UK construction safety: a zero paradox?

F. Sherratt, A. Dainty
{"title":"UK construction safety: a zero paradox?","authors":"F. Sherratt, A. Dainty","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2017.1305040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The zero accident mantra has become embedded within the safety discourse of large UK construction organisations, but the extent to which zero-focused approaches yield reductions in accident frequency is yet to be empirically investigated. By way of an evidence-based critique, we examine the relationship between major accidents and zero approaches by drawing on Health and Safety Executive accident data over a 4 year period, together with an analysis of major contractors’ safety approaches. This reveals that working on a project subject to a zero safety policy or programme actually appears to slightly increase the likelihood of having a serious life-changing accident or fatality; a possible ‘zero paradox’. Although these findings should be treated with caution, they suggest that the apparent trend towards abandoning zero amongst some large organisations is well-founded. As such, if zero policies stymie learning whilst failing to reduce accidents, the need for a countervailing discourse is clear.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":"15 1","pages":"108 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2017.1305040","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2017.1305040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Abstract The zero accident mantra has become embedded within the safety discourse of large UK construction organisations, but the extent to which zero-focused approaches yield reductions in accident frequency is yet to be empirically investigated. By way of an evidence-based critique, we examine the relationship between major accidents and zero approaches by drawing on Health and Safety Executive accident data over a 4 year period, together with an analysis of major contractors’ safety approaches. This reveals that working on a project subject to a zero safety policy or programme actually appears to slightly increase the likelihood of having a serious life-changing accident or fatality; a possible ‘zero paradox’. Although these findings should be treated with caution, they suggest that the apparent trend towards abandoning zero amongst some large organisations is well-founded. As such, if zero policies stymie learning whilst failing to reduce accidents, the need for a countervailing discourse is clear.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国建筑安全:零悖论?
零事故咒语已经嵌入到大型英国建筑组织的安全话语中,但零焦点方法在多大程度上降低了事故频率还有待实证调查。通过一种基于证据的批评方式,我们通过借鉴健康与安全执行局4年期间的事故数据,以及对主要承包商安全方法的分析,研究了重大事故与零方法之间的关系。这表明,在一个零安全政策或计划的项目中工作,实际上似乎会略微增加发生严重的改变生活的事故或死亡的可能性;一个可能的“零悖论”。尽管这些发现应该谨慎对待,但它们表明,在一些大型组织中,放弃零的明显趋势是有根据的。因此,如果零政策阻碍了学习,同时未能减少事故,那么显然需要一种对抗性的论述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Policy and Practice in Health and Safety
Policy and Practice in Health and Safety PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Safety risk factors in two different types of routine outsourced work: a systematic literature review Multimodal virtual environments: an opportunity to improve fire safety training? Road traffic collisions leading to human casualties in Riyadh: a retrospective study Addressing essential skills gaps among participants in an OHS training program: a pilot study Farewell from the editor
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1