Kokkarinen, N; Shaw, A; Cullen, J; Pedrola, M O; Mason, A and Al-Shamma’a, A (2014) Investigation of audible carbon monoxide alarm ownership : Case study. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 3(1), pp. 72-86. ISSN 2046-6099
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to outline the level of audible carbon monoxide (CO) alarm ownership. In this particular paper the data collected by the fire and rescue services from West Midlands and Merseyside will be analysed, and discussed. Design/methodology/approach – Research was conducted in two stages. Using the indices of multiple deprivation identified whether households in the top and bottom four areas owned an audible alarm. In stage two data loggers were placed into homes to take readings every minute for a total period of three days to three weeks. Findings – There was a noticeable trend that deprived areas were less likely to own audible CO alarms than homes in non-deprived areas. All homes surveyed in stage two had CO levels > 0 which further emphasises that anyone can be under health risk and that perhaps the maintenance of gas appliances and other sources is not being conducted at regular intervals. Social implications – This paper aims to raise awareness regarding not only the symptoms during CO poisoning but also the ones that have been reported to occur after treatment. It will also disseminate information as to what areas have low alarm ownership and thus more at risk of poisoning. It is hoped that findings from papers such as this one will promote more stringent maintenance and replacement requirements for gas or solid fuel appliances. Originality/value – Pilot study for the comparison of two English cities has not been conducted before and may lead to more studies of this kind.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | carbon monoxide; coventry; deprived areas; liverpool; living environments; non-deprived |
| Index terms: | ownership, investigation, household, case study, methodology, replacement, deprivation, health risk |
| Subjects: | environmental health, demography, social justice, research methods, economics, materials science, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Urban Studies, Ethics |
| 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