When we examine the roles of the stakeholders involved in the building process, the building owner stands out as having a significant level of responsibility. Yet, despite this, they often remain on the outside looking in. In this article, we’ll explore why this disconnect is problematic — and what can be done to bridge the gap.

Our first article highlighted the challenges we currently face, regarding the current passive fire compliance system and each stakeholder's role in it. Today, I’d like to present an approach that aims to offer a long-term solution that addresses the real issue on multiple levels.

This article is the first in a series that will explore how a systems thinking approach can help us understand the root causes of non-compliance, the legal and ethical responsibilities at stake, and what must be done to create a safer built environment for all New Zealanders.

With at least five fatalities, the fire at Loafers Lodge puts the spotlight on the insufficient fire safety systems in our existing building stock. The unfortunate event has resurfaced a systemic problem: Insufficient passive fire protection in older, high occupancy buildings. In this article we want to discuss how a liquid passive fire system, that offers an immediate solution for upgrading buildings can also feed into a long-term solution, adding to resolve the underlying systemic issue.

Offering insight into Brock Common’s passive fire strategy, we discuss how the passive fire safety approach should not be considered industry best practice, and how fire testing would have supported the project’s overall goal of being a unique research and learning opportunity related to innovative construction with engineered wood products.