Smallwood, J J; Allen, C J and Deacon, C H (2020) The role of industry 4.0 in construction occupational health (OH). In: Scott, L and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 36th Annual ARCOM Conference, 7-8 September 2020, Online Event, UK.
Abstract
Historical occupational health (OH) challenges, in terms of a range of issues, continue to be experienced, namely not following procedures, unsafe acts, unsafe conditions, non-compliance, sprains and strains, fatigue, and heat stress among workers, materials containing hazardous chemical substances, untrained workers undertaking work, commencement of activities without conducting hazard identification and risk assessment (HIRA), data gathering and recording, and monitoring. Given the abovementioned, and the advent of Industry 4.0, an exploratory quantitative study, which entailed a self-administered questionnaire, was conducted among registered Construction Health and Safety (H&S) practitioners to determine the OH challenges experienced, OH performance, and the potential of Industry 4.0 to contribute to resolving the former cited challenges. The findings indicate that a range of historical challenges, which negatively impact OH performance, continue to be experienced in construction; H&S practitioners rate themselves average relative to awareness of / exposure to eleven Industry 4.0 technologies, and that Industry 4.0 technologies can contribute to resolving the OH challenges experienced in construction. Conclusions include: a different approach is necessary to mitigate the persistent OH challenges; current technology is not capable of resolving the OH challenges; an integrated digital effort is required to resolve the OH challenges, and artificial intelligence, blockchain technology, digitalisation in general, drones, the internet of things, robots, and virtual reality have the potential to contribute to resolving the H&S challenges experienced in construction. Recommendations include: employer associations, professional associations, and statutory councils should raise the level of awareness relative to the potential implementation of Industry 4.0 relative to OH in construction; case studies should be documented and shared; tertiary construction management education programmes should integrate Industry 4.0 into all possible modules, especially H&S and OH-related modules, and continuing professional development (CPD) OH should address Industry 4.0.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; industry 4.0; occupational health; performance |
| Index terms: | risk assessment, monitoring, virtual reality, questionnaire, practitioner, module, exposure, internet, continuing professional development, implementation, artificial intelligence, blockchain, heat stress, compliance, tertiary, industry 4.0, digitalization, health and safety, case study, drone, construction management education, fatigue, programme, occupational health, hazard identification |
| Subjects: | public and environmental health, architectural elements, financial risk, professional development, health safety and environment, automation and robotics, health conditions and diseases, professional education, occupational health and safety management, project controls, environmental health, virtual reality, data collection methods, control systems, practitioner, computing systems, digital technology, curriculum development, contractual arrangements, technology adoption, artificial intelligence |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Site Management, Education, Time Control |
| 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