Categories
Uncategorized

 

Are fires at night time always Arson?

 

The idea that fires that start at night are always the result of arson frequently comes up in public debate whenever there are large fires in Portugal.

This was also the meaning of the statement made by João Tilly , a member of parliament for the Chega party, at the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee into the Rural Fires Business , last Tuesday.

“The fires that break out at night and in the early morning are all arson. All of them, 100%,” stated the Chega party deputy.

In his response, researcher Joaquim Sande Silva, a former member of the independent technical commission for the 2017 fires and of the Independent Technical Observatory, downplayed the “arson myth”.

“Beyond being a teacher, I am also a researcher, so I try to be guided by facts, things that are properly proven. It is not properly proven that all fires that break out at night are intentionally set,” said the expert, before listing scenarios in which a fire can break out at night.

Let’s look at the data.

The available official data – namely from the Institute for Nature Conservation and Forests (ICNF) and entities within the fire management system – show that the generalization made by João Tilly has no factual basis .

First of all, it is important to separate two different issues: when the fires start and what causes them . The ICNF reports exhaustively analyze the causes of ignitions, but do not establish any direct relationship that would allow us to conclude that the nighttime period is predominantly associated with arson . On the contrary, the evidence points to a more complex reality.

The most recent data indicate that arson accounts for a substantial portion of fires. In the last provisional report of 2025 , for example, the ICNF (Institute for Nature Conservation and Forests) states that approximately 31% of the fires investigated were intentionally set .

In turn, burning and controlled burns account for almost a quarter (23%) of the total causes identified , a trend that is not isolated. Negligence is historically the main cause of fires: between 50% and 60% of occurrences originate from the improper use of fire (controlled burns, campfires, burning of garbage), while arson typically accounts for 25% to 40% of cases, although it has a greater impact on the area burned.

Are fires that start at night "all arson"?
PAULO NOVAIS // LUSA

Furthermore, there are other relevant causes that dismantle the idea that everything boils down to deliberate criminal acts : rekindling of poorly extinguished fires, equipment or power line failures, machinery accidents and, although residual, natural phenomena such as lightning strikes.

The report prepared last year by the Agency for Integrated Rural Fire Management also underlines this diversity. In 2024, for example, only about 70% of the fires investigated had a determined cause, which means that a significant portion remains undetermined, making any simplistic conclusion about motivations impossible.

There is also an essential point that directly contradicts the statement in question: the fact that a fire starts at night does not allow us to infer its cause. Many negligent ignitions occur precisely outside the hottest hours: for example, controlled burns carried out at the end of the day that are poorly extinguished and reignite during the early morning, or agricultural work that prolongs thermal effects for hours. Reignitions are, moreover, a category of their own in official statistics and explain a portion of the occurrences.

The legislation itself imposes time restrictions on the use of machinery on days with a high risk of fire – “from 11 am until sunset”, according to Article 69 of Decree-Law No. 82/2021 – which pushes these activities into the cooler hours (night/early morning), increasing the likelihood of accidents during those time windows.

Furthermore, meteorological and physical factors also play a significant role in the evolution of fires during the night . The decrease in temperature and the increase in humidity can slow the progression, but they do not prevent latent fires from turning into active fires hours later, without any further human intervention.

In an in-depth analysis of one of the most recent major fire tragedies in Portugal, the report by the Independent Technical Commission on the October 2017 fires points to a ” very strong correlation between the number of ignitions and the exceptional weather conditions ” and specifies: “The fires of October 15 were dominated by the influence of Hurricane Ophelia . Initially, it was the wind strength and low humidity that allowed the fires to grow. However, it is the set of pyro-convective phenomena [ascending and descending movements in the atmosphere associated with fires] that subsequently develop, and not solely the wind, that is responsible for the large fire episode on the afternoon of October 15 and the night of October 16.”

In short, official data from the ICNF and other entities show that arson is only one of several causes of fire and that there are multiple additional origins (accidental, rekindled, unknown), with no evidence linking nighttime to arson .

SIC Verifica that it is…

Are fires that start at night "all arson"?

The statement that “fires that break out at night and in the early morning are all arson” lacks factual support. It is a generalization unsupported by official data, ignoring the diversity of causes and the actual ignition mechanisms of rural fires in Portugal.

Categories
Uncategorized

 

Towards an integrated rural fire management framework in Portugal

 

This OECD Environmental Police Paper was published on 7th April 2026.

Following the devastating 2017 wildfires, Portugal embarked on a series of reforms to improve its wildfire management. With the creation of the Integrated Rural Fire Management System (IRFMS), wildfire management became a policy priority across government and non-government agencies, leading to a sizeable scale-up of resources aimed at limiting wildfire damages.

The introduction of the IRFMS has improved institutional, regulatory and financing conditions for wildfire management. The IRFMS developed a unified strategy, clarified responsibilities across national, regional, and municipal levels for fire prevention and response, and created the Agency for Integrated Rural Fire Management (AGIF) to coordinate all involved entities. Fire regulations were strengthened through stricter buffer zones, higher penalties, and improved fire-resistant building standards. New incentives promoted prescribed burning and strategic fuel mosaics, increasingly recognising the role of landscape- and nature-based approaches to reduce wildfire risk. Since 2018, public funding for wildfire management has doubled, with prevention now representing nearly half of total fire-related expenditure.

The IRFMS also strengthened data and information systems to better ground fire management decisions in evidence. Portugal has since developed national fire hazard and risk maps covering all the country’s fire-prone areas, which enable decision makers to identify the most exposed localities. Tools and technologies to monitor fire behaviour and adapt suppression activities were improved, and a monitoring and evaluation system for all projects funded under the IRFMS was established. These initiatives enhanced transparency and efficiency in resource allocation by improving targeting and prioritisation of measures. Through annual and quarterly progress reports and lessons learned processes, the IRFMS also promotes continuous learning and improvement across all agencies.

Nevertheless, the scale and damage of the 2024 and 2025 wildfires point to a need to accelerate reform implementation. In 2024, 35 fires burning over 500 hectares accounted for 84% of the total annual burned area, and the summer of 2025 again saw the occurrence of large fires, whose burned area surpassed that of the 2017 fires that triggered the IRFMS reform. These events revealed several shortcomings:

  • Persistent regulatory weaknesses. A high number of human-caused ignitions and persistent gaps in meeting fuel management targets indicate challenges in ensuring regulatory compliance. Some regulations are perceived as top-down and misaligned with local realities. Limited enforcement and weak sanctions further reduce compliance.
  • Frequent shifts in institutional arrangements could undermine progress. Moving AGIF’s coordinating function from the Prime Minister’s office to a sectoral ministry that developed its own Forest Intervention Plan, which is complementary but sometimes overlapping with the IRFMS’ strategy, could weaken clarity, coherence, political leadership, and the very integrated approach built in recent years.
  • Complex and multiple large fires remain difficult to contain. Increasingly severe fire weather conditions (e.g. temperature increases and prolonged dry periods) and socio-economic changes that reduce active land management practices, combined with the governance challenges mentioned above, make complex fires especially challenging to manage.
  • Fire hazard and risk maps are contested locally. This delays the adoption of municipal execution plans, which are critical for accessing funding and implementing fire regulations.
  • Public funding arrangements are fragmented and provide limited incentives for private investment in wildfire prevention. Fragmented funding sources leave actors often unaware of available resources. Ambiguity around government ex post compensation for fire losses further weakens incentives for preventive investment, while low and costly insurance coverage in high-risk areas limits financial protection and discourages proactive risk reduction.
  • Incomplete loss and damage accounting. Data collection on observed forest, infrastructure and building losses and damages is improving, but is not yet systematically compiled or used to guide funding allocation decisions.
  • Monitoring and evaluation efforts have not sufficiently improved transparency, accountability and continuous improvement. While information on the implementation of wildfire management measures is being collected, existing indicators do not sufficiently capture outcomes such as improvements in wildfire resilience. Equally, evaluation tools are not fully used to track transparency and accountability and inform continuous improvement.

 

Key recommendations to strengthen implementation of the IRFMS

Copy link to Key recommendations to strengthen implementation of the IRFMS

Build a stronger institutional framework

  • Maintain commitment to an integrated approach to wildfire management. Future institutional reforms should preserve and build on the core achievements of the IRFMS’ integrated and coordinated approach, ensuring clear responsibilities and accountability in institutional arrangements across all government and non-government actors.

    Further strengthen prevention

  • Simplify and tailor regulations to local conditions, ensuring they account for territorial differences and facilitate compliance for different target groups. Design proportional and enforceable sanctions that can effectively encourage preventative behaviour.
  • Address structural constraints to effective fuel management implementation by accelerating land registration, prioritising abandoned or highly flammable vegetation, and continuing targeted behavioural prevention to reduce human-caused ignitions.
  • Further integrate active land management and ecosystem-based approaches into fire risk reduction, including sustainable forest management and conservation of natural assets, and promoting native and broadleaf species where appropriate.

Enhance funding efficiency

  • Develop a long-term comprehensive wildfire funding strategy to increase the efficiency of wildfire management expenditures. This could shed light on all wildfire funding resources available, clarify ex ante and ex post cost-sharing mechanisms between government levels and public-private actors, revise fiscal equalisation rules to better support high-risk areas, and create incentives for sustainable land management and ecosystem services.

Further anchor wildfire management decisions in evidence

  • Improve hazard data by mapping high-value assets to further support planning and prioritisation of fire management measures.

    Continue strengthening monitoring and evaluation of the IRFMS. Existing indicators could be improved to better evaluate outcomes. Lessons learned processes could be conducted more regularly. Fostering a strong evaluation culture and linking decisions (including spending) to clear accountability mechanisms can improve performance, and operational efficiency.

Increase community engagement

  • Emphasise inclusiveness in developing local hazard maps. Including local actors in the design of these maps, thereby valuing their knowledge of fire occurrence and spread, can increase the acceptance of fire prevention measures, and compliance with fire regulations.

Full report https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/towards-an-integrated-rural-fire-management-framework-in-portugal_9cb528df-en/full-report/component-3.html#chapter-d1e111