The devastating fire at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po has left Hong Kong in mourning, claiming 160 lives, including one of our brave firefighters. In the aftermath, public attention has turned sharply to bamboo scaffolding and smoking as culprits. Bamboo scaffolding, part of Hong Kong’s architectural heritage, has been singled out for its combustibility, while smoking bans on construction sites have also been proposed as a way to reduce fire risks.

These responses are understandable in the emotional aftermath of the tragedy but oversimplify complex problems, overlooking the systemic cracks in Hong Kong’s safety culture. Bamboo scaffolding, for instance, is not inherently unsafe. Even senior scholar and fire expert Professor Huang Xinyan from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University issued a statement clarifying that “the actual contribution of bamboo, relative to other materials, is a complex scientific question that requires systematic investigation and fire experiments. At present, there is no comprehensive research on this issue in Hong Kong or elsewhere.” Its risks depend on how it is used and whether safety measures, such as nonflammable netting, are in place. To address public concern, the Development Bureau’s current review of scaffolding materials is a welcome step, but any road map to promote alternatives must be evidence-based and consider the economic and cultural impact on the construction industry.

Similarly, smoking bans on construction sites face practical challenges. According to a report published by the Construction Industry Council, roughly 45 percent of construction workers are smokers. Enforcing a sitewide ban is not simply about issuing rules; it requires cultural change, phased education, and consistent enforcement. In the past, Hong Kong has successfully banned smoking in restaurants and bars through a gradual, collaborative approach. Construction sites will require a similar effort, involving developers, contractors, and workers, to ensure compliance. It’s more than setting rules or imposing penalties; it’s a journey that we as a city must travel toward a no-smoking construction environment.

The rapid spread of the Tai Po fire was tragically aided by the nonstandard safety nets encasing the building. The government’s immediate order to remove such nets was a necessary emergency response. More importantly, the Buildings Department’s follow-up decision to mandate that all future safety nets be certified by designated facilities is a commendable approach, which many would label as a swift, evidence-based regulatory upgrade. Yes, compliance may increase costs, but this is precisely the minimal price of public safety.

This response shows how decisive action backed by scientific evidence can address specific safety risks. However, even the best regulations will fail without a culture of accountability and consistent enforcement. This is where the real challenge lies, not in drafting better rules, but in ensuring they are followed.

At the heart of the Tai Po tragedy lies a more troubling reality. The public rightly fears that Hong Kong is facing widespread industry corruption and regulatory lapses. The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) is investigating allegations of bid-rigging and the use of substandard materials in renovation projects at Wang Fuk Court. Many worry this could just be the tip of the iceberg.

The world’s best regulations are meaningless if they are not enforced or are circumvented by corruption. To break this cycle, Hong Kong needs a transparent and accountable regulatory ecosystem. Does the solution lie in heftier penalties, serious consideration of criminal liability for directors who knowingly endanger lives, or radically stronger oversight of the entire building maintenance chain? The ICAC’s investigation must be the start, not the end, of this reckoning.

The Tai Po fire has revealed the complacency of some industry practitioners toward fire safety. We must ask ourselves: Are we, as a society, willing to prioritize public safety over convenience, cost-saving, and tradition?

Cultural change is often more difficult than regulatory reform, but it is no less critical. Developers and contractors must embrace safety as a core value, not an afterthought. Regulators must act as enforcers and public educators, not merely administrators. And the public, including flat owners and tenants, must demand accountability and be willing to bear the true cost of safety, refusing to accept substandard practices as the norm.

Education and awareness campaigns can shift attitudes. By making fire safety a nonnegotiable priority at every level, from policymakers to contractors to residents, we can forge a culture in which tragedies like Tai Po become unthinkable. The alternative, more reactionary bans without systemic change, will only guarantee more grief in the future.

The author is a senior lecturer of marketing at the Hang Seng University of Hong Kong.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.