"Fire engineering is risk-based and cost-optimized"

Fire safety regulations are designed to ensure that buildings and facilities are constructed, operated and maintained in a way that guarantees the safety of people and animals, and prevents fires and explosions. The spread of flames, heat and smoke should be prevented as much as possible. There is little to discuss regarding this principle. However, the key question is how this goal can be best achieved. What kind of regulations are needed to achieve this? There has been a shift in thinking in recent years.

In 2018, the IOTH, an intercantonal body, commissioned the Association of Cantonal Fire Insurers (VKF) to revise the regulations based on a risk-oriented approach, involving key industry stakeholders for the first time. Our fire protection expert, Christian Aumayer, was one of them. We asked him what is changing in fire protection.

Christian, you are involved in the revision of the fire safety regulations. How did this come about?

This is the first time the regulations have been revised in collaboration with relevant stakeholders, including the SIA, the construction industry, fire services, and property owners. Previously, the Association of Cantonal Fire Insurers (VKF) developed the regulations independently. Working with stakeholders enables their views to be considered and ensures the regulations will be more widely accepted. From 2019 to 2024, I was involved in the stakeholder process as a representative of the Interest Group of Private Professional Building Owners(IPB). Today, I am observing the finalisation of the regulations as an observer. My colleague, Gianluca De Sanctis, is also involved in the process, representing Basler & Hofmann as a member of the Swiss section of the Society of Fire Protection Engineers(SFPE), the global professional association of fire protection engineers.

What will change in fire engineering with the current revision?

The biggest change is that future fire engineering will be fact-based, risk-based and cost-optimized. The new fire protection regulations will be based on risk-based protection goals, providing a scientifically sound foundation. Very few countries have truly defined their measures based on facts. Switzerland is the first nation to consistently follow this approach and adapt its fire safety regulations accordingly.

How is this focus on costs and benefits achieved?

Each measure will be examined to determine its contribution to fire safety and whether the investment in greater safety is proportionate. The aim is to avoid excessively expensive protection measures. Since 2004, Switzerland has had relatively few fire-related fatalities in relation to its population. More regulations and higher expenditure do not automatically mean fewer victims. This issue is being addressed in the revision. The principle here is that the accepted risks in fire engineering should be neither higher nor lower than in all other areas of life.

How did the cost-benefit approach come about?

Historically, fire engineering has developed out of disasters: There was a fire incident and countermeasures were introduced as a result. The cost of a measure in relation to the safety benefits it provided often played a secondary role. This resulted in the establishment of a substantial body of regulations. 

Today, there are many ways to further reduce the damage caused by fires. However, the costs can also be very high. We are now at a point where we must ask: is the perhaps minimal safety gain achieved by this measure still in an acceptable proportion to its costs? This is why the cost-benefit ratio of each measure is now being examined. The current level of safety in fire engineering should be maintained, but there should also be no economic imbalance between costs and benefits.

Will there be deregulation?

Yes, one of the aims of the revision was to reduce and simplify the number of regulations and standardise their implementation. If we know how effective each measure is, we can exclude those that offer little protection yet are costly for building owners. This will streamline the regulations and prevent unnecessary costs being imposed on the economy by measures that have been proven to offer little benefit. 

What consequences does the paradigm shift have for fire engineering?

The major shift is the new responsibility that planners and building owners now have. When planning, various methods can be chosen to demonstrate the level of safety, from predefined measures to risk-based analyses.

In the future, greater weight will be given to engineering considerations, enabling the implementation of appropriate and proportionate fire protection measures. The primary responsibility for fire engineering will lie with planners and owners. The argument that 'the authorities didn't object to this, so we're not doing anything' will no longer be valid. Owners will be responsible for ensuring that fire protection measures are functional and that documentation is up to date. 

What does the risk-based approach mean for your work as a fire protection expert?

As a planner, I will be able to provide customers with more comprehensive advice in future, outlining the pros and cons of each measure based on facts. This will open up more design options overall. I can demonstrate to building owners and architects how the measures interact, examining the risk in detail for each specific case.

When will the new regulations come into force?

The new regulations will first be submitted for technical consultation in September 2025. All interested parties will be able to view them and suggest changes. A political consultation is then planned. If all goes well, the new fire safety regulations will come into force in April 2027.