Review: A Study about Guangzhou (China) Fire Protection Strategies and Technologies for Heritage Buildings

In an era when historic city centres across the globe are at risk—not only from large-scale redevelopment and neglect, but also from insidious threats like fire—this paper “Fire Protection Strategies and Technologies for Heritage Buildings: Experiences from Guangzhou” (Fu et al., 2025) published on Open Journal of Civil Engineering, offers a timely, practical, and needed perspective.

The study presents a comprehensive evaluation of fire protection systems implemented in heritage buildings in Guangzhou, one of China’s most historically layered cities. 

The paper details real-world applications of early warning sensors, sprinkler adaptations, smoke control mechanisms, and fire-resistant material retrofits, all tailored to the architectural sensitivity of traditional Chinese structures—such as courtyard homes (siheyuan), temple complexes, and different periods commercial buildings.

The work presents a pragmatic focus: it doesn’t just identify fire risks—it shows how they can be mitigated without compromising heritage authenticity. 

The integration of “discreet smoke detectors”, “low-impact suppression systems”, and  “community-based monitoring protocols” demonstrates that modern safety standards can coexist with cultural preservation.

Why the topic matters

Across Africa, South Asia, Latin America, and Europe, historic urban cores are vanishing—not always due to war or natural disasters, but through slow attrition: unchecked moisture, poor maintenance, electrical faults, cooking accidents, and “small-scale fires” that go unnoticed until it’s too late. These incidents rarely make headlines, yet they silently erode the very fabric of our heritage—especially its “non-structural elements”, which this article only briefly touches upon.

The paper

The paper follows a clear, practice-oriented structure, beginning with an introduction that establishes the growing fire risk in heritage buildings within rapidly urbanizing contexts like Guangzhou. It then presents a literature review outlining global fire protection challenges in historic structures, setting the stage for local application. 

The methodology section details a case study approach, focusing on selected heritage sites in Guangzhou where modern fire safety systems have been retrofitted.

The core of the paper consists of sections analyzing specific fire protection strategies—such as early warning systems, adapted sprinkler installations, smoke management techniques, and fire-resistant material applications—supported by field observations and technical assessments. 

A dedicated case example illustrates successful implementation, highlighting both technological adaptations and heritage preservation outcomes.

Finally, the study concludes with a discussion on effectiveness, limitations, and recommendations for broader application, emphasizing the importance of balancing safety, authenticity, and urban resilience.

While Fu et al. primarily focus on structural fire safety and active protection systems, the vulnerability of non-structural components such as decorative woodwork, historic plaster, stained glass windows internal joinery heritage finishes and movable cultural artefacts to low-intensity or localised fires warrants greater attention.

These elements are often the most culturally significant yet the most fragile. A cooking accident in a traditional courtyard house may not cause structural collapse but can destroy hand-carved doors ancestral altars or century-old roof linings.

However current fire strategies both in Guangzhou and globally tend to prioritise structural survival over cultural continuity.

Future research

In the section “Fire Protection Mechanism of Traditional Spatial Layout and Contemporary Application” the work presented interesting solutions like:

The chapter ‘Modern Technological Innovation and Application for Fire Protection of Guangzhou Historic Buildings’ details a comprehensive range of physical and management safety measures implemented to mitigate fire risks. The ‘Management Mechanism and Guarantee System for Fire Protection of Guangzhou Historic Buildings’ section provides a specific focus on the entire management cycle of fire safety.

Furthermore, the ‘Exploration of Fire Protection Value of Traditional Materials and Techniques’ and ‘Activation of Fire Protection Functions of Traditional Water Source Systems’ sections outline alternative practical solutions.

While the provided information on safety measures is impressive, the article could have further addressed:

• Community engagement: how residents perceive fire risks and participate in prevention. In densely populated heritage districts such as Guangzhou’s old lanes occupant behaviour is as crucial as technology.
• Climate resilience linkages: rising temperatures and humidity fluctuations increase material stress; how does this interact with flammability?
• Policy integration: are local building codes adapting to allow safe retrofitting of fire systems in protected buildings?

Why this Study could be a model for others

Despite these gaps, Fu et al.’s work sets an important precedent. It moves beyond diagnosis and offers implementable solutions rooted in real urban conditions. Their multidisciplinary approach—blending engineering, conservation ethics, and local context—is exactly what heritage cities need.

As UNESCO and ICOMOS increasingly emphasize adaptive resilience for cultural sites, studies like this one must become standard practice—not exceptions. Fire protection is not just an engineering challenge, it’s strictly connected with conservation obligation.

Read the full article here.