THESIS ABSTRACT

Abstract

Fire incidents can cause damage to both structural and non‑structural parts of a building. After physical restoration safety deficiencies may remain. Post‑fire hazards fire‑safety compliance and emergency preparedness have not been systematically assessed during the restoration of government buildings. The goal of this study was to identify post‑fire hazards evaluate fire‑safety compliance and assess emergency preparedness. The study also sought to uncover challenges in applying fire‑safety provisions and to explore measures that could improve fire safety in post‑fire‑restored government buildings. The study used a mixed‑method approach. Five government buildings—Kathmandu District Court, Department of Land Management and Archive Office, FUDBC Office, Survey Office and DUDBC Unit Blocks—were chosen on purpose. Primary data came from field observation, safety inspections a questionnaire sent to 15 respondents and Key Informant Interviews (KII). Secondary data came from drawings, damage assessment reports, inspection records, official documents, the Nepal National Building Code and other guidelines. Field assessment used checklists for hazard identification fire‑safety compliance and emergency preparedness. The quantitative data were analyzed with frequency counts, percentages, descriptive statistics and indices. KII responses were examined thematically. A three‑round Delphi survey with five experts was used to reach consensus on improvement measures and the Interquartile Range (IQR) measured that consensus. 2 The assessment found 22 post‑fire hazard indicators in the buildings with a Hazard Index of 0.609. Walls, ceilings, doors, windows and floors were often damaged. Structural damage, damaged fire‑safety systems, electrical hazards and fire residues were also seen. The average Fire‑Safety Compliance Index was 0.482. Basic escape routes, exit doors and corridors existed,. Exit signs, evacuation plans, fire detection and alarm systems and other fire‑safety features were lacking. The average Emergency Preparedness Compliance Index was 0.248. None of the five buildings had emergency response plans, formal evacuation procedures or staff fire‑safety training. Three buildings had emergency assembly points and fire wardens. The KII findings highlighted challenges. These included institutional and technical capacity, poor integration of fire safety into planning and design insufficient fire‑safety provisions, gaps between building codes and emergency preparedness needs, inadequate inspection and maintenance limited technical staff and a lack of emergency planning, training and drills. The Delphi findings backed measures. These included strengthening fire‑safety codes and institutional duties adding fire safety to building design and restoration plans improving safety and using fire‑resistant materials boosting inspection and maintenance keeping firefighting systems operational safeguarding important government documents and creating emergency response plans, evacuation procedures, training and drills. 3 The study concludes that restoring government buildings after a fire must go beyond fixing the structure. It should also upgrade fire safety prepare for emergencies inspect and maintain systems, enforce responsibility and meet regulatory standards. A combined approach, to safety fire‑safety compliance and emergency preparedness is needed to make post‑fire‑restored government buildings safer and more resilient.

Keywords

fire hazards; fire-safety compliance; emergency preparedness; government buildings; Nepal National Building Code; restoration; Delphi method; Kathmandu.