Odeyinka, H A; Davison, C and Olomolaiye, A (2005) An assessment of factors inhibiting designers from complying with health and safety regulations in their design. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 21st Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-9 September 2005, London, UK.
Abstract
The construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 (CDM) place an important duty on designers to consider the health and safety of the workforce by designing out and minimising risks associated with the construction, maintenance and demolition of a building. Despite the specific duties imposed by the regulations on designers, statistics by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) reveal that two-thirds of designers did not take them into consideration when working on their designs. This study aims at addressing the root cause of this by assessing the designers' level of awareness, understanding and expected commitment to the CDM regulations. In addition, the study seeks to determine the specific aspects of the regulations that designers have not been taking into consideration and the factors inhibiting compliance with health and safety regulations. The study was conducted through a questionnaire survey of UK construction designers and other construction industry participants. Results showed that whilst most respondents claimed to be fully conversant with their duties under the CDM, many indicated that the regulations require some clarifications as unspecific wordings in many cases means that the regulations are open to interpretations. Results further showed that inadequate time to explore design alternatives and budget constraints imposed by the client significantly inhibit designs from being able to comply with health and safety regulations at the design stage.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cdm regulations; designers; health and safety; UK |
| Index terms: | commitment, health and safety executive, budget constraint, survey, designer, compliance, health and safety, statistics, construction industry, duty, design stage, questionnaire, regulation |
| Subjects: | political science, industry analysis, health safety and environment, financial and cost management, professional practice, psychology, practitioner, mathematical modelling, data collection methods, contractual role, profession |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Governance, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Design 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