Zhang, W; Xue, N; Zhang, J and Zhang, X (2021) Identification of critical causal factors and paths of tower-crane accidents in China through system thinking and complex networks. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(12): 04021174, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Tower-crane accidents occur frequently with serious consequences, including deaths, serious injuries, and economic losses. To identify the critical causes and paths of tower-crane accidents, the network analysis method is utilized. First, according to the relevant laws, regulations, and standards regarding tower-crane safety, a system of tower-crane accident causes is decomposed into 6 subsystems and 34 causal factors through system thinking. Then a sample of 194 tower-crane accident reports is used as empirical data. Accident causes are considered the nodes, and correlations among the causes are considered edges, through which a network model of tower-crane accident causes is established. The statistical indicators of the network model, such as the degree, strength, and shortest path, are calculated, after which seven critical factors and three critical paths of tower-crane accident causation are identified. Finally, a major tower-crane collapse accident in the city of Yueyang is adopted to conduct a case study and verify the practicality of the established systematic model and the reasonability of the analysis results.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accident cause; complex network; system thinking; tower crane |
| Index terms: | critical path, injury, China, regulation, critical factor, tower crane, case study, network analysis |
| Subjects: | maintenance engineering, Geography, health conditions and diseases, political science, data collection methods, risk assessment, operations research, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Time Control, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Risk Management, Governance |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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