Recent increases in the frequency and complexity of disasters, including large-scale urban fires and wildfires, have significantly elevated the risks associated with firefighting operations. This study addresses the urgent need to strengthen the safety management expertise for on-site firefighting personnel. Statistical analysis reveals a persistent and concerning rise in safety incidents involving firefighters. Over the past three years (2022-2024), a total of 471 safety incidents were recorded, showing a continuous increase from 131 in 2022, to 157 in 2023, and 183 in 2024.
The data indicates that 'Fire Suppression' activities are the most hazardous, accounting for the largest portion of incidents (145 cases, 30.7%). Consequently, 'Fire Suppression Officers' are the most frequently injured, representing 171 personnel (36.2%) of all cases. This escalating trend not only poses a direct threat to the well-being of firefighters but also fundamentally undermines the effectiveness of disaster response, thereby jeopardizing public safety.
This research identifies critical gaps in the current safety management framework. A primary issue is the ambiguous role of 'On-Site Safety Inspectors', whose responsibilities are defined in regulations but lack the specific operational processes needed for dynamic, real-world scenarios, leading to unclear boundaries with field commanders. This ambiguity is compounded by a lack of systematic, specialized training for these safety management roles. Furthermore, existing protocols show deficiencies in risk assessment for complex situations, such as general fire suppression and, notably, wildfire response.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to systematically analyze the types and root causes of safety incidents across all firefighting duties. Based on this analysis, the research aims to propose practical and effective accident reduction measures and develop a robust framework for strengthening the professional expertise of on-site safety management.
To achieve these objectives, this study employed a mixed-methods approach. First, a quantitative analysis was conducted on 471 safety incident reports from the Seoul Fire and Disaster Headquarters (2022-2024) and 57 injury cases from the fire academy (2022-2024). Second, a nationwide survey was administered to 4,227 active-duty firefighters to analyze perceived versus actual risk factors and safety awareness. Third, a comparative analysis was performed on domestic and international (e.g., NFPA, CTIF) safety standards, literature, and operational cases from Japan, Europe (Germany, UK, France), and Hong Kong
The comparative analysis of overseas strategies provided models for Seoul's complex, high-density urban environment. Japan's approach focuses on "building-use-type" (e.g., commercial, residential, underground), prioritizing mass evacuation and smoke control. In contrast, European and Hong Kong models focus on "building-material-type", developing specific tactics for the risks of modern materials. These include concrete 'spalling', 'sudden strength reduction' in steel at high temperatures , Cross-Laminated Timber (CLT) acting as a high fuel load , and plastic composite façades causing 'rapid vertical fire spread' and 'toxic smoke'. This analysis concludes that Seoul urgently needs to develop its own "Seoul-type" tactics to address these new material and high-rise risks