Grosskopf, K R (2010) Post-disaster recovery and reconstruction safety training. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 1(3), pp. 322-333. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to identify safety hazards likely to be encountered during post-disaster recovery and reconstruction, identify barriers to effective safety training and hazard mitigation, and provide actionable guidance on methods to safely avoid and abate such hazards. Design/methodology/approach: Surveys were administered to 400 participants at 13 training sites to evaluate safety practices among reconstruction contractors and workers. Findings: A comparison of survey results to hazards likely to cause injuries and fatalities during post-disaster reconstruction indicates that little effort is made to assess workers' physical condition or immunization records prior to deployment. Furthermore, data suggest that workers lack safety training in reconstruction-specific hazards such as electrocution, falls, chemical and biological hazards (e.g. contaminated flood water), and equipment hazards (aerial lifts, ladders, electric equipment, generators, etc.). Findings also indicate that training effectiveness is further compromised by limited language and literacy skills of workers, high turnover of workers, and insufficient resources for adequate safety training frequency and duration, especially among smaller contractors (<100 workers). Originality/value: The paper is based on original research funded by the US Government following Hurricane Katrina and is intended to aid in the development of targeted training to reduce worker injuries and fatalities during post-disaster reconstruction.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | employees; hazards; natural disasters; safety training |
| Index terms: | reconstruction, falls, post-disaster reconstruction, duration, safety training, post-disaster recovery, fatalities, natural disaster, turnover, injury, survey, methodology, mitigation, training effectivenes |
| Subjects: | environmental hazards, assessment methods, health conditions and diseases, building construction, project controls, occupational health and safety management, financial risk, research methods, post-disaster and reconstruction, health risk and incident analysis, business management, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Time Control, Education, Urban Studies, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here