Mohd Zainudin, N (2019) Identification and analysis of worker safety hazards in Midwest agribusiness construction work sites. Unpublished PhD thesis, Iowa State University, USA.
Abstract
The construction industry is characterized by high fatality and injury rates. The dynamic nature of construction projects has exposed its workers to multiple safety hazards and risks, resulting to the high fatality and injury rates on sites. Agribusiness construction is a sub-classified area of the construction industry. Agribusiness construction incidents are thought to contribute to the high fatality and injury rates in the construction industry, yet little empirical work done to confirm this hypothesis. A lack of available data to address fatalities and injuries with specific focus on agribusiness construction sites has hindered many efforts to improve safety management within the industry. Worker safety hazards for agribusiness construction sites and their contributing factors are important in the development of tailored preventative safety measures to reduce safety incidents in the future. Because safety incident can be attributed to multiple factors, research on worker safety incidents must encompass the depth and breadth of the area, specifically concerning underlying contributing factors, through the application of effective research approach. This study aimed at identifying worker safety hazards commonly present at agribusiness construction sites and their contributing factors using a mixed method approach and fault tree analysis (FTA). Purposive sampling was utilized to gather sample. Industrial experts and academic professionals were approached to participate in semi-structured interviews and surveys. Participants were asked to identify worker safety hazards and their contributing factors during the interview sessions and then quantify and rank order the hazards and factors through the surveys. FTA was then used to further analyze the contributing factors to the worker safety hazard. The research results provide a better understanding of worker safety hazards occurring in agribusiness construction projects, identification of contributing factors to the hazards, and comparison of safety research data and census data relative to worker safety hazards in agribusiness construction industry. Safety professionals, construction companies, and training developers will be able to use the research results to develop safety plan tailored for agribusiness construction sites.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Gretchen, A M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction project; construction site; hazards; injury; safety; training; developer; professional; interview; construction safety; fault tree analysis; mixed method |
| Index terms: | construction site, construction company, survey, interview, injury, construction safety, safety management, safety research, construction project, fault-tree analysis, construction incident, mixed method, safety measures, fatalities, purposive sampling, construction industry, construction work |
| Subjects: | risk management, data collection methods, work location, health risk and incident analysis, environmental health, industry analysis, health conditions and diseases, occupational health and safety management, organization, operations management, health safety and environment, production management, research methods |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Site Management |
| 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