Banner image. A photo shows a crowd of people dancing and celebrating on a patio at UFV; bright rainbow colours and Pride flags decorate in the space. Superimposed over the image are CHASI's signature orange triangles, all pointing to the right implying forward movement and progress.

Unmasking Disparities: The Critical Need for Data-Driven Fire Safety in Indigenous Communities

by

CHASI is proud to maintain a longstanding partnership with the National Indigenous Fire Safety Council (NIFSC). The NIFSC supports Indigenous communities in the development of their internal capacity to enhance community safety and resiliency. As part of this partnership, CHASI is pleased to amplify their articles on our blog.

CHASI’s collaboration with the NIFSC, and many of their other research work, can be found on our NIFSC Publications page. For questions about the NIFSC and their work, please visit their contact page.

Unmasking Disparities: The Critical Need for Data-Driven Fire Safety in Indigenous Communities

By Len Garis and Mandy Desautels
Based on a study by Dr. Amanda Robbins, National Research Council of Canada

Fire safety is a fundamental right, yet for far too long, the true scope of fire risk in Canada’s Indigenous communities has remained largely obscured. A recent exploratory study, prepared by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in collaboration with the National Indigenous Fire Safety Council (NIFSC) and Statistics Canada, is helping to unmask these hidden disparities. This in-kind research, authored by Dr. Amanda Robbins along with the efforts of the Director of Research at the NIFSC, delves into the National Fire Information Database (NFID) (2005-2021) to shed light on fire incident outcomes in Indigenous communities, underscoring the urgent and profound need for robust, Indigenous-specific data analytics to save lives.

The Unseen Gap: A Decades-Long Data Deficit

For decades, Indigenous communities have grappled with a significant void in comprehensive, consistent fire incident data. While the federal government previously collected such information from individual First Nations communities, this program was unfortunately discontinued in 2010. This hiatus left a critical gap, hindering evidence-based insights into the unique size and type of fire risks confronting these communities. Without reliable data, developing tailored fire risk reduction plans becomes an exercise in guesswork, rather than precise, impactful intervention.

The importance of a robust data collection system was strongly recommended during the 2018 Parliamentary Session on Fire Safety and Emergency Management in Indigenous Communities. In response, the NIFSC launched its voluntary National Incident Reporting System (NIRS), a crucial step towards collecting and analyzing fire incident data directly from Indigenous communities. The NIRS aims to build community risk profiles, enabling informed decisions about safety and informing future education, training, infrastructure, and economic planning. However, as a newly launched system, NIRS data is still accumulating, making supplementary data sources vital.

This is where the NRC’s exploratory study comes in. The project sought to determine whether existing information within the NFID, particularly incidents where fire departments provided mutual aid to adjacent Indigenous communities, could offer an untapped perspective to enrich the nascent NIRS data. By identifying and analyzing these incidents, the study provides evidence-based reasoning for the critical importance of data collection and offers initial insights into the realities of fire risk.

Unveiling the Numbers: A Glimpse into the Disparity

The analysis painstakingly combed through NFID data from 2005 to 2021, focusing on geolocation information to identify incidents likely occurring within Indigenous communities. The findings are sobering. Of the total residential fire incidents with available geolocation data, the study identified:

  • 4,089 residential fire incidents in Indigenous community locations.
  • 191 fire-related civilian deaths within these communities.
  • 179 fire-related civilian injuries within these communities.

While these numbers represent a small fraction (approximately 2%) of the total residential fire incidents in the NFID dataset, their impact, when measured against incident rates, tells a profoundly different and concerning story.

The Alarming Reality: Five Times Higher Fatalities

A central, alarming finding of the study is that the rate of civilian fire-related deaths per 1,000 residential fire incidents is approximately five times higher for Indigenous community locations (46.7 per 1,000 incidents) compared to non-Indigenous communities (9.8 per 1,000 incidents). This stark disparity aligns with previous independent studies that have indicated significantly higher fire-related mortality rates in Indigenous populations.

This elevated risk is not confined to specific types of residential properties but is evident across various categories:

  • For one- and two-family dwellings, the death rate per 1,000 fires is approximately 5 times higher in Indigenous communities.
  • For mobile homes, mobile accommodations, and trailers, the death rate is approximately 3.2 times higher.
  • Even for apartments, tenements, and condominiums, the death rate remains approximately 2.8 times higher.

Conversely, the study found that the rate of civilian fire-related injuries per 1,000 incidents is roughly similar between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. However, the ratio of civilian deaths to injuries is approximately 1.1 for Indigenous communities, compared to a much lower 0.2 for non-Indigenous communities. This means that for every injury in an Indigenous community fire, there’s nearly one death, highlighting the severe consequences when fires occur.

Beyond the Rankings: When Similar Causes Lead to Different Outcomes

One of the study’s most critical insights is that simply identifying the most common causes or locations of fires isn’t enough. While the rankings of the most common categories for fire origin, ignition source, smoke alarm performance, and act/omission might appear similar between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, the rates of civilian fire-related deaths tell a drastically different and disproportionate story.

Consider these key observations:

  • Area of Fire Origin: When fires start in structural areas (e.g., ceilings, walls), the death rate per 1,000 incidents is approximately 13 times higher in Indigenous communities. For other common areas of fire origin, the death rates ranged from 3 to 8 times higher. This suggests that structural vulnerabilities or delayed suppression in Indigenous communities may contribute to more lethal outcomes.
  • Source of Ignition:
    • Fatalities linked to heating equipment were approximately 10 times higher in Indigenous communities.
    • For cooking equipment, death rates were approximately 9 times higher.
    • Smoker’s equipment and open flames resulted in death rates approximately 3 times higher.
    • Electrical appliances, distribution, and other equipment were associated with death rates approximately 5 times higher. These figures underscore that even common ignition sources carry a significantly greater risk of fatality in Indigenous communities.
  • Performance of Smoke Alarm Devices: Despite the vital role of smoke alarms, death rates per 1,000 incidents were approximately 5 times higher in Indigenous communities where smoke alarms were either not present or did not activate. Even when alarms did activate, the death rate was still approximately 4 times higher compared to non-Indigenous communities. This points to potential challenges with alarm maintenance, occupant response, or structural factors contributing to rapid fire spread and limited escape time.
  • Act or Omission: Human factors also present stark disparities. Fire-related civilian deaths due to “human failing” (e.g., being asleep, impaired, distracted, or having a temporary loss of judgment) were approximately 12 times higher in Indigenous communities. Similarly, deaths from the “misuse of ignited materials” were approximately 5 times higher. While “incendiary fires” were the most common category for incidents in Indigenous communities (35% vs. 12% in non-Indigenous), the death rate for these fires was still 1.4 times higher. These statistics highlight the complex interplay of socio-economic factors, housing conditions, and emergency response capabilities.

The Imperative of Data Analytics: Beyond Generalizations

These findings reinforce a crucial message that cannot be overstated: it is not appropriate, nor is it recommended, to use fire information trends observed for non-Indigenous community locations to estimate trends or inform strategies for Indigenous community locations. The underlying conditions, historical context, and current realities within Indigenous communities are unique and demand a distinct, evidence-based approach.

“For too long, the true scope of fire risk in Indigenous communities has been obscured by a lack of specific, reliable data,” says Blaine Wiggins, Chief Operating Officer of the National Indigenous Fire Safety Council (NIFSC). “This exploratory study, conducted in-kind by the NRC, provides invaluable initial insights, confirming that generic fire safety data cannot adequately inform targeted interventions for our communities. These findings are crucial as we build out the National Incident Reporting System (NIRS) to empower communities with the tailored information they need for effective fire risk reduction planning.”

The NRC study demonstrates that while general patterns may seem to emerge, the disproportionately higher rates of fatalities in Indigenous communities demand a granular understanding. This can only come from dedicated data collection and rigorous analysis specific to these communities.

“The statistics revealed in this report are not just numbers; they represent preventable tragedies and reflect the systemic challenges faced by our communities,” states Arnold Lazare of the Indigenous Fire Marshals Service. “Having accurate, community-specific data is fundamental to understanding these risks and developing strategies that genuinely resonate and protect our people. This study is a vital step towards ensuring that decision-makers have the evidence needed to allocate resources effectively and implement programs that will truly save lives.”

Paving the Way Forward: Recommendations for a Safer Future

This exploratory effort, while acknowledging its limitations (such as relatively small data sizes, potential under-reporting, and data inconsistencies), provides a vital foundation. Its success in identifying a significant volume of incidents within the NFID that relate to Indigenous communities means that this data can be combined with the NIRS, without duplication, to create a richer, more comprehensive dataset.

To further enhance future efforts, the study recommends:

  • Improving NFID Data Quality: Enhancing the availability, accuracy, and consistency of geolocation information within the NFID itself will improve the identification of fire incidents in Indigenous communities and benefit all Canadian communities.
  • Refining Community Identification: Continuously refining Indigenous community name lists with provincial information and alternate names will ensure more precise data matching.
  • Dedicated Data Cleaning and Review: Allocating sufficient time for thorough data cleaning, dataset review, and cross-checks in future planning phases.
  • Integrating with NIRS: Investigating how this NFID-derived information can best complement and enrich the data collected by the NIRS to empower communities with actionable insights for fire risk reduction plans.

Ultimately, the findings of this study reinforce the critical need for continued data collection and analysis tailored to the unique contexts of Indigenous communities. By investing in this essential data infrastructure, we can move beyond generalized assumptions and empower communities with the precise information required to develop effective, life-saving fire safety strategies and foster truly resilient communities across Canada.

Authors

Len Garis is director of research for the National Indigenous Fire Safety Council, Ret. Fire Chief for the city of Surrey, B.C., associate scientist emeritus with the B.C. Injury Research and Prevention Unit, lwgaris@outlook.com. 

Mandy Desautels is Chief Administrative Officer at the National Indigenous Fire Safety Council, a project of the Aboriginal Firefighters Association of Canada. Prior to joining NIFSC, she worked for BC Emergency Health Services and prominent NGOs. Contact her at mandy.desautels@indigenousfiresafety.ca