Lingard, H; Cooke, T and Blismas, N (2011) Who is 'the designer' in construction occupational health and safety? In: Egbu, C and Lou, E C W (eds.) Proceedings of 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2011, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
In countries of the European Union, and now in Australia, OHS legislation establishes specific responsibilities for construction design professionals. Accordingly OHS duties are established for The Designer. The ascription of responsibility to the occupant of an abstract socio-technical role is problematic. In reality, construction design is a complex iterative process that is influenced by human and non-human agents extending well beyond the project architect and engineer. This paper analyses definitional problems associated with the term The Designer in the context of modern building design. A socio-technical systems analysis is presented for one case study construction project. This case study is used to illustrate that simplistic ascriptions of OHS responsibility are unhelpful and likely to be counter-productive to advancing the Construction Hazard Prevention through Design concept.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction hazard prevention; design; occupational health and safety; socio-technical system |
| Index terms: | European Union, designer, Australia, occupational health and safety, engineer, socio-technical, case study, legislation, building design, duty, agent, prevention, socio-technical system, architect, construction project |
| Subjects: | occupational health and safety management, production management, Geography, financial risk, physical geography and landforms, theoretical framing, research methods, legal systems, architectural design, practitioner, data collection methods, contractual role, profession |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Contract Administration, Legal Issues, Design Practice |
| 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