, Johnson , & Johnston, 2015). According to the results of some studies, people never forget what they learned at an early age, therefore it is very useful for people to learn disaster prevention and risk reduction methods in childhood (Collymore, 2011). In addition, children are able to spread messages throughout their society, starting with their parents. Since more than half of the population in many developing countries is under the age of 18, it is possible to convey vital information to the majority of the population through the knowledge, skills and enthusiastic motivation of children. In this regard, it is im- portant to note that the level of acceptance of children by parents in these countries is generally high (Izadkhah & Hosseini, 2005).

Although school fires are a public concern due to the increased incidence, injuries and deaths of students, as well as the destruction of property, they appear to be inadequately prepared for fire disasters (Gichuru, 2013). The safety of school buildings is useful for disaster reduction in the short term, while disaster education can play a crucial role in developing a culture of disaster reduction in the long term (Shiwaku & Fernandez, 2011; Shiwaku, Shaw, Kandel, Shrestha, & Dixit, 2007). Depending on conditions and time, family or school staff may provide first aid and direct the evacuation of children to safety; therefore, the education of children depends entirely on the education of families and schools (Bosschaart, van der Schee, Kuiper, & Schoonenboom, 2016). There is a need to provide dis- aster mitigation knowledge, especially in primary school, and to develop a “safety culture” (Winarni & Purwandari, 2018). According to the results of the study, which indicated the unpreparedness of secondary schools, Gichuru et al. (Gichuru, 2013) recommended the school management to consider adding fire extinguishing equipment to be adequate, as well as its regular inspection; fire extinguishers should be easily accessible, windows should not be barred, exits should be clear of obstacles, fire extinguishers should be enlarged and doors should open out- wards. In addition, head teachers, teachers, non-teaching staff and students should be familiar with the evacuation plans, all stakeholders should be reminded of the evacuation plan, assembly points should be identified and stakeholders informed, schools should have alarm procedures and multiple assembly areas in case of fire. Finally, all stakeholders should be trained in fire safety (Gichuru, 2013).

In recent years, Japan has recognized the importance of disaster prevention education at an early age and has developed disaster prevention training manuals for

primary and secondary schools. There are some educational programs, such as work- shops, drills and maneuvers, operational trainings and preventive measures aimed at children in the community (Aldrich & Benson, 2008). Winarni (Winarni & Pur- wandari, 2018) proposed the integration of a mobile learning application in a primary school that could improve disaster risk reduction capability. An experiment he con- ducted shows the impact of an educational mobile application on students’ under- standing of disaster preparedness. In 2016, interactive exercises were conducted in China and the Philippines as part of the “Save the Children” project, during which they were taught life-saving skills. In China, on this occasion, a learning day was or- ganized in three schools, where children learned about the importance of prepared- ness for responding to disasters. Students had the opportunity to experience earthquake simulation and fire evacuation and to learn practical skills, such as pre- paring a first aid kit (Cvetković, 2019). New Zealand and the USA are countries that have prioritized the education of children at the national level, and for this purpose, various programs have been created that find their application in formal, informal and activities in the local community (Tuladhar, Yatabe, Dahal, & Bhandary, 2015). When it comes to young adults (18-24 years old), the involvement in un-

safe fire behavior is extremely high. Examining the opinions of students at two New Zealand universities about the problem of unsafe behavior and fire use among young adults, as well as the best ways to engage this group in safe fire be- havior, some differences were found between those participants who engaged in unsafe behavior and those who did not, although both groups were similar overall (Lambie, Best, Tran, Ioane, & Shepherd, 2018). Therefore, the authors concluded that campaigns aimed at young adults are likely to be most successful. Young adults’ suggestions for ways to better engage youth in fire safety behavior include better fire safety education, campaigns that highlight the negative consequences of fires, use of fire victims in campaigns, campaigns specifically aimed at young adults, and the use of TV advertising and Facebook (Lambie et al., 2018). Existing literature also suggests that campaigns for young adult populations should be grounded in research and theory, using strategies such as humor, positivity, peer influence, and social norms interventions (Lambie et al., 2015).

Nowadays, among the various methods of education, simulations stand out as one of the most valuable, because they enable users to face real uncertainties and pressures that accompany the decision-making process in all phases of pro- active and reactive prevention or mitigation of disaster risks (Cvetković & Martinović, 2021; Cvetković & Andrić, 2019). The purpose of disaster simulation is: to provide knowledge about the dangers of disasters; increasing disaster aware- ness; checking the readiness of procedures and equipment for disaster manage- ment and reducing the number of victims if a disaster actually occurs (Gunawan

et al., 2019). Fire situations, especially in an enclosed space shared by a large number of people, are characterized by severe limitations in fire-rescue activities due to the rapid growth of fires and difficulties related to ventilation and provision of evacuation routes (Cha, Han, Lee, & Choi, 2012), as and the onset of mental confusion of the population, that is, the so-called “disaster personalities” that must be overcome with experience (Kim & Han, 2018). Complete training for such conditions, which includes reproducing real fire situations, requires enormous so- cial/economic costs, as buildings or roads would have to be closed or new build- ings constructed for training purposes, as well as the possibility of toxic gas poisoning and structural collapse during process. This is precisely why virtual reality-based fire training simulators are critical, providing the general public or inexperienced firefighters or commanders with a broad first-hand experience so that they can make quick decisions and respond safely and organizedly in real- world fire situations (Cha et al., 2012).

The virtual reality fire disaster prevention training system proposed by Ooi et al. (Ooi, Tanimoto, & Sano) consists of evacuation drills, fire training, and comprehensive training. First, VR evacuation drills allow users to learn by gaining experience in fire evacuation methods. Second, users can undergo firefighting training in virtual reality by gaining experience in extinguishing methods. Finally, in general training, users can experience mock fire training based on knowledge gained in evacuation and fire drills. They conducted an experiment by dividing the participants into two groups: one group was trained using existing methods with the use of teaching materials, while the other was trained using the proposed method. They then conducted a comprehensive training and evaluation to inves- tigate whether this system demonstrated an improvement over existing teaching methods. The results showed that the proposed system achieved better results in terms of attention, relevance, confidence and user satisfaction. Furthermore, for the groups trained with the proposed system, the average player evacuation risk during VR comprehensive training was -6.45 p, the fire start time was -10 s less and the user could act safely and quickly against disasters (Ooi et al .). The find- ings of the study conducted by Huseyin et al (Huseyin & Satyen, 2006) also show the importance of fire safety training in improving people’s knowledge of fire safety and their response in the event of a fire which could lead to a reduction in fire casualty rates. Namely, by examining 158 participants between the ages of 18 and 80, they determined that fire protection training increases the level of knowledge about fire safety and the accuracy of fire response. In addition, middle- aged adults responded more accurately to fire than younger and older adults (Hu- seyin & Satyen, 2006) (Cvetković & Protić, 2021).

Tan and colleagues (Tan et al., 2017) investigated disaster preparedness among students at 10 different universities in southern China and found that stu- dents expressed a high desire for disaster preparedness knowledge (85.5% of stu- dents expressed a desire for a systematic course for disasters, while 75.4% expressed willingness to attend such a course), especially for rescue skills. The authors therefore concluded that there is a need for systematic disaster courses focused on rescue skills at all universities, as well as the need to conduct semester exercises for disasters in order to improve education and preparedness. This is particularly important when considering research on the evaluation of the effec- tiveness of educational interventions to increase knowledge about fire risk reduc- tion. Namely, Chan and colleagues (Chan et al., 2018) based on the analysis of questionnaires before, immediately after and 17 months after the intervention de- termined that the knowledge about using a fire blanket, calling the correct tele- phone number for emergencies, turning off unused electrical devices and not using of water for extinguishing electrical fires immediately improved after the inter- ventions. Also, respondents demonstrated a better understanding that fire blankets can fight fires if used appropriately, and that knowledge was maintained at 17 months (Chan et al., 2018). An example of the introduction of such courses is Ok- lahoma State University, which offers two required fire courses annually, in which more than 600 students have enrolled and actively participated (Weir). On the ter- ritory of the Republic of Serbia, in the organization of the Scientific and Profes- sional Society for Risk Management in Emergency Situations4, a large number of online courses are organized, which, among other things, include the acquisition of knowledge about firefighting tactics. Research findings by Lee et al. (Lee et al., 2018) indicate the effectiveness of online fire prevention training and educa- tion in China. Given the vulnerability of hospitals to fires, challenging evacuation, and the fact that face-to-face fire prevention and evacuation training can take healthcare workers’ time away from patient care, they found that this type of fire training can effectively improve healthcare workers’ knowledge of fire prevention and evacuation.

PREPAREDNESS FOR DISASTERS CAUSED BY FIRES

Despite individuals and households reporting awareness of various risks (Perez-Fuentes, Verrucci, & Joffe, 2016), adoption of preparedness measures re- mains low, even in high-risk regions (Joffe et al., 2019), thereby increasing the

 

https://upravljanje-rizicima.com/online-kursevi/

likelihood that they will suffer the cascade of adverse effects that follow a disaster (Perez-Fuentes et al. 2016). This is precisely why citizen participation is recogni- zed as key to all four phases of emergency management (mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery), while the responsibility of local governments is based on the promotion of authentic citizen participation in all phases (Wu, Chang, & Tso, 2016). Personal emergency preparedness can be defined as a set of knowledge, skills, trained behavior as well as appropriate equipment to deal with emergency situations until professional help is present (Goersch & Werner, 2011).

Numerous fires in buildings have confirmed the importance of residents’ behavior for survival (Kobes, Post, Helsloot, & Vries), while the presence of fire- fighting equipment in the household is one of the more significant indicators of fire preparedness (Stumpf, Knuth, Kietzmann, & Schmidt, 2017). Even if an at- tempt to extinguish the fire is not possible or successful, timely detection of smoke is life-saving. That is why, based on the importance of smoke detectors in saving lives, warning residents of fire, and reducing property damage if detected early, “Smoke Detector Day” is celebrated in Germany. Since the start of the campaign to promote the use of smoke detectors in Germany in 2000, smoke detectors have been installed in approximately 50% of German households, and annual fire deaths have been reduced by half (Stumpf et al., 2017). In the US, the frequency and se- verity of wildfires has led agencies, such as the US Forest Service, to encourage residents to protect their homes, property and communities by adopting Firewise recommendations, while their adoption has been linked to the following influencing factors: fire experience, familiarity with the Fire Protection Plan and a high level of risk perception for their community (Wolters, Steel, Weston, & Brunson, 2017). A survey carried out in Nigeria covered 43 public buildings and 108 resi-

dents and found that banks, buildings and hospitals pay the most attention to the provision and maintenance of fire protection equipment. The study also found that nearly 52% of respondents had poor knowledge of the use of safety equipment and concluded with the recommendation that existing fire safety legislation should be implemented and building residents should participate in training on fire safety, first aid in disaster and evacuation process (Adeleye, 2020). According to Cvetković (Cvetković, 2020), in order to improve the safety and preparedness of citizens to react in the event of a fire, they should be educated on how to use fire extinguishers. As a preventive measure, it is necessary to secure flammable materials in basements, attics, corridors of buildings and households. Before leaving the household, it is necessary to check whether all electrical devices are switched off, especially if a long stay outside the residential building is planned. Also, an important prerequisite for protection is the regular maintenance of evacuation passages (Cvetković, 2020). In a similar study conducted in Tanzania, fire preparedness was examined

in terms of the presence of fire-fighting equipment, knowledge and awareness among building users about their use. On that occasion, it was determined that the distance of the fire department is one of the most important factors that in- fluence preparedness and response in emergency situations (Sierra, Rubio- Romero, & Gámez, 2012). More than half of the respondents (51%) of the mentioned study did not know how to handle firefighting tools and equipment; 91% of the respondents indicated that the lack of training and insufficient orien- tation in the building are the reasons for the lack of knowledge about emergency response; another important element examined by the study is whether respon- dents would seek help in the event of a fire. It was noted that as many as 81.5% of respondents do not know the number of the fire department; 63% of respon- dents answered that their first instinctive reaction would be to flee the scene of the accident, while only 22% answered that they would seek help from the fire department (Kobes, Helsloot, De Vries, & Post, 2010). The study conducted by Kihila (2017) focuses on the number of residents in buildings, the presence of combustible materials and the accessibility of a given facility. Namely, it was dis- covered that 40% of the buildings were occupied by a larger number of people than expected, 30% of the buildings had firefighting units that were not in oper- ation, 50% of the buildings had a storage of flammable material, and 90% of the buildings hosted events that gathered more than 100 people in one place, 70% of the buildings did not have enough water to extinguish the fire, and 50% of the buildings did not have easily visible access points for the fire department.

Community-based approaches to disaster preparedness are linked to a politi- cal trend of valuing the knowledge and capacity of local people and represent an in- creasingly important element of disaster management and risk reduction strategies (Allen, 2006). Disaster management agencies invest varying levels of resources in communities to prepare for a range of hazards. Ryan et al. (Ryan, Johnston, Taylor, & McAndrew, 2020) apostrophize the importance of the combined use of a wide range of behavior change techniques, including face-to-face community engagement, as part of the overall effort that Disaster Management Agencies should undertake.

In order to develop an integrated disaster management strategy, which motivates the contribution of citizens and households to fire risk reduction, insight into fire risk mitigation behavior is crucial. Troy (Тroy, Carson, Vanderbeek, & Hutton, 2008) highlights a local database that provides a variety of resources, such as physical, informational, and human, for use in response as a critical component of disaster preparedness. Also, he emphasizes that maintaining such a base can become a joint responsibility of non-governmental organizations in the commu- nity and public and private community organizations. This process is of great im- portance both for mobilizing resources and for assessing local knowledge and

resources and raising awareness in the community. The author concludes that com- munity-based disaster preparedness is strengthened by a combination of appro- priate information technology and collaborative relationships between NGOs and community-based organizations (Troy et al., 2008).

Preparedness studies highlight various programs for fire mitigation, the purpose of which is to increase the awareness of the population and work to mini- mize the chance of damage at the personal and community level. In this regard, installing a fire-resistant roof, creating a defensible space around the house and re- ducing the fuel load in the community are recommended as part of the efforts that residents can take to deal with potential fire hazards (Robinson, 2012). Mileti (Mi- leti, 1999) points to the importance of community examples and sustainable hazard mitigation in terms of moving from emergency management to local responsibility and capability. Also, numerous other advantages of participatory processes are mentioned, such as providing the possibility of generating and distributing informa- tion, developing a sense of community and ideas. An analysis of the various aspects of preparedness and response to the severe fires in Victoria in 2009 suggests that community fire safety programs should emphasize the risks associated with staying in to defend property, and how people should prepare to leave the city safely if a fire threatens (McLennan, Elliott, Omodei, & Whittaker, 2013).

Programs in Australia, such as Community Fireguard and similar, aim to improve the knowledge of neighborhood groups about fire preparedness and prop- erty protection (Gibbs et al., 2015), while in Canada’s Jasper National Park, resi- dents of cottages around Lake Edith actively participate in the work of bees to help Parks of Canada manage fuel around their community (Gilbert, 2007; McGee, 2011). A significant example in America is the national Firewise Communities pro- gram, designed to encourage residents of fire-prone areas to take measures to re- duce the risk of fire in their homes and neighborhoods, by educating people on the basics of fire behavior and adaptation, or protection from them. Given that many homes are within 100 meters of other homes and properties, getting neighbors to- gether to agree on a plan of action and take certain safety steps is crucial to effec- tively reducing the risk of house fires in the community. In order to achieve the goal of the program, a number of methods are used, such as Firewise Community workshops, public education and an interactive website (Steinberg).

In addition to participating in community efforts to protect their homes, the program also encourages individual owner behaviors, focused primarily on landscaping and construction, followed by emergency and evacuation planning. Within 200 feet of the home, called the home’s ignition zone, there are three sep- arate zones, each with its own specific recommendations for reducing or elimin- ating ignition hazards. The zones closest to the home require the most decoration

and maintenance. Recommendations include thinning and spacing of shrubs and trees, removing dead leaves, needles and branches, using stone and brick near the foundation of the house rather than mulching, creating fuel breaks such as drive- ways or paths, and many others. When building or renovating a home using Fire- wise techniques, homeowners are encouraged to plan their construction with consideration of the home’s immediate surroundings. Homes that are exposed to more fuels and combustible materials will be more susceptible to fires and will have a greater need for non-combustible and fire-resistant building materials. The most important places to use fire resistant materials are on the roof, exterior walls and additions such as decks and porches (Wolters et al., 2017).

Residents of homeowner associations and small communities interested in improving fire protection work with state forest and fire officials and follow a simple, flexible process to become recognized as Firewise. To date, more than 700 commu- nities in 40 states have been recognized as Firewise Communities/USA sites. There are also certain conditions they must meet in order to maintain their status, such as conducting annual mitigation work, holding Bonfire Day and documenting their ac- tivities. The template initially required communities to take four steps: complete a community assessment and create a plan; form a Firewise Board; hold a Firefighter’s Day; invest at least $2 per resident in local fire mitigation projects annually. Each community develops its own protection plan in collaboration with community leaders, agency staff and professionals, and is responsible for its implementation (Steinberg). The ultimate goal of any Firewise landscaping project is to create a defensible space. The program offers instructors and videos that guide homeowners on what materials, plants, and landscaping will make their homes the most fire-safe (Wolters et al., 2017).

Starting from the need to research the factors that influence the success and failure of various community-based programs, Kyle and colleagues (Kyle, Theodori, Absher, & Jun, 2010) found that those who are most connected to their homes and community will be most inclined to adopt the recommendations for protection. They observed that dimensions of home attachment most strongly predicted activities centered in and around the home, while community attachment more strongly pre- dicted community-based activities. By studying three different community prepared- ness programs, McGee and colleagues (McGee, 2011) identified three main reasons for participating in them: fire experience, agency involvement, and personal and family protection. In addition, Ojerio and colleagues (Ojerio, Moseley, Lynn, & Bania, 2011) found that socially disadvantaged communities were less engaged in federal fire mitigation efforts than other less disadvantaged communities. This find- ing supports the possibility that the factors that increase vulnerability are the same ones that limit access to power and resources. However, the researchers were unable to document an empirical explanation for this absence of mitigation activity. In this

sense, more research should specify the reasons why the socially vulnerable popu- lation does not participate in fire mitigation activities (Ojerio et al., 2011).

TACTICAL ELEMENTS OF RESPONSE TO DISASTERS CAUSED BY FIRES

An essential element of building fire safety in residential units is the train- ing and education of their residents. A building may have the latest fire prevention and extinguishing devices installed, but if the residents ignore the warning signals, do not know how to operate the devices, and do not know which behaviors are de- sirable and which may put them in greater danger, even the latest technology will not help and benefit them if a fire occurs (Nyankuru, Omuterema, & Nyandiko, 2017). The three key aspects of fire protection management are: education and training of residents in high-rise residential buildings; implementation of protection and rescue and evacuation programs; providing clear signage indicating fire exits and the location of firefighting equipment (Prashant & Tharmarajan, 2007).

The ability of individuals to respond to a fire depends on whether they are able to notice the warning signs of danger and make the correct and effective deci- sions that will help them survive the fire with little or no harm to health and prop- erty losses. It was found that in the early moments of a fire, residents smell smoke or hear an alarm, but react with a delay. At the very beginning, the person does not assess that he/she is in danger, ignores the situation or looks for an explanation for the phenomenon. Such responses often lead to delayed evacuation or protec- tion measures (Tancogne-Dejean & Laclémence, 2016). According to the authors (Tong & Canter, 1985), human behavior is influenced by other individuals, build- ing construction and fire effects. The mentioned authors also point out three strat- egies for surviving a fire. The first strategy involves trying to extinguish the fire, the second strategy refers to seeking shelter and waiting for help to arrive, while the focus of the third strategy is evacuation. The most important aspect of the se- curity of a building is the possibility of a safe exit. An important prerequisite for protection is that the plans and equipment available to the building enable an in- dependent and adequate response from the building’s occupants (Kobes et al. 2010). The same authors claim that people’s behavior is based on the perception of the situation. In the first moments of a fire, building users rely only on their own resources or on the people they are surrounded by. The response of people in the first moments of fire is a decisive factor for survival (Kobes et al. 2010).

Phases of evacuation: a) confirmation of the warning signal – the percep- tion of risk determines the reaction. Although fire and smoke are clear indicators of danger and the need for evacuation, people continue with their daily activities and wait for other people to initiate action before joining in (Graham & Roberts,

2000); b) decision-making – the users of the building are evacuated using the usual routes, mainly the main exit from the building (Guylène Proulx, 2003); c) the movement phase – by examining the incidents during this phase, the results show that people are facing smoke and those who tried to evacuate that way stated that they had to change direction or go back from where they started because of breath- ing problems, reduced visibility, fear and other reasons (Proulx, 2003).

The higher the level of perceived risk, the faster the residents will make a decision to take protective actions such as evacuation (Kinateder, Kuligowski, Reneke, & Peacock, 2015). On the other hand, when the threshold of perceived risk is low, residents may exhibit passive behavior, pretending that the situation does not pose a threat (Kuligowski, 2013). This leads to the conclusion that the perceived risk is directly related to the response time, i.e. taking action. Once the decision to evacuate is made, the movement time is determined by the choice of exit path and evacuation speed. The speed of evacuation is determined not only by the degree of mobility, but also by the level of perceived risk. For example, residents will move more slowly and leave the building more calmly if they feel that the situation is relatively safe, but if the situation they are in is life-threatening, they will leave the building much faster (Choi, Lee, Park, & Lee, 2018).

Firefighting as an individual response is most prevalent in housing units to which individuals are emotionally attached or economically involved. In a study conducted by Bryan (Bryan, DiNenno, Drysdale, & Beyler, 2002), of the 208 fires included in the study, 167 fires (80%) were not reported to the fire department. The reason for this is that most of the unreported fires were extinguished by the occu- pants of the building where the fire broke out, and whose neighbors came to their aid. In the evacuation model, the time needed for vulnerable categories to make a decision (response time) and the time needed to leave the building (movement time) in different conditions were examined. This process consists of three basic elements: risk perception, the ability to find a way out, and the speed of evacuation (Choi, Lee, Hwang, Park, & Lee, 2020). An interesting finding is that in 20% of cases the victim had the opportunity to evacuate, but chose not to do so. The majority of cases are where residents try to put out the fire instead of evacuating (82%), trying to save other residents or pets (9%), or calling the fire department before evacuating (9%). The reason behind this is that people are unable to predict the speed of fire spread and therefore overestimate the time they have available (Fridolf & Nilsson, 2011).

Unforeseen events, such as fire, can cause a higher fatality rate when there are vulnerable categories of occupants in the building. Vulnerable categories are those categories that are more susceptible to the negative impact of high-risk situ- ations due to their inability to implement the proposed measures during evacuation (Oppenheimer et al., 2015). In a study conducted by Rubadiri (Rubadiri, 1994),

statistics indicate that a significant number of fire victims suffered from some type of disability. In this context, disability is related to a person’s physical and mental condition that affects their ability to react in case of danger (Rubadiri, 1994). The elderly are most at risk due to poor mobility, rapid fatigue, confusion, impaired vision and hearing. In addition, older people often refuse to evacuate their homes (Jenkins, Laska, & Williamson, 2007). According to the results of one of the surveys conducted by Choi et al. (Choi et al., 2020), respondents con- sider the elderly (64.3%), the hearing impaired (80.6%) and the mentally retarded (75%) as those who are most likely to fail when evacuating from a fire-affected building because they will not be aware of the danger.

The Resident Movement Decision Model divides building users into two basic groups in the event of a fire and suggests two basic ways of responding for each group: people stay where they are; people are moved to a safe area inside or outside the build- ing. The authors suggest which strategies are best for which group of residents, ways of adapting plans when situations develop in an unexpected direction (Groner, 2016). Studies conducted by Proulx (Guylène Proulx, 2000) show that it should not be ex- pected that the activation of the alarm alone will alert all residents, that it will encour- age them to take immediate action, initiate evacuation and leave enough time to leave the building safely. Complementary elements, such as voice messages, staff instruc- tions, conducted training, and a well-designed and implemented fire safety plan, sig- nificantly increase the likelihood that residents will respond quickly and appropriately in the event of an emergency (Proulx, 2000). Persons who are exposed to the greatest risk of fire should be prioritized when providing information on the necessity of taking certain measures and actions, while persons whose lives are not endangered may be required to wait for further information. When it is considered that people are safe in a certain place, they should be informed not to leave the given space, because by doing so they would potentially put themselves in danger (Proulx & Sime, 1991). In dangerous situations, making bad decisions is more likely. Timely and adequate gui- dance is therefore crucial in helping people to safely escape from dangerous situations (Li et al., 2010). Bryan et al., 2002 investigated gender differences in responses to fire. Respondents were offered four options: “Save the family,” “Find the source of the fire,” “Call the fire department,” and “Use a fire extinguisher.” The results of the research show that men were more oriented towards firefighting activities, while women’s first reaction was to evacuate and call the fire department. In 14% of men, the initial reaction was to find the source of ignition (in women, 6%), while in women, evacuation of other family members was the first reaction (11%). In men, that number was significantly lower (3%) (Bryan et al., 2002).

In case of emergency situations caused by fires, building occupants have to get to a place of safety, which is assisted by evacuation behavior. In that process,

two periods are distinguished that make up the evacuation of users from buildings: the pre-evacuation period – which consists of the pre-alarm phase, the information seeking phase and the response phase in which initial protective measures are taken, and which ends with the decision to evacuate when it occurs second period; and the evacuation period. A crucial point in the pre-evacuation period is people’s decision to evacuate, which is influenced by risk perception and other human factors (Kina- teder et al., 2015). That is why numerous studies have investigated the perception of fire risk in the context of building evacuation, in order to improve the evacuation process. For example, Qin et al. (Qin & Gao, 2019) found that the process of inter- preting fire cues is influenced by several factors, including the characteristics of fire signs, the architecture of the building where the fire occurs, and personal character- istics. Interpretation also significantly influences decision-making and response be- havior (Qin & Gao, 2019). The interpretation or perception of risk is influenced by psychological, social, physical, political (regulatory and normative) and cultural factors, while the dominant factors are the role of trust, human environment (every- day and extraordinary), physical environment (building) and safe climate in in which the event takes place (Tancogne-Dejean & Laclémence, 2016). The importance of researching the perception and behavior of people in the conditions of fire disasters in order to achieve an adequate evacuation strategy is also shown by the fact of the number of injured persons in attempts to evacuate from floors above the fire level, while those who waited for help from firefighters on the spot and received it were saved (Mousavi & Kariminia, 2021). It was shown that evacuees compared to non- evacuees thought and talked more about the fire. Evacuees also mentally traveled back and relived the disaster; they saw the fire, heard its sound, smelled it more and felt more agitated, angrier and emotionally stronger. Furthermore, compared to non- evacuees, evacuees estimated that their life and worldview had changed as a result of the disaster that befell them (Knez et al., 2021).

Given that the U.S., especially the American West, has seen a tremendous number of fires since the mid-1990s, some of the efforts of government agencies that have begun to pay attention to homeowners in fire-prone areas include improv- ing risk communication and understanding the way residents perceive risk (Vande- venter & Vandeventer, 2012). Martin et al. (Martin, Martin, & Kent, 2009) indicated in the results of their analysis two significant factors that have a direct impact on the risk reduction behaviors undertaken by homeowners: beliefs in their own ability to face the danger and permanent or seasonal employment, while subjective knowl- edge and locus of responsibility have an indirect effect on risk reduction behavior. These latter effects are mediated through individuals’ risk perception. There is a sig- nificant impact of the feeling of powerlessness of those who have experienced a disaster on the prevention of taking action (Fernandez, Tun, Okazaki, Zaw, & Kyaw,

2018), as well as the perception of responsibility (Roth, 2015) as one of the most important factors for mitigating and minimizing damage in the event fire.

CONCLUSION

Improving the level of fire safety is a complex issue that requires a com- prehensive and multidisciplinary approach. In addition to a high level of profes- sional commitment, the absolute and total support of society is also needed, as well as serious and unequivocal political commitment. In order to improve the level of fire safety in the country, the approach “from top to bottom” must be changed, in other words, in order to achieve this goal, one must first start from changes at the individual level. In order for the country to be able to respond to the challenges, risks and threats it faces, it should follow examples of good prac- tice from around the world and apply them in accordance with the needs and ca- pabilities of the country.

With this aim, many international organizations and platforms have been established that provide the exchange of information, experiences, knowledge and practices in the field of fire protection. In addition to monitoring the implementation of the law on fire protection, normative and technical standards, regulations and plans, it is necessary to work on improving the technical equipment of the fire-res- cue service, as well as the professional competencies of members of those services. The first step in building an effective protection and rescue system is the introduction of subjects related to fire safety in educational institutions. Through curricular and extracurricular activities, it is necessary for children to be intro- duced to protection measures and ways of implementing these measures in every- day life, both for personal protection and because of their tendency to pass on the acquired knowledge to their family members, thereby providing indirect educa- tion. The community, and especially the family, as the basic unit of society, has a great role when it comes to adopting a safety culture. In Serbia, it is necessary to continue improving legal and by-law regulations, as well as the level of control over the implementation of legal norms. In addition, it is necessary to implement innovative preventive measures as soon as possible, so that the development of the protection and rescue system in emergency situations caused by fires is at the

same level of technological and social development.

REFERENCE LIST

Akashah, F. W., Baaki, T. K., & Lee, S. P. (2017). Fire risk assessment of low cost high rise residential buildings in Kuala Lumpur: A case study. Journal of Design and Built Environment, 17.

Akter, R., Roy, T., & Aktar, R. (2023). The Challenges of Women in Post- disaster Health Management: A Study in Khulna District. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 5(1), 51-66.

Aldrich, N., & Benson, W. F. (2008). Peer reviewed: disaster preparedness and the chronic disease needs of vulnerable older adults. Preventing chronic dis- ease, 5(1).

Allen, K. M. (2006). Community‐based disaster preparedness and climate adaptation: local capacity‐building in the Philippines. Disasters, 30(1), 81-101.

Baruh, S., Dey, C., & Dutta, N. P. M. K. (2023). Dima Hasao, Assam (India) landslides’ 2022: A lesson learnt. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 5(1), 1-13.

Bosschaart, A., van der Schee, J., Kuiper, W., & Schoonenboom, J. (2016). Evaluating a flood-risk education program in the Netherlands. Studies in Educa- tional Evaluation, 50, 53-61.

Bryan, J. L., DiNenno, P. J., Drysdale, D., & Beyler, C. L. (2002). Behav- ioral response to fire and smoke. The Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE) handbook of Fire Protection Engineering edited by Philip J. DiNenno, Dougal Drysdale, Craig L. Beyler, 315-341.

Buchanan, A. H., & Abu, A. K. (2017). Structural design for fire safety: John Wiley & Sons.

Cavallini, M., Papagni, M. F., & Preis, F. W. B. (2007). Fire disasters in the twentieth century. Annals of Burns and Fire Disasters, 20(2), 101.

Cha, M., Han, S., Lee, J., & Choi, B. (2012). A virtual reality based fire train- ing simulator integrated with fire dynamics data. Fire safety journal, 50, 12-24.

Chan, E. Y. Y., Lam, H. C. Y., Chung, P. P. W., Huang, Z., Yung, T. K. C.,

Ling, K. W. K., . . . Chiu, C. P. (2018). Risk perception and knowledge in fire risk reduction in a dong minority rural village in China: a Health-EDRM Education Intervention Study. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 9(3), 306-318.

Choi, M., Lee, S., Hwang, S., Park, M., & Lee, H.-S. (2020). Comparison of emergency response abilities and evacuation performance involving vulnerable occupants in building fire situations. Sustainability, 12(1), 87.

Choi, M., Lee, S., Park, M., & Lee, H.-S. (2018). Effect of dynamic emerg-

ency cues on fire evacuation performance in public buildings. Journal of infra- structure systems, 24(4), 04018029.

Chow, W. K. (2004). Aspects of fire safety in ultra highrise buildings. In- ternational Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, 6(2), 47-52. Chow, W. K. (2006). Fire Safety Provisions for Super Tall Buildings. In-

ternational Journal on Architectural Science, 7(2), 57-60.

Cobin, J. M. (2013). The Effectiveness of Delhi’s Fire Safety Regulation Amidst Poverty, Ignorance, Corruption and Non‐Compliance. Economic Affairs, 33(3), 361-378.

Codreanu, T. A., Celenza, A., & Jacobs, I. (2014). Does disaster education of teenagers translate into better survival knowledge, knowledge of skills, and adaptive behavioral change? A systematic literature review. Prehospital and dis- aster medicine, 29(6), 629.

Collymore, J. (2011). Disaster management in the Caribbean: Perspectives on institutional capacity reform and development. Environmental Hazards, 10(1), 6-22.

Cowlard, A., Bittern, A., Abecassis-Empis, C., & Torero, J. (2013). Fire safety design for tall buildings. Procedia Engineering, 62, 169-181.

Cvetković, V. M., & Andrić, K. (2019). Edukacija građana o smanjenju rizika od katastrofa korišćenjem multimedijalnih sadržaja-društvene igre, komp- juterske igrice i simulacije. Vojno delo, 71(6), 122-151.

Cvetković, V. M., Romanić, S., & Beriša, H. (2023). Religion Influence on Disaster Risk Reduction: A case study of Serbia. International Journal of Dis- aster Risk Management, 5(1), 66-81.

Cvetković, V, & Martinović, J. (2021). Upravljanje u nuklearnim katas- trofama (Nuclear Disaster Management). In: Naučno-stručno društvo za up- ravljanje rizicima u vanrednim situacijama, Beograd.

Cvetković, V, Adem, O, & Aleksandar, I. (2019). Young adults’ fear of disasters: A case study of residents from Turkey, Serbia and Macedonia. Inter- national journal of disaster risk reduction, https-doi.

Cvetković, V, Dragašević, A, Protić, D, Janković, B, Nikolić, N, & Milošević, P. (2022). Fire Safety Behavior Model for Residential Buildings: Im- plications for Disaster Risk Reduction. International journal of disaster risk re- duction, 75, 102981.

De Hults, Q., & El Houssami, M. (2019). A European framework to ensure fire safety in taller buildings. 3nd International Symposium on Fire Safety of Fa- cades Paris, France, September 26-27, 2019

El-Mougher, M. M. (2022). Level of coordination between the humanitar- ian and governmental organizations in Gaza Strip and its impact on the humani- tarian interventions to the Internally Displaced People (IDPs) following May

escalation 2021. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 4(2), 15-45.

Fernandez, G., Tun, A. M., Okazaki, K., Zaw, S. H., & Kyaw, K. (2018). Factors influencing fire, earthquake, and cyclone risk perception in Yangon, Myanmar. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 28, 140-149.

Festag, S. (2020). Analysis of the effectiveness of the smoke alarm obli- gation–Experiences from practice. Fire safety journal, 103263.

Gaillard, J.-C., Liamzon, C. C., & Villanueva, J. D. (2007). ‘Natural’dis- aster? A retrospect into the causes of the late-2004 typhoon disaster in Eastern Luzon, Philippines. Environmental Hazards, 7(4), 257-270.

Gibbs, L., Sia, K. L., Block, K., Baker, E., Nelsson, C., Gilbert, J., Mac- Dougall, C. (2015). Cost and outcomes associated with participating in the Com- munity Fireguard Program: Experiences from the Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria, Australia. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 13, 375-380.

Gichuru, J. N. (2013). Fire disaster preparedness strategies in secondary schools in Nyeri central district, Kenya.

Gilbert, J. (2007). Community Education, Awareness and Engagement Programs for Bushfire: An Initial Assessment of Practices Across Australia: Bush- fire Cooperative Research Centre.

Godschalk, D. R., Rose, A., Mittler, E., Porter, K., & West, C. T. (2009). Es- timating the value of foresight: aggregate analysis of natural hazard mitigation bene- fits and costs. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(6), 739-756. Goersch, H. G., & Werner, U. (2011). Empirische Untersuchung der Real- isierbarkeit von Maßnahmen zur Erhöhung der Selbstschutzfähigkeit der Bevöl-

kerung. In: Bundesamt für Bevölkerungsschutz und Katastrophenhilfe Bonn.

Graham, T. L., & Roberts, D. J. (2000). Qualitative overview of some im- portant factors affecting the egress of people in hotel fires. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 19(1), 79-87.

Groner, N. E. (2016). A decision model for recommending which building occupants should move where during fire emergencies. Fire safety journal, 80, 20-29.

Gunawan, I., Afiantari, F., Kusumaningrum, D. E., Thasbikha, S. A., Zul- karnain, W., Burham, A. S. I., Cholifah, P. S. (2019). Improving disaster response through disaster simulation. Int. J. Innov. Creat. Chang, 5(4), 640-653.

Hagen, B. C. H. R., & Milke, J. A. (2000). The use of gaseous fire signa- tures as a mean to detect fires. Fire safety journal, 34(1), 55-67.

Hahm, S., Knuth, D., Kehl, D., & Schmidt, S. (2016). The impact of dif- ferent natures of experience on risk perception regarding fire-related incidents: A comparison of firefighters and emergency survivors using cross-national data.

Safety science, 82, 274-282.

Hall, J. R. (2000). High-rise building fires: The Association.

Hanea, D., & Ale, B. (2009). Risk of human fatality in building fires: A decision tool using Bayesian networks. Fire safety journal, 44(5), 704-710.

Hoffmann, R., & Muttarak, R. (2017). Learn from the past, prepare for the future: Impacts of education and experience on disaster preparedness in the Philippines and Thailand. World Development, 96, 32-51.

Hossen, M. N., Nawaz, S., & Kabir, M. H. (2022). Flood Research in Bangladesh and Future Direction: an insight from last three decades. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 4(1), 15-41.

Huseyin, I., & Satyen, L. (2006). Fire safety training: Its importance in enhancing fire safety knowledge and response to fire. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 21(4), 48-53.

Iftikhar, A., & Iqbal, J. (2023). The Factors responsible for urban flooding in Karachi (A case study of DHA). International Journal of Disaster Risk Man- agement, 5(1), 81-103.

Izadkhah, Y. O., & Hosseini, M. (2005). Towards resilient communities in developing countries through education of children for disaster preparedness. International journal of emergency management, 2(3), 138-148.

Janković, B., Sakač, A., & Iričanin, I. (2023). Students’ perception of po- lice readiness to respond to disasters caused by a COVID-19 pandemic. Inter- national Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 5(1), 39-51.

Jenkins, P., Laska, S., & Williamson, G. (2007). Connecting future evacu- ation to current recovery: Saving the lives of older people in the next catastrophe. Generations, 31(4), 49-52.

Jerić, K. (2021). Žandarmerija u Ugarskoj do Prvog svetskog rata: Teritori- jalna organizacija, lični sastav i oficirski kor. Diplomatija i bezbednost, 4(2), 95-114. Jevtić, M. (2019). Odnosi SAD i NR Кine kroz projekat „Jedan pojas,

jedan put”. Diplomatija i bezbednost, 2(2), 155-169.

Joffe, H., Potts, H. W. W., Rossetto, T., Doğulu, C., Gul, E., & Perez- Fuentes, G. (2019). The Fix-it face-to-face intervention increases multihazard household preparedness cross-culturally. Nature human behaviour, 3(5), 453-461. Johnson, V. A., Ronan, K. R., Johnston, D. M., & Peace, R. (2014). Evalu-

ations of disaster education programs for children: A methodological review. In- ternational journal of disaster risk reduction, 9, 107-123.

Jovićević, L. (2021). „Zaboravljeni rat” kroz prizmu Holivuda: Korejski rat u američkim filmovima tokom Hladnog rata. Diplomatija i bezbednost, 4(1), 87-107. Juneja, C. S. (2005). Analysis of Ontario fires and reliability of active fire

protection systems.

Jung, E., Kim, G. U., & Choi, E. K. (2020). Factors affecting home‐based disaster preparedness among school‐aged children’s parents: A cross‐sectional study. Nursing & health sciences, 22(2), 138-148.

Kabir, M. H., Hossain, T., & Haque, M. W. (2022). Resilience to natural disasters: A case study on southwestern region of coastal Bangladesh. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 4(2), 91-105.

Kagawa, F., & Selby, D. (2012). Ready for the Storm: Education for Dis- aster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation1. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6(2), 207-217.

Khan, H., Vasilescu, L. G., & Khan, A. (2008). Disaster management cycle

– a theoretical approach. Journal of Management and Marketing, 6(1), 43-50.

Kihila, J. M. (2017). Fire disaster preparedness and situational analysis in higher learning institutions of Tanzania. Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, 9(1), 1-9.

Kim, J. K., & Han, D.-H. (2018). A Study of Introducing Virtual Reality for Fire Disaster Preparedness Training. The Journal of the Convergence on Cul- ture Technology, 4(1), 299-306.

Kinateder, M. T., Kuligowski, E. D., Reneke, P. A., & Peacock, R. D. (2015). Risk perception in fire evacuation behavior revisited: definitions, related concepts, and empirical evidence. Fire science reviews, 4(1), 1-26.

Knez, I., Willander, J., Butler, A., Sang, Å. O., Sarlöv-Herlin, I., & Åker- skog, A. (2021). I can still see, hear and smell the fire: Cognitive, emotional and personal consequences of a natural disaster, and the impact of evacuation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 74, 101554.

Kobes, M., Helsloot, I., De Vries, B., & Post, J. G. (2010). Building safety and human behaviour in fire: A literature review. Fire Safety Journal, 45(1), 1-11.

Kobes, M., Post, J., Helsloot, I., & Vries, B. (2008). Fire risk of high-rise buildings based on human behavior in fires.

Kodur, V., Kumar, P., & Rafi, M. M. (2019). Fire hazard in buildings: re- view, assessment and strategies for improving fire safety. PSU Research Review. Krga, B. (2019). NATO agresija na SRJ 1999. g. – bitni bezbednosni prob-

lemi. Diplomatija i bezbednost, 9-27.

Kuligowski, E. (2013). Predicting human behavior during fires. Fire Tech- nology, 49(1), 101-120.

Kwon, S. A., & Ryu, S. I. (2020). What Role Do Disaster Victims Play as the Mainstream for Future Disaster Preparedness in Korea? Case Studies of Foun- dations Established by Disaster Victims. Social Sciences, 9(10), 182.

Kyle, G. T., Theodori, G. L., Absher, J. D., & Jun, J. (2010). The influence

of home and community attachment on firewise behavior. Society and Natural Resources, 23(11), 1075-1092.

Lambie, I., Best, C., Tran, H., Ioane, J., & Shepherd, M. (2018). Evaluating effective methods of engaging school-leavers in adopting safety behaviors. Fire safety journal, 96, 134-142.

Lambie, I., Best, C., Tran, H., Ioane, J., & Shepherd, M. J. F. S. J. (2015). Risk factors for fire injury in school leavers: A review of the literature. 77, 59-66. Lee, P. H., Fu, B., Cai, W., Chen, J., Yuan, Z., Zhang, L., & Ying, X. (2018). The effectiveness of an on-line training program for improving knowledge of fire prevention and evacuation of healthcare workers: A randomized controlled

trial. PLoS One, 13(7), e0199747.

Leistikow, B. N., Martin, D. C., & Milano, C. E. (2000). Fire injuries, dis- asters, and costs from cigarettes and cigarette lights: a global overview. Preventive medicine, 31(2), 91-99.

Lidstone, J. (1996). Disaster education: Where we are and where we should be. International perspectives on teaching about hazards and disasters, 7-18.

Lindell, M. (2013). North American cities at risk: Household responses to environmental hazards. In Cities at risk (pp. 109-130): Springer.

Martin, W. E., Martin, I. M., & Kent, B. (2009). The role of risk percep- tions in the risk mitigation process: the case of wildfire in high risk communities. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(2), 489-498.

Masellis, M., Ferrara, M. M., & Gunn, S. W. A. (1999). Fire disaster and burn disaster: Planning and management. Annals of Burns and Fire Disasters, 12, 67-76.

McGee, T. K. (2011). Public engagement in neighbourhood level wildfire mitigation and preparedness: case studies from Canada, the US and Australia. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(10), 2524-2532.

McLennan, J., Elliott, G., Omodei, M., & Whittaker, J. (2013). House- holders’ safety-related decisions, plans, actions and outcomes during the 7 Feb- ruary 2009 Victorian (Australia) wildfires. Fire safety journal, 61, 175-184.

Mercer, J., Kelman, I., Lloyd, K., & Suchet‐Pearson, S. (2008). Reflections on use of participatory research for disaster risk reduction. Area, 40(2), 172-183.

Mileti, D. (1999). Disasters by design: A reassessment of natural hazards in the United States: Joseph Henry Press.

Mohammed, E.-M., & Maysaa, J. (2022). International experiences in sheltering the Syrian refugees in Germany and Turkey. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 4(1), 1-15.

Mousavi, S. Y., & Kariminia, S. (2021). Analysis of human behavior in case of fire inside a high-rise building: effect of risk perception and Individual’s location. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation.

Mróz, K., Hager, I., & Korniejenko, K. (2016). Material solutions for pass- ive fire protection of buildings and structures and their performances testing. Procedia Engineering, 151, 284-291.

Muhammad, K., Ahmad, J., & Baik, S. W. (2018). Early fire detection using convolutional neural networks during surveillance for effective disaster management. Neurocomputing, 288, 30-42.

Ocal, A., Cvetković, V., Baytiyeh, H., Tedim, F., & Zečević, M. (2020). Public reactions to the disaster COVID-19: A comparative study in Italy, Lebanon, Portugal, and Serbia. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 11(1), 1864-1885.

Odero, N. A., & Mahiri, I. (2022). The Complacency of Flood Victims, Socio Economic Factors, and Effects and Vulnerabilities of Floods in Lower Kano Plains, Kisumu County, Kenya. International Journal of Disaster Risk Manage- ment, 4(2), 59-77.

Ojerio, R., Moseley, C., Lynn, K., & Bania, N. (2011). Limited involve- ment of socially vulnerable populations in federal programs to mitigate wildfire risk in Arizona. Natural Hazards Review, 12(1), 28-36.

Ooi, S., Tanimoto, T., & Sano, M. (2019). Virtual reality fire disaster train- ing system for improving disaster awareness.

Perez-Fuentes, G., Verrucci, E., & Joffe, H. (2016). A review of current earthquake and fire preparedness campaigns: What works?

Petal, M., & Izadkhah, Y. O. (2008). Concept note: formal and informal education for disaster risk reduction.

Podder, M., Hasan, M. K., & Islam, M. J. (2022). Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of Existing Buildings by Rapid Visual Screening Method: A Study on Ward 27 in Dhaka South City Corporation. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 4(2), 77-91.

Ponomarenko, R., Loboichenko, V., Strelets, V., Gurbanova, M., Morozov, A., Kovalov, P., .Kovalova, T. (2019). Review of the environmental characteristics of fire extinguishing substances of different composition used for fires extinguish- ing of various classes.

Prashant, T., & Tharmarajan, L. (2007). The essential aspect of fire safety management in high rise buildings. Faculty of Civil.

Proroković, D. (2018). Unutrašnji dijalog o Kosovu: deset objašnjenja i deset predloga. Diplomatija i bezbednost, 1, 43-56.

Proulx, G. (2000). Why building occupants ignore fire alarms: Citeseer. Proulx, G. (2001). Occupant behaviour and evacuation. New York.

Proulx, G. (2003). Smoke does not turn people back. Although most build- ing occupants know that smoke kills, they often move through the smoke instead of away when evacuating a burning building. Studies show occupants behave dif-

ferently during a fire event than traditionally anticipated by HVAC designers and fire protection engineers. ASHRAE Journal, 45(7), 33-35.

Proulx, G., & Sime, J. D. (1991). To prevent’panic’in an underground emergency: why not tell people the truth? Fire Safety Science, 3, 843-852.

Qin, H., & Gao, X. (2019). How fire risk perception impacts evacuation behavior: A review of the literature.

Rajani, A., Tuhin, R., & Rina, A. (2023). The Challenges of Women in Post-disaster Health Management: A Study in Khulna District. International Jour- nal of Disaster Risk Management, 5(1), 51-66.

Rather, J. A. Risk Perception and Knowledge in Fire Risk Reduction in an Urban Environment: A Study of Srinagar City.

Robinson, D. K. (2012). Understanding Firewise Investment: Examining Social and Biophysical Factors Related to Mitigation Engagement.

Rodrigues, E. E. C., Rodrigues, J. P. C., & da Silva Filho, L. C. P. (2017). Comparative study of building fire safety regulations in different Brazilian states. Journal of Building Engineering, 10, 102-108.

Ronan, K. R., Alisic, E., Towers, B., Johnson, V. A., & Johnston, D. M. (2015). Disaster preparedness for children and families: a critical review. Current psychiatry reports, 17(7), 58.

Roth, S. J. (2015). Assessing fire risk perception and risk communication in the Big Bear Valley: California State University, Long Beach.

Rubadiri, L. (1994). Evacuation modelling of mixed-ability populations in fire emergencies.

Ryan, B., Johnston, K. A., Taylor, M., & McAndrew, R. (2020). Commu- nity engagement for disaster preparedness: A systematic literature review. Inter- national journal of disaster risk reduction, 49, 101655.

Seebamrungsat, J., Praising, S., & Riyamongkol, P. (2014). Fire detection in the buildings using image processing.

Sergey, K., & Gennadiy, N. (2022). Methodology for the risk monitoring of geological hazards for buildings and structures. International Journal of Dis- aster Risk Management, 4(1), 41-49.

Shaw, R., Shiwaku, K., & Takeuchi, Y. (2011). Disaster education: Em- erald Group Publishing.

Shibru, M., Operea, A., Omondi, P., & Gichaba, M. (2022). Impact of 2016-2017 drought on household livestock assets and food security: the case of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in Borana zone, southern Ethiopia. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management, 4(1), 49-69.

Shiwaku, K., & Fernandez, G. (2011). Roles of school in disaster educa- tion. In Disaster education: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Shiwaku, K., Shaw, R., Kandel, R. C., Shrestha, S. N., & Dixit, A. M. (2007). Future perspective of school disaster education in Nepal. Disaster Pre- vention and Management: An International Journal.

Sierra, F. J. M., Rubio-Romero, J. C., & Gámez, M. C. R. (2012). Status of facilities for fire safety in hotels. Safety science, 50(7), 1490-1494.

Službeni glasnik RS, No. 111/09, 20/15, 87/18).

Službeni glasnik RS, No. 21/2012.

Son, B.-S. (2014). Basic Study for Performance Improvement of Fire De- tectors System at Domestic Apartment Buildings. Journal of the Korea Academia- Industrial Cooperation Society, 15(1), 533-538.

Steen-Hansen, A., Storesund, K., & Sesseng, C. (2020). Learning from fire investigations and research –A Norwegian perspective on moving from a re- active to a proactive fire safety management. Fire safety journal, 103047.

Steinberg, M. (2011). Firewise forever? Voluntary community participa- tion and retention in Firewise programs.

Stumpf, K., Knuth, D., Kietzmann, D., & Schmidt, S. (2017). Adoption of fire prevention measures–Predictors in a representative German sample. Safety science, 94, 94-102.

Tan, Y., Liao, X., Su, H., Li, C., Xiang, J., & Dong, Z. (2017). Disaster preparedness among university students in Guangzhou, China: assessment of status and demand for disaster education. Disaster medicine and public health preparedness, 11(3), 310-317.

Tancogne-Dejean, M., & Laclémence, P. (2016). Fire risk perception and building evacuation by vulnerable persons: Points of view of laypersons, fire vic- tims and experts. Fire safety journal, 80, 9-19.

Teo, M., Goonetilleke, A., Ahankoob, A., Deilami, K., & Lawie, M. (2018). Disaster awareness and information seeking behaviour among residents from low socio-economic backgrounds. International journal of disaster risk re- duction, 31, 1121-1131.

Tong, D., & Canter, D. (1985). The decision to evacuate: a study of the motivations which contribute to evacuation in the event of fire. Fire Safety Jour- nal, 9(3), 257-265.

Troy, D. A., Carson, A., Vanderbeek, J., & Hutton, A. (2008). Enhancing community‐based disaster preparedness with information technology. Disasters, 32(1), 149-165.

Tuladhar, G., Yatabe, R., Dahal, R. K., & Bhandary, N. P. (2015). Disaster risk reduction knowledge of local people in Nepal. Geoenvironmental Disasters, 2(1), 1-12.

Twigg, J., Christie, N., Haworth, J., Osuteye, E., & Skarlatidou, A. (2017).

Improved methods for fire risk assessment in low-income and informal settlements.

International journal of environmental research and public health, 14(2), 139. van Manen, S. M. (2014). Hazard and risk perception at Turrialba volcano

(Costa Rica); implications for disaster risk management. Applied Geography, 50, 63-73.

Vandeventer, A., & Vandeventer, A. R. E. (2012). Factors Influencing Resi- dential Risk Perception in Fire-Prone Landscapes.

Verrucci, E., Perez-Fuentes, G., Rossetto, T., Bisby, L., Haklay, M., Rush, D., Joffe, H. (2016). Digital engagement methods for earthquake and fire pre- paredness: a review. Natural Hazards, 83(3), 1583-1604.

Vučić, M. (2020). Izazovi primene restriktivnih mera Evropske unije pro- tiv sajber napada. Diplomatija i bezbednost, 3, 77-98.

Weir, J. R. (2008). Prescribed fire education at Oklahoma State University: training our future pyros.

Winarni, E. W., & Purwandari, E. P. (2018). Disaster risk reduction for earthquake using mobile learning application to improve the students understanding in elementary school. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 9(2), 205-205.

Wolters, E. A., Steel, B. S., Weston, D., & Brunson, M. (2017). Deter- minants of residential Firewise behaviors in Central Oregon. The Social Science Journal, 54(2), 168-178.

Wu, W.-N., Chang, K., & Tso, Y.-E. (2016). If only we knew what we know: Factors for mobilizing citizen participation in community-based emergency preparedness. Chinese Public Administration Review, 7(1), 77-109.

Xin, J., & Huang, C. (2013). Fire risk analysis of residential buildings based on scenario clusters and its application in fire risk management. Fire safety journal, 62, 72-78.

Xu, D., Yong, Z., Deng, X., Liu, Y., Huang, K., Zhou, W., & Ma, Z. (2019). Financial preparation, disaster experience, and disaster risk perception of rural households in earthquake-stricken areas: Evidence from the Wenchuan and Lushan earthquakes in China’s Sichuan Province. International journal of envi- ronmental research and public health, 16(18), 3345.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *