Integration of Proactive Building Fire Risk Management in the Building Construction Sector: A Conceptual Framework to Understand the Existing Condition

Abstract

In recent decades, the frequency and severity of building fires have increased with rapid urbanization, particularly in high-rise buildings and high-building-density areas. Although proactive building fire risk management (PBFRM) can address this issue, significant research gaps exist. This research aims to propose a conceptual framework for understanding the existing condition of integrating proactive building fire risk management in the building construction sector, and the effect on improving building fire safety. It has been performed through a comprehensive review of the relevant literature. This framework identifies five components by answering the following questions: what? (building fire safety), of what? (buildings), to what? (integrate PBFRM in the building construction sector), for what? (ensuring resilience, sustainability and smartness), and how? (through building construction sector governance). According to the proposed conceptual framework, building fire safety can be achieved by integrating the PBFRM measures in different building attributes throughout the building life cycle. At the same time, resilience, sustainability and smartness must be ensured. These can be achieved through governance in the building construction sector. The proposed conceptual framework will contribute to policy and practice by facilitating policymakers and stakeholders in assessing the existing conditions and the efficacy of building fire safety measures, and thereby in devising strategies to further reinforce them.

1. Introduction

Building fires are serious threats nowadays, although we expect to see a decline in the occurrence with numerous advancements. Among other fire types, about 32% of the total fire occurrences in the world in 2019 were building fires [1]. The extent of the spread and severity of a building fire determine its social, physical, environmental and economic effects. The impacts on society are the loss of lives and injury of various levels. In 2019, building fires caused the most casualty among other fire types (92% of deaths and 85% of injuries) [1]. Building fires result in damage to buildings, burning the materials and resources, and causing buildings to partially or completely collapse during or after fires. The impacts on the environment include direct impacts (through air, water and soil pollution) and indirect impacts (such as increased resource use, waste and embodied carbon) contributing to the global warming potential (GWP) and climate change effect [2,3]. The magnitude of these impacts depends on the length of exposure, the medium of transmission, and the vulnerability of the receiving atmospheric, aquatic, and terrestrial habitats [4,5]. The impacts on the economy include direct and indirect losses depending on the severity of the fire. The increased frequency of building fire occurrences and their impacts bring out the urgency of ensuring building fire safety in the building construction sector.

Disaster risk management (DRM) is a crucial approach for addressing any disaster situation. It is supported by prominent global initiatives such as the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) [6,7], the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [8,9], and the New Urban Agenda [10]. Here, the disaster risk refers to the potential damage caused by a disaster from the social (loss of life and injury), physical (damage or destruction of asset), environmental and economic aspects. DRM encompasses a holistic combination of measures aimed at preventing or mitigating the disaster risk and managing the residual risk [11]. However, the traditional approach to DRM is predominantly reactive or response-based [12,13]. It primarily emphasizes post-disaster management and capacity enhancement. They include the disaster response, rescue of disaster victims, their rehabilitation (providing food, water, treatment, shelter and support), recovery from disaster losses and preparedness for these purposes. In contrast, proactive DRM emphasizes taking pre-emptive action to address anticipated disasters by identifying and addressing the disaster risk in advance [12,13,14,15]. This is achieved through pre-disaster measures aimed at preventing or mitigating the hazard and exposure, addressing vulnerabilities for disaster risk reduction, as well as enhancing the capacity to manage the residual risk. Thereby, proactive DRM enhances the performance of the built environment and strengthens the capacity of first responders before the occurrence of disruptive events. Consequently, these measures significantly reduce the probability of disaster occurrences, mitigate their impact, and expedite the recovery process. Additionally, they help lower emergency, recovery, and reconstruction expenses. Hence, the recent global initiatives mentioned earlier reflect a shift in focus from reactive toward more proactive DRM.

In the building construction sector, consideration of building fire safety is a common practice. However, traditional building fire risk management focuses on the application of fire safety engineering for protection of life and property. It also emphasizes responding to and recovering from building fires, especially with intervention by firefighting and rescue teams. It is assumed that building fires will inevitably occur. By contrast, proactive building fire risk management (PBFRM) emphasizes identifying and addressing building fire risks proactively, in addition to the traditional approach. This approach contributes to a proactive reduction in the likelihood of building fire occurrences and mitigates the risks associated with their impacts. Therefore, supporting the global shift, building fire risk management is required to be more proactive than reactive. Integration of PBFRM in the building construction sector can proactively enhance the fire safety of buildings by addressing the factors affecting building fires to resist the threat and reduce the losses effectively [4,16,17]. However, it is essential to comprehend the current state of PBFRM integration in order to successfully integrate it into the building construction industry. The inability to systematically identify and solve the deficiencies in the current system for efficient PBFRM will result from a lack of such understanding. This could increase the risks of building fire, jeopardizing safety.

Studies on building fire safety have covered different aspects of risk management, including risk assessment [16], prevention [18], mitigation [19], emergency response [20], etc. Proactive fire management has been considered in some studies but only for forest or wildfires [21,22,23]. Few studies developed conceptual frameworks for fire safety and management. Bjelland et al. [24] proposed framework for fire safety design for buildings. Himoto [25] presented a conceptual framework for quantifying fire resilience and understanding the fire safety performance of buildings. Some literature again focused on proposing conceptual frameworks for wildfire management [26,27,28]. Nonetheless, a research gap can be observed in holistically integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector to improve building fire safety. Furthermore, a framework for understanding the existing condition of integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector has not yet been explored in the existing literature.

To address these gaps, this paper aims to propose a conceptual framework that can serve as a starting point for understanding the existing condition of integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector and how it affects building fire safety. The specific objectives are twofold: first, to identify the components of the proposed conceptual framework and understand them from a building fire perspective, and second, to develop the conceptual framework linking the components to understand the existing condition of integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector. The ultimate goal is to improve building fire safety.

2. Materials and Methods

There is no absolutely correct method for constructing a conceptual framework that provides the ideal structure for presenting an argument [29]. However, the framework should make sense as it will eventually affect its application [29,30]. Even when new information comes to light and changes are made, it continues to be the main reference point [29]. The conceptual framework in this research was built based on a literature review with a continuous interchange between literature collection and review. For this purpose, relevant works of literature were searched through Google Scholar and the UNSW library collection. The literature reviewed included peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers, academic books and reports, considering their reliability [29]. Additionally, studies published until 2022 were considered to reflect conventional, established as well as contemporary knowledge. Figure 1 shows the research methodology. Broadly, this research was carried out in three phases [29,30]. These phases are discussed in the following sections.

2.1. Phase 1: Identification of the Components

The first phase of this research involved the identification of the related components for the conceptual framework through an extensive review of the multidisciplinary literature relevant to the topic [29,30]. This was performed by gradually finding answers to some questions related to the research topic and focusing on their purposes. They were the following: “what?”, “of what?”, “to what?”, “for what”, and “how?” [5,29,31,32]. It involved drawing on a review of the United Nation’s literature on fire safety and DRM, including reports, conference papers and web pages, such as the SFDRR [6,7], the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development [8,9], and the New Urban Agenda [10]. Reading and re-reading the literature considering the research topic allowed us to “discover” the components emerging from the literature [30]. After primary identification of the components, they were further justified through an initial identification and review of the component-wise relevant literature, including peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers and academic books.

In this research, the ultimate goal is to improve building fire safety through the integration of PBFRM in the building construction sector. Hence, building fire safety explains “what” the goal of the proposed conceptual framework is, buildings explain the “of what” component, and to integrate PBFRM in the building construction sector explains the “to what” component.

When addressing any disaster, resilience, sustainability and smartness (ReSuSm) must be ensured [6,8,9,10]. Consideration of ReSuSm together enhances the capacity to cope with changes, reduce the impact, recover from disaster, and thereby ensure sustainability in the long run in the face of an uncertain future [33,34,35]. Different aspects of ReSuSm in the disaster context in the built environment and buildings have been emphasized in numerous research studies [36,37,38]. A few research studies considered ReSuSm in the building fire context as well [5,39,40]. Therefore, while improving building fire safety, ensuring ReSuSm has been emphasized in this research. Hence, ReSuSm explains the “for what” component of the proposed conceptual framework.

Again, the second priority of the SFDRR is “strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk”, where one of the guiding principles is “the development, strengthening and implementation of relevant policies, plans, practices and mechanisms” [6]. Thus, the SFDRR emphasizes strengthening disaster risk governance from a general perspective. However, due to differences in the characteristics of different hazards, relevant sectoral governance should also be emphasized, focusing on hazard-specific requirements to effectively manage the disaster risk accordingly. Hence, the integration of disaster risk management in governance has been studied in the existing literature from general and some specific disaster perspectives [41,42,43]. Therefore, to improve building fire safety, the governance in the building construction sector is required to be strengthened concerning building fires [44,45,46]. Consequently, this research emphasizes the role of building construction sector governance in improving building fire safety, which therefore explains the “how” component of the proposed conceptual framework.

2.2. Phase 2: In-Depth Understanding of the Identified Components

In this phase, the components identified in the first phase were explored further through an extensive literature review.

Table 1. Literature selection criteria for the extensive review.

Components	Selection Criteria: Literature That Discusses	No. of Literature
Building fire safety	Concept of building fire safety in light of the different stages of building fires and factors that affect building fires at these stages	162
Buildings	Importance of considering fire safety in buildings as a part of the built environment
Proactive Building Fire Risk Management (PBFRM)	Different PBFRM measures and how they can address the factors affecting building fires
Resilience, Sustainability and Smartness (ReSuSm)	Concepts and characteristics of ReSuSm from general, disaster risk management and building fire safety perspectives	128
Governance	Concepts and characteristics of governance from building construction sector and building fire safety perspectives	48

shows the literature selection criteria and the number of literature studies selected for review in this research for the different components. The literature searches for each component were conducted utilizing the selection criteria shown in Table 1. Later, the search was extended through snowballing and citation chaining.

The selection criteria were determined based on the component-wise initial literature search and review conducted in the first phase. The components of building fire safety, buildings and PBFRM are relevant and overlapping. Hence, a combined literature search was carried out for these three components. Due to the limited number of research studies on ReSuSm and governance in the building fire context, studies on these components were searched from general perspectives as well (as shown in Table 1). Their concepts and characteristics were then translated from the general to the building fire perspective. Finally, a total of 304 studies were selected for the review, considering the selection criteria.

More than 90% of the studies selected were published after 2010. Figure 2 shows the distribution of the studies selected with respect to the publication type. The publications selected for this study included journal articles, conference papers, books and book sections or chapters, and international reports. More than half of the selected studies are journal papers (n = 158). Figure 2 also shows the further distribution of the selected journal papers with respect to the subject areas of the journals in which the selected studies are published. Most of the selected papers (48 out of 158 selected journal papers) are published in the built environment and building related journals, where the top contributing journals are Buildings, Journal of Building Engineering, and Building Research and Information. Journals related to sustainability and environment (e.g., Sustainability, Sustainable Cities and Society, and International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management), science and technology (e.g., Applied Sciences, Sensors, and IEEE Internet of Things Journal), and fire, safety and disaster (e.g., Fire Safety Journal, Fire, and International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment) constitute almost similar amounts of the selected publications. The rest of the selected journal articles are published in journals that focus on urban planning and development (e.g., Cities, Journal of Urban Affairs, and Urban Design and Planning), and multidisciplinary and other journals (e.g., PLoS ONE and PSU Research Review).

After selection, extensive reading of the literature was performed. Here, the component-wise selection criteria mentioned in Table 1 were considered as the basis for extraction and analysis. The purpose was to develop an in-depth understanding of the concepts, attributes and characteristics of the components from the building fire perspective. The review also looked into determining the potential relation of the components from the building fire perspective [29].

2.3. Phase 3: Constructing the Conceptual Framework

Finally, during the third phase, a conceptual framework was constructed by integrating the selected components based on their concepts, attributes, characteristics and potential relations found from the extensive literature review in the second phase [29,30]. It was an iterative process of repetitive synthesis and resynthesis to construct a conceptual framework that makes sense [30]. The framework elaborates on understanding the existing conditions of integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector and their effects on improving building fire safety. Here, causal relationships and hypothetical approach were utilized, where building fire safety was the dependent variable and other components were independent variables [29].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Components of the Proposed Conceptual Framework from the Building Fire Perspective

3.1.1. “What?”: Building Fire Safety

Different factors affect building fires and their impact at different stages of the fire [4,16,21,47]. Ignition of fire in a building is caused by faults in electrical distribution systems and equipment [48,49,50], human errors and behavior [51,52,53], and natural and environmental reasons (lightning, heatwaves, earthquakes, typhoons/cyclones, wildland fires, etc.) [4,51,53]. After ignition, the fire spreads in the building gradually due to improper storage of flammable, combustible and explosive materials [4,47,51]; poor building design features [4,47,54]; and environmental factors (e.g., air temperature, wind or other extreme climatic conditions) [50,51,53]. Delays in extinguishing building fires can be caused by lack of fire safety measures in buildings (fire detection and alarm system, fire suppression and extinguishing systems) [47,48,54] and the inability of occupants to use fire-fighting equipment [55]. Such a delay in extinguishing the fire at this stage causes an increase in the size and intensity of the fire in the building [4,52,56]. Delay in evacuation during building fires is caused by lack of evacuation measures (means of egress, absence of safety signage, inaccessible staircases, scarcity of emergency light, etc.) [47,48,54] and lack of preparedness of the building occupants for evacuation [55]. Despite having adequate measures in a building, poor maintenance and management result in their failure, leading to the growth of fire, and restrictions in the response [4,51,57]. Human errors and behaviors mainly result from negligence, ignorance or unawareness of potential damage due to the lack of initiatives and access to fire safety awareness, education, training and drills [52,55,58]. Moreover, urbanization and increases in high-rise buildings and high-building-density areas are influencing increased trends in building fires [59,60,61].

Building fire safety aims to address these factors affecting building fires and their impact. The primary aim is to prevent or deter the occurrences of building fires [4]. Even if a fire occurs, building fire safety aims to limit its progression by managing the growth and effects of the building fire, keeping the potential harms to life or society, structure, environment and economy to an acceptable level [4,62].

3.1.2. “Of What?”: Of Buildings

Buildings are part of the built environment. The built environment is a combination of human-made resources produced through human-initiated processes with which people interact, most directly [63,64,65,66]. It is concerned with the design, development, and management of buildings, spaces, and places; decided by the government, land owners, and financial institutions; associated with planning, architecture, engineering, construction, landscape, surveying, and urbanism; and formed by economics, culture (including social norms, law, and politics), and resources [63,67]. It provides the context for all human endeavors; serves human needs, wants, and values; protects humans from the overall environment; and contributes either positively or negatively to the overall environment [65,68,69]. Thus, the built environment is shaped by people and also shapes people’s everyday lives [70]. Buildings are the smallest-scale hard infrastructure of the built environment, and they are nested within larger-scale systems forming and defining its scope [67,69,71]. Like any development cycle of an asset, the stages of the building life cycle can be categorized into three phases: pre-construction phase, construction phase and post-completion phase [72,73,74]. Due to the entwined relationship of buildings with human activities, injury, death, and economic damage to society results from their destruction in the event of disasters [34,75,76]. Consideration of hazards in development through enhancing their protective characteristics can effectively reduce the disaster risk [63]. Accordingly, the safety of people in relation to building fires must be addressed [4,17]. This should be considered at all stages of the building life cycle to be effective [77].

3.1.3. “To What?”: To Integrate PBFRM in the Building Construction Sector

PBFRM is concerned with proactively identifying and addressing building fire risks to reduce the likelihood of building fire occurrences and mitigate the risks associated with their impacts. This approach includes technical fire safety engineering as well as operational and organizational measures. The PBFRM measures and how their integration in the building construction sector can address the factors affecting building fires (as discussed in Section 3.1.1) are discussed below [72,78,79]:

• Inherent safety and preventive measures. Basic fire science establishes that if it is possible to completely remove sources of ignition then the risk of fire can be reduced to zero [53]. Therefore, the most important strategy to tackle fire is the prevention or elimination of the possibility [4]. However, complete prevention is not often practicable. So, the best approach for PBFRM is to reduce the likelihood of fire occurrence as far as possible, and at the same time, to limit the impact of a potential ignition [53]. This can be achieved by inherent safety and preventive measures. For example, enhancing the safety of the ignition sources (electrical distribution systems and equipment), separation of ignition sources and fuels (combustible and flammable materials), public education and awareness to control human errors and behaviors, and reducing the effect of natural and environmental factors through structural and preparedness measures.
• Detection and warning measures. Despite the preventive measures, it is not always possible to prevent fire [80]. Even if a fire occurs, PBFRM aims to manage the growth and effects of building fires, keeping the potential harm to life or society, structure, environment and economy to an acceptable level [4,62]. For this purpose, these measures aim to detect the fire immediately and provide an early warning to the building occupants for immediate response [47].
• Control measures. Once detected, the fire and resulting smoke must be controlled or mitigated to reduce the intensity, thereby reducing the amount of damage and enabling the safe evacuation of the occupants [81]. For this purpose, it is necessary to tackle the condition in-house before the arrival of external help [82]. These measures limit the adverse impacts by curbing the growth of the fire, reducing the amount of damage and enabling the safe evacuation of the occupants [4,83]. For example, proper storage and separation of flammable, combustible and explosive materials; building design and construction with appropriate fire rating, separation and compartmentation considering the environmental factors; and appropriate fire suppression and extinguishing systems.
• Measures for emergency response. After fire detection and while controlling building fires, it is necessary to ensure effective emergency response. These measures enable the building occupants to respond to and evacuate safely from the building during a fire event, ensuring safety [84,85,86]. For example, means of egress; emergency lighting and power sources; and postage, marking and signage.
• Measures for risk assessment and management. Despite having adequate fire safety measures in a building, the risk of fire may remain [53]. Hence, these measures aim to identify and manage the fire risks in a building, their characteristics and their potential effects [16,52,53]. For example, risk assessment, monitoring and maintenance, building fire management system and plans, systematic and periodic updates and rectifications, and documentation.
• Measures for addressing vulnerabilities and enhancing capacity. These are required to address the associated risks and to ensure the preparedness of the building occupants for timely management, response and safe evacuation from the building [81]. For example, special consideration for the vulnerable (such as children, pregnant women and people with compromised health), the elderly (who may have age-related health issues), and differently abled people (with mobility, hearing, visual and speech impairments); and training, education, awareness, publicity and drill.

3.1.4. “For What?”: For Ensuring Resilience, Sustainability and Smartness (ReSuSm)

The UNISDR [87] defines disaster resilience as “…the ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions…”. Sustainability is defined by the Brundtland Commission [88] as “…development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs…”, which is also echoed by the UNISDR [87] in a disaster context. On the other hand, smartness comprises technology, humans and institutions [89,90], which can be utilized to facilitate collaboration across various stakeholders in governance to improve different operations and services [91,92]. The application of smart technologies has achieved remarkable efficiency in building fire safety. For example, smart plugs for fire prevention [93], deep learning for fire source location and intensity estimation [94], smart training system for preparedness utilizing virtual reality and video training [95], intelligent fire risk perception system based on big data from the Internet of Things (IoT) [96], intelligent control system based on the IoT [97], smart emergency response system utilizing the IoT [98] and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) [99], building information modeling (BIM)-based smart system for fire prevention [18] and evacuation [100], real-time intelligent dynamic exit signage for evacuation [101,102], and personalized intelligent evacuation management system [103,104]. Thus, ReSuSm concepts are very broad and have some differences in goals [105,106,107]. The approaches to enhance resilience may be expensive to construct and maintain or may not be effective in the long run, which may prove to be a large financial burden for future generations, conflicting with sustainability [35]. Again, smartness may not necessarily lead to sustainability [108]. Despite such differences, ReSuSm are compatible and complement each other from a disaster perspective.

ReSuSm have been considered and defined in the reviewed literature from six dimensions. They are physical, institutional, technical, social, environmental, and economic. For a comprehensive understanding, this research reviewed the definition of ReSuSm from these six dimensions individually from a general perspective. Then, it brought out their definition from a building fire perspective. The summary of the findings from the review is shown in

Table 2. Definition of ReSuSm from six dimensions.

Dimension	General Definitions			Definition of ReSuSm for Building Fires
	Resilience	Sustainability	Smartness
Physical	Capacity of physical structures for avoiding or minimizing the effects of disruptive events [79,109]	Capacity of physical structures to sustain in the long run [79,109]	Technology utilization in the life cycle of physical structures, and supporting systems and services [110,111]	Capacity enhancement of buildings for fire safety through integration of fire safety measures in the building life cycle, utilizing smart technology to avoid or minimize the effects of building fires and thereby sustain in the long run.
Institutional	Preparation of governmental and non-governmental institutions for making decisions and taking actions for disaster management [79,109,112].	Sustainability of institutions for their role in ensuring services, management, maintenance, and implementation [90,113,114].	Smart government, smart decision-making, smart administration, and smart collaboration to improve public service delivery [89,115,116].	Capacity enhancement of building construction sector stakeholders and institutions for their role in services, management, maintenance and implementation through smartness integration for building fire safety ensuring their sustainability.
Technical	Ability of systems to perform to acceptable or desired levels at disruptive events [112].	Technical performance and functional sustainability of systems [73].	Information and communication technology (ICT), internet of things (IoT), cyber-physical systems (CPS), cyber-physical-social systems (CPSS), big data, and many more [117].	Capacity enhancement of systems through integration of smart technology ensuring their technical performance and sustainability at acceptable or desired levels for building fire safety.
Social	Capacity to reduce negative consequences for people due to disruptive events [112], and the capacity of individuals and groups of people to respond, develop coping mechanisms and develop anticipatory adaptation strategies [79].	Minimizing impact of development on the quality of life, community needs and wider social issues for everyone, now and in the future [79,90,118], and protection and promotion of human health and safety [74].	People and their safety with more focus on the community, cohesion, inclusion, participation, capacity, education, knowledge, social innovation, social equity, etc. [110,111,119].	Capacity boost of people to reduce negative consequences of building fires on them safeguarding protection and promotion of human health and safety.
Environmental	Systems supporting the capacity of the natural environment and ecology to cope with disruptive events [79].	Resources conservation for the future generation [90].	Technology integration in resource utilization and management [110,120], encouraging optimum utilization of renewable resources [111].	Optimum resource utilization and environmental impact reduction from building fires integrating technology.
Economic	Reduction of both direct and indirect economic losses resulting from disruption through developing capacity to cope with shocks [112].	Economic growth to combat the shock on economy [90,110,112], and considering affordability and cost-effectiveness [121,122].	Economic growth and technology integration to combat the shock on economy [90,110,112], and considering affordability and cost-effectiveness [121,122].	Capacity building to prevent or reduce economic loss from building fires through economic growth and technology integration considering affordability, cost-effectiveness and fund availability without compromising the safety performance to ensure higher return on investment in the long run.

. Broadly, ReSuSm in the building fire context are concerned with capacity enhancement to resist, withstand, reduce impacts and recover from building fires to ensure resilience, thereby ensuring sustainability in the long run and utilizing different features of smartness. These can be achieved by integration of building fire safety measures in the building life cycle (physical), strengthening building construction sector governance (institutional), capacity building and inclusion of people (social), optimum resource use and management (environmental), economic efficiency improvement (economic), and with technology integration in the whole process (technical). All these measures lead to ensuring ReSuSm by avoiding or minimizing the effects on buildings (physical), ensuring the effectiveness of building construction sector governance (institutional), technology integration ensuring their technical performance (technical), enhancing the safety of people (social), environmental impact reduction (environmental) and economic loss reduction (economic) in the event of building fires.

Based on the review of the characteristics of ReSuSm with respect to the dimensions,

Table 3. Characteristics of ReSuSm and governance with respect to the dimensions, along with examples of the indicators for PBFRM integration in building construction sector governance.

Dimension	Characteristics	Explanation of Characteristics	Example References for				Examples of Indicators for PBFRM Integration
			Resilience	Sustainability	Smartness	Governance
Physical	Monitoring, maintenance and management capacity	Capacity to monitor, maintain and manage facilities for better risk management	[125]	[113,114,126]	[31,119,127]	-	Monitoring, maintenance and management of overall PBFRM measures
	Reliability	Degree of getting same result from a measure repeatedly and consistently	-	-	[31,119]	-	Overall PBFRM measures
	Robustness, resistance, and persistence	Ability to resist, persist and withstand stress preserving own characteristics and structure with no or temporary degradation or loss of function	[31,119,128]	-	[129]	-
	Adaptability or adaptive capacity	Capacity to adapt to unforeseen situations	[67,119,130]	[131]	[119]	-
	Redundancy, diversity, modularity, flexibility, transformability and openness	Spare capacity with more than needs, alternative strategies, backup measures and overlapping functionality for replaceability and transformability with ability and willingness to adopt them in times of need to recover reduced, failed or lost functionality in the event of disasters, which allows a system to be separated and recombined for better management if any of the alternatives fail	[124,128,132]	-	[31,119,129]	-	Alternative options and spare capacity of resources for emergency
	Awareness and anticipation	Awareness of the hazard and ability to anticipate threats	[31,119,124]	-	[119,122,127]	[4,77,133]	Training, education, awareness, publicity and fire drills for building fire safety capacity building
	Rapidity	The ability to quickly restore system functions to avoid future disruption, appropriate response and recovery, and thus contain losses	[112,123,132]	-	[129]	-
	Independence, self-organization and self-sufficiency	Ability to operate independently in the event of emergency without relying on external physical intervention	[130,134]	-	-	-
	Innovation capacity and creativity	Ability to quickly find different ways to restore the functionality of critical systems under severely limited conditions	[119,130]	-	[31,119,135]	-
	Resourcefulness	Availability of supplies, human resources and other resources, with the capacity to identify problems, establish priorities, and allocate them	[129,130,132]	-	[91,122,136]	[45,137,138]	Availability of technology and resources for building fire safety and management
	Learning capacity and reflectiveness of knowledge and experience	Capacity to constantly acquire, revise and preserve knowledge with changing circumstances, to learn (right lessons) from (right) experiences of successes as well as failures, and to use them to inform future decisions	[31,119,139]	[109,113]	[119]	[4,45,140]	Regular review and amendment of policies and legislation considering and reflecting learning from previous building fires
Institutional	Connectivity, coordination, collaboration, interaction and integration	Connectivity, coordination, collaboration, and integration among different government administrations and institutions with clearly and well-defined networks, jurisdiction, responsibilities and team requirements to function collectively	[119,128,130]	[141]	[91,115,142]	[46,133,137]	Well-defined network, jurisdiction and responsibilities with coordination and collaboration among public, stakeholders, institutions and building owners for enforcement and practices
	Efficiency and effectiveness in administration	Efficiency and effectiveness in administration by utilizing networked infrastructures	[31,119,130]	-	[91,119,136]	-
	Well-defined process	Well-defined administrative processes	-	-	-	[77,115,143]
	Consistency	Consistency among policies and legislations considering local context	-	-	-	[137,144]	Consistency among policy and legislation considering local context
Technical	Technical capacity	Capacity for technology integration	-	[113,114,145]	[91,122]	-	Availability of technology and resources for building fire safety and management
	Interoperability and networking capacity	Capacity to interoperate and connect stakeholders through technology to facilitate communications, and share resources and services	[119]	-	[119,122,135]	-	Interoperability and networking capacity of available technology and resources for building fire safety and management
	Compatibility and ease of use	Compatibility for and ease of technology use	-	-	[91,122]	-	Compatibility and ease of use of available technology and resources for building fire safety and management
Social	Safety and security	Safety and security of people	[123]	[126,146,147]	[91,136,148]	-	Overall PBFRM measures
	Participation, equity, inclusion, social cohesion and fairness	Existence of multiple opportunities for different stakeholders to participate, interact and contribute to decision-making; while doing so mediating differing interests to reach a broad consensus on what is in the best interest of the people; ensure fairness and equal opportunity in the process	[119,124,130]	[131,149]	[91,136,150]	[45,137,138]	Regular review and amendment of policies and legislations considering and reflecting participation, equity and inclusion (e.g., gender, elderly, disability); fair and impartial enforcement and practices
	Feedback mechanism	Capacity to make alterations in a system through receiving information about it in the form of feedback	[67,134,139]	-	[127,150]	[45,137,138]	Availability of feedback collection mechanism to improve policies and legislations
	Accountability	Relevant institutions and stakeholders held responsible	-	-	[91,115,136]	[4,46,151]	Accountability of stakeholders and institutions for building fire safety
	Transparency and openness	Availability of resources to the public in easily understandable forms and language	-	-	[91,115,136]	[45,137,138]	Open access to policies and legislations in easily understandable forms and language
	Responsiveness	Ability to respond to the needs and concerns of citizens and other stakeholders	-	-	[91]	[4,45,140]	Regular review and amendment of policies and legislation considering and reflecting feedback
Environmental	Efficiency and effectiveness in resource use	Ensure efficient and effective use of all resources, minimize use of non-renewable resources and maximize use of natural, renewable and recyclable resources	[124]	[126,146,147]	-	[45,137,138]	Controlled, efficient and effective use of building construction and fire safety material
	Local availability and local context	Reliance on abundant locally available resources and consideration of local context (social, cultural and political as well as weather and seasonal)	[124]	[126,145,147]	[152]	[137,144]	Consideration of local availability and local context for building fire safety
	Durability or longevity	Durability or longevity of materials, structures and building services	[123,124,129]	[126,147,153]	-	-	Overall PBFRM measures
Economic	Affordability and cost-effectiveness	Affordable and cost-effective options	-	[121,154]	[91,122,136]	[4,77,137]	Financial support for the building owners to facilitate building fire safety integration

shows their summary along with their explanation. Here, similar overlapping characteristics have been grouped for better representation. Although all these characteristics complement each other, there are some contradictions. Redundancy, diversity, modularity, flexibility, transformability and openness are some of the core characteristics of resilience, which are also supported by smartness, but they contradict sustainability, especially with the efficiency and effectiveness of resource use [79,123,124]. Affordability and cost-effectiveness are also core characteristics of sustainability, which are also supported by smartness. By contrast, the approaches to enhance resilience may be expensive to construct and maintain or may not be effective in the long run, which may prove to be a large financial burden for future generations, conflicting with sustainability [35]. Optimum solutions must be formulated in these circumstances to bring balance among ReSuSm.

3.1.5. “How?”: Through Building Construction Sector Governance

Governance is the management of a country’s affairs at all tiers through economic, political, and administrative authority [155]. It is a complex and dynamic process that is shaped by the context and culture of the society in which it operates [137]. Due to differences in contexts, a generalized model of governance is not applicable [156,157,158]. Therefore, governance has been conceptualized differently in different contexts and scales [159]. In the building construction sector, the building characteristics are guided, regulated, and controlled by governance [107,160,161]. It comprises policies and legislations and their enforcement and practices by relevant stakeholders (e.g., government officials, elected representatives, bureaucrats, professionals, construction workers and citizens), and institutions (e.g., legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government, private organizations and civil society groups) [45,137,162]. Policies and legislation involve the formulation of policies and legislation for the building construction sector [46]. Policies include national-level strategic and sectoral plans and policies. Legislation includes plans, acts, ordinances, rules, regulations, standards, codes and other legal instruments developed by government agencies to provide guidance or sector-specific requirements for certain areas of activity. Among them, acts and ordinances are enacted laws, whereas plans, rules, regulations, standards and codes are not necessarily laws but are legally binding [140]. Together, policies and legislation provide the framework to govern decision-making in the building construction sector [44,46,163]. The enforcement and practices of these policies and legislation by relevant stakeholders and institutions in the building construction sector define the building characteristics, ensuring their compliance with the policies and legislation [160,164,165]. All of these again differ for different phases of the building life cycle as they comprise numerous different activities [160,161].

Hassler and Kohler [35] found that the regulatory intentions and the actual implementation may have a large gap between them. Consequently, the policies and legislation will not matter if they are not enforced and practiced properly by relevant stakeholders and institutions [160,164,165]. Thus, governance shapes the characteristics of buildings and the built environment as a whole. Incompatible policies and legislation as well as the gap in enforcement and practices by relevant stakeholders and institutions devoid of hazard aspects increase the vulnerability of buildings, enhancing the effect of disasters [166,167,168]. Therefore, consideration of building fire safety in the overall governance aids in shaping the buildings to withstand building fires and their impact [160,169,170]. To do so, the risk management measures addressing the factors affecting building fires are required to be integrated into the building construction sector governance [4,17,24]. The contrary leads to failure in the improvement of building fire safety, increasing the frequency and effects of building fires [166,167,168]. However, such consideration should be performed systematically instead of integration as an afterthought [72,171].

Table 3 shows the characteristics of governance, where overlaps with some characteristics of ReSuSm can be observed. Hence, governance also addresses ensuring ReSuSm.

Figure 3 shows a summary of the components identified for the proposed conceptual framework.

3.2. Proposed Conceptual Framework

Figure 4 shows the proposed conceptual framework for understanding the existing condition of integrating proactive building fire risk management in the building construction sector to improve building fire safety, showing the linkages among the components (discussed in Section 3.1). The linkages among the components shown in the proposed conceptual framework are explained by four propositions P1, P2, P3, and P4.

Propositions P1 and P2 in the proposed conceptual framework focus on looking into the existing conditions of PBFRM integration in the building construction sector governance and their effects on improving building fire safety. These propositions are as follows:

Proposition P1.

Existing PBFRM integration in the building construction sector-related policies and legislation significantly improves building fire safety.

Proposition P2.

Existing enforcement and practices of the PBFRM-integrated policies and legislation in the building construction sector significantly improve building fire safety.

Governance in the building construction sector broadly comprises two parts, shaping the characteristics of buildings and the built environment as a whole (explained in Section 3.1.5). Firstly, building construction sector-related policies and legislation (national and sectoral policies, plans, acts, ordinances, rules, regulations, standards, codes and other legal instruments) provide the framework to govern decision-making in the building construction sector [44,46,163]. Incompatible policies and legislation devoid of building fire safety increase the vulnerability of buildings, increasing the frequency and effects of building fires [166,167,168]. Therefore, the PBFRM measures addressing the factors affecting building fires (explained in Section 3.1.3) are required to be integrated into the building construction sector-related policies and legislations. Secondly, the enforcement and practices of these policies and legislation by relevant stakeholders and institutions in the building construction sector defines the building characteristics, ensuring their compliance with the policies and legislation [160,164,165]. This is substantial because policies and legislation will not matter if they are not enforced and practiced properly [160,164,165].

The PBFRM integration in governance should be performed systematically instead of as an afterthought [72,171]. Hence, the characteristics of governance (as shown in Table 2) should be considered during the integration. Again, building construction sector governance differs for different phases of the building life cycle as they comprise numerous different activities [160,161] (explained in Section 3.1.2). Therefore, PBFRM integration in governance should be appropriately ensured in the whole building life cycle: (i) in the pre-construction phase while considering the conceptualization, need assessment, development control, consultation, planning, design, feasibility, and approval; (ii) in the construction phase while considering project planning and procurement, and construction; and (iii) in the post-completion phase while considering the occupation or use, operation, management, maintenance, repair, change of use, deconstruction or removal or demolition [72,73,74]. Such systematic integration of PBFRM measures in the building construction sector policies and legislation proactively improves the building construction sector governance framework to improve building fire safety (explained in Section 3.1.1).

Therefore, proposition P1 of the proposed conceptual framework looks into the existing PBFRM integration in the building construction sector policies and legislation and their effects on building fire safety. On the other hand, appropriate enforcement and practices aid in proactively enhancing building fire safety, addressing the factors affecting building fires in the building construction sector for resisting the threat, enhancing the capacity to withstand and reducing the losses effectively (explained in Section 3.1.1). Hence, proposition P2 looks into the existing enforcement and practices of the PBFRM integrated policies and legislations in the building construction sector and their effects on building fire safety.

Propositions P3 and P4 in the proposed conceptual framework focus on looking into the existing condition of ensuring ReSuSm while integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector governance and their effects on improving building fire safety. These propositions are as follows:

Proposition P3.

Existing conditions for ensuring ReSuSm while integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector-related policies and legislations significantly improve building fire safety.

Proposition P4.

Existing conditions for ensuring ReSuSm while enforcing and practicing the PBFRM-integrated policies and legislation in the building construction sector significantly improve building fire safety.

As elaborately discussed in Section 3.1.4, ReSuSm in the building fire context are concerned with capacity enhancement to resist, withstand, reduce impacts and recover from building fires to ensure resilience, thereby ensuring sustainability in the long run and utilizing different features of smartness. Therefore, while integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector governance, ReSuSm are required to be ensured. Such consideration leads to avoiding or minimizing the effects on buildings, ensuring the effectiveness of building construction sector governance, technology integration ensuring their technical performance, enhancing the safety of people, environmental impact reduction and economic loss reduction in the event of building fires. These further direct toward improving building fire safety (explained in Section 3.1.1). Therefore, proposition P3 of the proposed conceptual framework looks into the existing condition of ensuring ReSuSm while integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector policies and legislation and their effects on improving building fire safety. On the other hand, proposition P4 looks into the existing condition of ensuring ReSuSm during enforcement and practices of the PBFRM-integrated policies and legislations in the building construction sector and their effects on building fire safety.

Table 3 shows the characteristics of ReSuSm and governance with respect to the dimensions. The table also shows examples of the indicators for PBFRM integration in building construction sector governance ensuring, the characteristics accordingly. The table can be considered a guiding reference to ensure ReSuSm while integrating PBFRM in building construction sector governance. Although all these characteristics complement each other, there are some contradictions, as discussed in Section 3.1.4. Optimization is required in PBFRM measures to ensure redundancy, diversity, modularity, flexibility, transformability and openness for resilience and smartness, as well as efficiency and effectiveness in resource use for sustainability. Again, some PBFRM measures (e.g., fire detection and alarm systems, fire-resistant construction, fire separation, and fire suppression measures) are expensive to construct and maintain, which is a major drawback, discouraging people from their integration into buildings. Some of these measures may not be effective in the long run, which may prove to be a large financial burden for future generations, jeopardizing sustainability. These contradict the affordability and cost-effectiveness requirements of sustainability. However, ignoring these PBFRM measures at present, considering affordability and cost-effectiveness, may lead to greater building fire vulnerability and consequent economic loss in the future. Therefore, affordable and cost-effective options for PBFRM measures are required without compromising their effectiveness. Additionally, financial support for building owners can be provided in the forms of subsidies, financial support, low-interest loans, risk transfer through insurance, emergency funds for recovery, etc. [4,77,137]. Future research should be carried out focusing on optimizing the PBFRM measures for ensuring ReSuSm to overcome the above-discussed conflicts.

3.3. Contribution of This Research

This research underscores the need to adopt a comprehensive and proactive approach to building fire management alongside traditional reactive approaches. It underscores the importance of considering ReSuSm in the pursuit of building fire safety and provides a clear definition of these concepts within the context of this study. Furthermore, this study emphasizes the crucial role of governance in shaping building fire safety by regulating the building construction sector. The proposed conceptual framework serves as a unifying thread among these various components. Ultimately, this research contributes to the existing knowledge in the field of building fire safety by advocating for the integration of PBFRM within the governance of the building construction sector and prioritizing the importance of ReSuSm in enhancing building fire safety.

The proposed conceptual framework provides a comprehensive, forward-looking approach to fire safety that aligns with contemporary urban challenges. It can systematically evaluate the current state of integrating PBFRM within the governance of the building construction sector, encompassing both its positive aspects and existing gaps. In doing so, it can shed light on the extent to which ReSuSm are ensured and aligned during such integration. Thereby, this framework can empower policymakers to identify the vulnerabilities and contemporary challenges in the building construction sector that give rise to the risk of building fires. Ultimately, the proposed framework can be utilized to comprehend the impact of these conditions on building fire safety. Insights derived from the existing conditions can provide valuable guidance for policymakers, enabling them to make informed decisions. Thereby, they can enhance and strengthen the integration of PBFRM in governance, whilst also ensuring ReSuSm by further enhancing the positive aspects and formulating effective strategies to address the gaps. By adhering to PBFRM-integrated governance, practitioners can contribute to creating safer, more resilient, and sustainable buildings that are better equipped with smart technologies to manage fire risks.

Consequently, the proposed conceptual framework can assist in strengthening the integration of PBFRM in the building construction sector. Such integration can significantly drive development in the field of sustainable development. It can help to acknowledge and address the challenges associated with ensuring the fire resilience of sustainable building construction materials and practices. In the domain of smart city development, it can help to address the challenges associated with ensuring fire resilience and the sustainability of smart building technologies. In turn, the building construction sector can benefit from effective building fire risk reduction. Thereby, the threats posed by building fires can be mitigated, leading to significant declines in casualties, property damage, environmental impacts contributing to GWP and climate change, as well as economic losses. As a result, as buildings and cities expand, they can be safeguarded against emerging fire risks, while also making them more resilient, sustainable, and smart. By these means, PBFRM integration in the building construction sector can contribute to enhanced public safety and well-being.

3.4. Recommendation for Future Research

This research offers examples of indicators to test the causal relationships of the proposed conceptual framework. They are related to PBFRM measures, their integration in the building construction sector governance, and ensuring ReSuSm. However, future research should be conducted to ascertain the indicators through systematic literature reviews. The proposed conceptual framework should be validated and refined in future research. This should be performed based on empirical evidence obtained through extensive data gathering and empirical testing. The practical application of the proposed conceptual framework and its benefits can be demonstrated by developing a series of case studies in different geographical and socio-economic contexts. For more specific contextual applications, future research should consider the local context and make modifications accordingly.

This research also opens up potentially fruitful avenues for further investigation in order to advance this research. It provides a foundation for future studies to delve deeper into each constituent identified in this research. Further studies should explore the extent of PBFRM. Research should be conducted to further examine the role of governance in enhancing building fire safety. This research also highlights that, despite the complementarity of ReSuSm characteristics in the building fire context, there are contradictions and challenges. Hence, future research should seek to conceptualize ReSuSm and to understand the interconnection among them in the context of building fires. Additionally, they should explore methods of optimizing the PBFRM solutions, ensuring a balance among ReSuSm by capitalizing on the synergies and resolving the contradictions and challenges. Future research should also explore the role of emerging technologies, such as AI, machine learning, deep learning, and digital twins, in enhancing PBFRM while also considering their resilience and sustainability.

4. Conclusions

This research underscores the need to adopt proactive strategies alongside traditional reactive approaches to manage fire risks due to the growing frequency and severity of building fires. The conceptual framework developed in this study provides a structured approach to understanding the current state of integrating PBFRM in the building construction sector to strengthen building fire safety. The framework is based on an extensive literature review. This framework identifies five components. They are building fire safety, of buildings, to integrate PBFRM in the building construction sector, for ensuring ReSuSm, and through building construction sector governance. These components are linked to form the conceptual framework, utilizing causal relationships and a hypothetical approach.

This study concludes that to enhance building fire safety, PBFRM measures need to be integrated into various aspects of building design and construction throughout the building’s lifecycle. Here, PBFRM involves identifying and addressing building fire risks in a proactive manner, with the goal of reducing the likelihood of building fire incidents and mitigating the associated risks.

This study necessitates the incorporation of ReSuSm while integrating PBFRM. ReSuSm in the building fire context are defined in this research as the capacity enhancement of buildings to resist, withstand, reduce impacts and recover from building fires, leveraging advanced technologies to ensure resilience and sustainability in the long run. Thereby, while ensuring fire safety, buildings can be made resilient, sustainable, and equipped with smart measures to optimally combat fire incidents. Although the characteristics of ReSuSm complement each other, this research acknowledges several challenges and contradictions that must be addressed to optimize PBFRM solutions ensuring ReSuSm. For instance, some fire-resistant designs, materials and technologies may be resource-intensive as well as expensive to construct and maintain, or may not be effective in the long run, conflicting with sustainability. Therefore the synergies and conflicts between them must be carefully managed to ensure long-term building safety and resilience.

The framework emphasizes the need for governance to integrate PBFRM and ensure ReSuSm in every phase of a building’s lifecycle. Effective governance is not merely about having the right policies and legislation. It also involves their proper enforcement and practices by relevant stakeholders and institutions across all levels of the building construction sector. This ensures that building fire safety is an integral part of the governance structure in the building construction sector rather than an afterthought.

The proposed conceptual framework can serve as a tool for policymakers and practitioners to assess the current state of PBFRM integration in the building construction sector. Insights derived from the existing conditions can provide them with valuable guidance to make informed decisions for strengthening the fire safety of buildings by further enhancing the positive aspects and formulating effective strategies to address the gaps. This research recommends future research to validate the framework and explore its application in different contexts. Additionally, further studies are suggested to delve deeper into each constituent identified in this research to strengthen building fire safety. This research, along with the recommended future research, can contribute to the development of buildings that are not only safer in the event of fires but also more resilient, sustainable and smart, enhancing public safety and well-being.