A fire at a nightclub in North Macedonia has killed at least 59 people and injured more than 150. The blaze broke out at the Pulse nightclub in Kočani , where around 500 people were attending a concert.
Authors
- Milad Haghani
Associate Professor & Principal Fellow in Urban Risk & Resilience, The University of Melbourne
- Ruggiero Lovreglio
Professor in Digital Construction and Fire Engineering, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University
Witnesses reported that pyrotechnics used during the performance ignited the ceiling , causing flames to spread rapidly.
Authorities have arrested 20 people so far , including the club's manager. Investigations continue. The North Macedonian government has declared a seven-day mourning period.
While building fires are not limited to nightclubs, many of the most devastating building fires in history have happened in nightclubs around the world. So why are nightclubs such a risky place for deadly fires?
A long history of nightclub fires
A look at past nightclub fires shows just how common and deadly they've been in the past 100 years. We identified at least 24 nightclub fires where ten or more people died since 1940.
Collectively, these 24 incidents account for at least 2,800 deaths, with nearly 1,300 in the 21st century alone.
The Cocoanut Grove fire (Boston, 1942) remains the deadliest on record, killing 492 people. The club's flammable decorations and locked exits turned what should have been an ordinary night out into one of the worst fire disasters in history .
In Argentina, the República Cromañón fire killed 194 people in 2004, caused by pyrotechnics igniting flammable materials inside the club.
The Kiss nightclub fire in Brazil in 2013 was even deadlier, claiming 242 lives.
More recently, Thailand's Mountain B nightclub fire killed 23 people in 2022.
And in 2023, 13 people died in a fire at the Fonda Milagros nightclub in Spain .
Now, North Macedonia's Pulse nightclub joins this long list.
Why are nightclubs so risky for fires?
A review of past nightclub fires we've collated in our database reveals common patterns. Two key factors have contributed to the frequency and severity of these fire disasters.
1. Pyrotechnics, fireworks and flammable materials
One of the most common causes of nightclub fires has been the use of pyrotechnics in enclosed spaces. Pyrotechnics are controlled chemical reactions designed to produce flames, smoke, or light effects.
They have been involved in at least six of the deadliest nightclub fires, including the recent Pulse nightclub fire in North Macedonia, as well as The Station (United States, 2003), Kiss (Brazil, 2013), Colectiv (Romania, 2015), Lame Horse (Russia, 2009) and República Cromañón (Argentina, 2004).
When used indoors, pyrotechnics can easily ignite flammable ceiling materials , acoustic foam , or decorations.
In some cases, fireworks - which are different from stage pyrotechnics and sometimes illegally used indoors - have played a role. The Lame Horse nightclub fire , which killed 156 people in Russia in 2009, was caused by a spark from fireworks igniting a low ceiling covered in flammable plastic decorations.
Even when fires don't start from pyrotechnics or fireworks, the materials used in nightclub interiors can rapidly turn a small fire into a major disaster.
Foam insulation, wooden panelling, plastic decorations and carpeted walls have all been key factors in past nightclub fires . In Cocoanut Grove (Boston, 1942), artificial palm trees and other flammable decorations accelerated the blaze.
2. Overcrowding and blocked or insufficient exits
Evacuation failures have been a factor in nearly every major nightclub fire.
In some instances, crowds may not immediately recognise the severity of the situation, especially if they mistake alarms for false alarms or special effects (for example, smoke machines, loud music).
Further, patrons could be intoxicated due alcohol or other drugs. Intoxication combined with potential disorientation due to dim lighting can further reduce judgement during an evacuation.
Clearly, the best way to protect patrons is to prevent a fire from breaking out in the first place. But in settings where fire risks are inherently high, the ability to evacuate people swiftly is crucial.
Nightclubs, however, have a poor track record when it comes to evacuation safety measures .
Nightclubs are among the most crowded indoor spaces. While crowd density is part of a nightclub's design and atmosphere, overcrowding beyond legal capacity is common.
A crowd that has gradually gathered over several hours must suddenly evacuate in seconds or minutes to survive a fire. This is made more difficult by narrow hallways and limited exits, which quickly become bottlenecks when hundreds of people attempt to escape at once.
What's more, not all exits are always accessible during a fire. In several past nightclub disasters, locked or obstructed emergency exits have significantly worsened the death toll.
Minimising the risks
Nightclubs are uniquely vulnerable to fires due to a combination of structural risks, unsafe materials, overcrowding and regulatory failures.
While human behaviour plays a role in how fires unfold in confined spaces such as nightclubs, people should be able to go for a night out and expect to come home safely.
Regulatory oversight must ensure strict compliance with fire codes. Venues should have fire suppression systems (such as sprinklers, fire extinguishers and smoke detectors) to control or contain fires before they spread, and adequate exits.
Nightclubs should ban indoor pyrotechnics and fireworks, as history has repeatedly shown their deadly consequences.
Capacity limits must be enforced, and emergency exits should always be accessible.
Australia has strict fire safety regulations for nightclubs , with venues required to have fire suppression systems, emergency exits and trained staff to manage fire risks.
Public awareness is also key. Patrons need to understand the real risk of fires in nightclubs, and be prepared to evacuate swiftly but calmly if danger arises.
Ruggiero Lovreglio receives funding from Royal Society Te Apārangi (NZ) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (USA).
Milad Haghani does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
