Tymvios, N and Gambatese, J A (2016) Perceptions about design for construction worker safety: Viewpoints from contractors, designers, and university facility owners. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(2): 04015078, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Decisions made before construction can affect safety on the construction site, either positively or negatively. This was observed from past research that identified the link between design decisions and fatalities. The concept of implementing design decisions that positively affect safety falls under the general concept of prevention through design (PtD), which attempts to identify and mitigate hazards early in the design process to eliminate the risks of injury or damage during construction. Prevention through design is practiced in other countries, primarily through legislation. The objective of this paper is to present the results of a survey that was conducted to identify construction industry stakeholders' views on the concept of PtD and gauge the possibility for implementing PtD in the U.S. construction industry through either legislation or other means. Four distinct groups were surveyed: engineers, architects, contractors, and owners. Within this study, PtD was described and introduced to survey participants as design for construction worker safety (DCWS) to differentiate PtD efforts in construction from efforts in other industries. The survey consisted of questions that asked about the industry's knowledge of PtD and the extent of PtD practice in the United States, participants' opinions on designer and owner safety knowledge and perceptions, and obstacles and enablers for designer participation in construction safety. The responses from the various groups were compared to identify the groups that are more receptive to the idea of designer participation in construction worker safety. The results showed that architects were the least receptive to the idea, whereas the other groups were more likely to be supportive, with some hesitations. Architects and engineers identified the existence of economic, legal, and contractual obstacles for designers to practice DCWS, whereas contractors only identified economic obstacles. No enablers were identified by any group. The research contributes additional information that can be used by construction industry practitioners and organizations desiring to expand and optimize PtD implementation in the United States. The research results can be used by project teams to plan for PtD education and training efforts on projects and by construction industry organizations to develop PtD diffusion strategies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accident prevention; accidents; design; occupational safety; owners; project planning and design; safety |
| Index terms: | injury, design process, accident prevention, legislation, United States, survey, construction site, strategy, practitioner, project planning, design decision, construction safety, university facility, falls, designer, engineer, owner, architect, project team, education and training, fatalities, construction worker, occupational safety, implementation, prevention, construction industry |
| Subjects: | environmental health, industry analysis, sociology, professional education, health conditions and diseases, occupational health and safety management, financial risk, Geography, design practice, management, health risk and incident analysis, project delivery, contractual arrangements, legal systems, work location, practitioner, control systems, design methods, profession, construction type, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Design Practice, Site Management, Education, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Procurement |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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