By Ephraim Agbo
The fire that consumed Singa Market on the day and night of February 14 to the morning of February 15 , 2026, did not begin at about 4:30 pm, though that is when the first alarms sounded. It began decades ago, in the decisions not taken: the hydrants never installed, the access lanes never widened, the electrical grids never upgraded, the safety inspections never conducted. It began in the gap between what governance promises and what it delivers—a gap wide enough to swallow millions of naira in goods and thousands of livelihoods, again and again.
Fourteen days earlier, another fire had torn through the same commercial axis. Between these two events, the Kano State Government announced a ₦3 billion road rehabilitation package for the area—implicitly acknowledging the spatial chaos that turns manageable fires into conflagrations. The announcement came after the first fire, before the second. It changed nothing for the traders who watched their inventory turn to ash on Valentine's Day.
This is not a story about accidents. It is a story about systemic failure, about the political economy of disaster, and about the people who are expected to absorb loss as though it were a normal cost of doing business in Nigeria's most storied commercial hub.
The Architecture of Vulnerability
To understand why Kano's markets burn with such predictable regularity, one must first understand how they are built—not just physically, but economically and politically.
The city's major trading hubs—the lanes off Bello Road, the warehouses along Ado Bayero Road, the stalls pressed against one another along the commercial spine that feeds the metropolis—form what urban planners would call a continuous fire load. They are not discrete markets separated by safety buffers but an unbroken corridor of commerce: structures sharing walls, power sources, access routes, and the ambient risk of any single spark. The density that makes Kano's informal economy so vibrantly efficient—the ability to source any good within a 500-meter radius, the clustering that reduces transaction costs—is precisely what makes it catastrophically vulnerable.
This is not an accident of history. It is the product of a particular development trajectory in which the state ceded spatial planning to the logic of commerce, and commerce, left to itself, optimizes for profit, not safety. When every square meter generates income, no trader volunteers to leave it empty as a firebreak. When landlords retrofit structures without permits, no authority intervenes to enforce codes. The result is what we see today: markets that function as engines of prosperity during business hours and as tinderboxes through the day and after dark.
The February 14 to 15 fire exploited this architecture with mechanical precision. It began in one warehouse—sources suggest an electrical fault, though investigations remain inconclusive—and traveled along the axis of adjacency, fed by textiles, plastics, and the dried goods that fill Kano's warehouses. By the time firefighters arrived, the question was not whether they could save the structure but how much of it they could prevent from burning.
The Infrastructure of Failure
Firefighting, at its most basic level, requires three things: detection, access, and suppression. In Kano's major markets, all three are compromised by design.
Detection fails because fires often start after hours, when markets are empty and the first sign of trouble is smoke visible from neighboring streets. By then, the fire has established itself, feeding on inventory that represents not just goods but the compressed life savings of thousands of households.
Access fails because the lanes that once allowed donkey carts to pass now accommodate neither vehicles nor, in some cases, pedestrians. Encroachment—stalls spilling into walkways, goods stacked in passageways, structures built without regard to setbacks—has turned the commercial axis into a maze. Fire engines arrive, as they did on February 14, only to find that the last 200 meters are impassable. Hoses must be laid manually. Time is lost. The fire grows.
Suppression fails when the water runs out. This is perhaps the most damning indictment of the system: that in a city of millions, with markets that generate billions in annual turnover, there is no dedicated water infrastructure for firefighting. Fire trucks carry what they can carry—typically between 5,000 and 10,000 liters—and when that is exhausted, the search begins for private water tankers. On February 14, witnesses reported that initial water supplies were exhausted before reinforcements arrived. Firefighters scrambled to locate tankers, negotiate prices, direct them to the scene. While they negotiated, the fire burned.
This is not a failure of courage or effort. The Kano State Fire Service has been visible at every major incident, its personnel working through nights and weekends, often at great personal risk. It is a failure of design—a system that relies on heroism rather than infrastructure, on improvisation rather than planning. When the usual response to a fire is to search for water, the system has already failed.
The Political Economy of Reaction
The government's response to market fires follows a pattern so consistent it might be mistaken for policy.
Phase one: Condolences. Officials visit the scene, pose for photographs amid the ruins, and express sympathy for the traders' losses. These visits are covered extensively by local media, generating images of governance in action.
Phase two: Announcements. Relief packages are promised, investigations launched, committees formed. The ₦3 billion road rehabilitation package announced after the first February fire is a classic example—a major infrastructure commitment framed as a response to disaster, even though it addresses only one dimension of a multidimensional problem.
Phase three: Disbursement. Small sums are distributed to affected traders, often through channels that favor those with political connections. The amounts are rarely sufficient to replace lost inventory, but they generate another round of positive coverage.
Phase four: Silence. The committees conclude their work. The investigations produce no public findings. The next fire waits.
This cycle—reaction, announcement, partial implementation, forgetting—is not unique to Kano or to Nigeria. It is characteristic of governance systems that treat disasters as public relations problems rather than structural failures. The underlying logic is simple: responding to fires generates visible political benefits; preventing fires does not. A hydrant, once installed, produces no photo opportunities. A safety inspection, properly conducted, generates no headlines. The incentives align against prevention, and the result is a system that waits for the next disaster to justify its existence.
The Human Ledger
Numbers obscure as much as they reveal. "Goods worth millions of naira" is the standard formulation in news reports, and it is true as far as it goes. But it does not go far enough.
For Aisha, a textile trader in Singa Market for 22 years, the fire consumed 400 bales of fabric—her entire inventory, purchased on credit from a Lagos supplier. She had been saving for months to restock after the first February fire damaged her previous supply. Now she owes ₦3.2 million, has no goods to sell, and faces creditors who are not known for patience. Her children's school fees were due next week. Her youngest needs medication for a chronic condition. The math does not work.
For Suleiman, who ran a provisions store in the same market, the loss is measured not in naira but in decades. He built the business from nothing, starting as a load-boy at 14, graduating to his own stall at 25, expanding slowly over 30 years. The fire erased not just his inventory but the accumulated capital of a lifetime. At 55, he does not have another 30 years to rebuild. He does not know what he will do.
For Fatima, who sold cooked food to traders from a stall near the market entrance, the fire's impact was indirect but devastating. When the market burned, her customers disappeared. She has not cooked in two weeks. Her husband, a transporter who moved goods between the market and the suburbs, has had no work. They are eating into savings meant for their daughter's wedding next year.
These stories do not appear in the official tallies. They are not captured by the phrase "goods worth millions." But they are the true measure of the disaster—a measure that compounds over time, as debt accumulates, as children are pulled from school, as households slide from precarity into crisis.
Women traders, who dominate retail stalls and cross-border commodity chains, face particular vulnerabilities. They have less access to formal credit, smaller capital buffers, and greater responsibility for household welfare. When a fire destroys their inventory, it destroys not just a business but the social fabric that depends on their income. The ripple effects extend far beyond the market's boundaries, into neighborhoods across Kano.
The Accountability Gap
Why does this pattern persist? The answer lies in what might be called the accountability gap—the space between those who experience disaster and those who have the power to prevent it.
Market fires, for all their devastation, are diffuse events. They affect thousands of people but rarely produce a single, focused constituency for change. Traders are occupied with survival—with salvaging what remains, with negotiating with creditors, with finding new places to sell. They have neither the time nor the resources to mount sustained advocacy campaigns. Journalists cover the flames and the funerals, then move to the next story. The public's attention, captured by dramatic images, fades as the ashes cool.
In this gap, the system continues as before. The same decisions not taken remain not taken. The same hydrants not installed remain not installed. The same lanes not widened remain impassable. And the same fires, waiting for the right combination of spark and fuel and wind, prepare to burn again.
This is not a conspiracy. It is a structural reality—a set of incentives and constraints that produce predictable outcomes. Politicians respond to visible demands; market fires, once the cameras leave, cease to be visible. Bureaucrats allocate resources according to established procedures; fire prevention has no established line item. Traders organize around immediate threats; the next fire is always somewhere else, someone else's problem, until it isn't.
Toward a Different Trajectory
Breaking this cycle requires more than good intentions. It requires a fundamental shift in how disaster risk is understood, governed, and financed.
The immediate measures are clear enough. Emergency cash transfers can keep the most vulnerable traders from destitution while they rebuild. Coordinated relief efforts—managed jointly by government agencies, market associations, and community leaders—can reduce duplication and corruption. Pre-positioned water tankers and portable pumps can buy precious minutes when the next fire starts.
But these are palliatives, not solutions. The real work lies deeper.
It lies in the hydrant networks and dedicated water mains that should have been built decades ago—infrastructure that treats firefighting as a public utility rather than an act of God. It lies in the spatial planning that creates firebreaks, widens access lanes, and moves traders out of structures that violate every known safety standard. It lies in the professionalization and funding of the Kano State Fire Service—modern pumps, satellite substations, guaranteed night shifts—so that heroism becomes unnecessary.
It lies, most fundamentally, in the recognition that prevention is not optional. It is not a luxury to be funded when revenues permit. It is a core function of governance, as essential as roads or schools or hospitals. And like those functions, it requires sustained investment, professional management, and public accountability.
The ₦3 billion road rehabilitation package announced after the first February fire could be a down payment on this vision—if it is implemented transparently, if it includes genuine safety improvements, if it is followed by complementary investments in water infrastructure and emergency services. Or it could be another announcement, another photo opportunity, another step in the cycle of reaction and forgetting.
The Choice
Every fire at Singa Market writes the same lesson into ash: that urban commerce cannot sustain itself indefinitely without the infrastructure to protect it. The traders know this. They have lived through enough fires to understand the risks. They continue to trade because they have no choice—because this market, with all its dangers, is the only economy they have.
The question is whether those with the power to act will learn the same lesson. Whether they will see in the ashes not just a tragedy but an indictment. Whether they will treat prevention as an investment rather than an expense. Whether they will build the hydrants, widen the lanes, enforce the codes, and fund the services that could make the next fire a manageable incident rather than a recurring disaster.
If they do, the fires of February 2026 will become a turning point—a moment when the city chose a different path. If they do not, the markets will continue to burn, and the traders will continue to rebuild, and the cycle will continue until the next fire, and the next, and the next.
The choice is not technical. It is political. It is about whether governance exists to serve those who elected it or to perpetuate itself through gestures. It is about whether the people of Kano—the traders, the transporters, the load-boys, the women who cook and sell and keep households together—are seen as citizens with rights to safety and security or as subjects who must accept loss as their portion.
The ashes are still warm. The cameras are still here. The attention has not yet faded. This is the moment when change becomes possible—if anyone is willing to seize it.
No comments:
Post a Comment