Lingard, H; Cooke, T; Blismas, N and Wakefield, R (2013) Prevention through design: Trade-offs in reducing occupational health and safety risk for the construction and operation of a facility. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 3(1), pp. 7-23. ISSN 2044-124X
Abstract
The research aims to explore the interaction between design decisions that reduce occupational health and safety (OHS) risk in the operation stage of a facility's life cycle and the OHS experiences of workers in the construction stage. Data was collected from three construction projects in Australia. Design decisions were examined to understand the reasons they were made and the impact that they had on OHS in the construction and operation stages. The case examples reveal that design decisions made to reduce OHS risk during the operation of a facility can introduce new hazards in the construction stage. These decisions are often influenced by stakeholders external to the project itself. The results provide preliminary evidence of challenges inherent in designing for OHS across the lifecycle of a facility. Further research is needed to identify and evaluate methods by which risk reduction across all stages of a facility's life cycle can be optimised. The research highlights the need to manage tensions between designing for safe construction and operation of a facility. Previous research assumes design decisions that reduce OHS risk in one stage of a facility's life cycle automatically translate to a net risk reduction across the life cycle. The research highlights the need to consider the implications of PtD decision-making focused on one stage of the facility's life cycle for OHS outcomes in other stages.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; construction industry; industry policy; occupational health and safety; operational safety; prevention through design |
| Index terms: | design decision, prevention, construction industry, interaction, evidence, lifecycle, decision-making, construction project, Australia, occupational health and safety, life cycle, risk reduction |
| Subjects: | project delivery, value management, evaluation and assessment methods, industry analysis, behavioral psychology, occupational health and safety management, decision analysis, production management, Geography, financial risk, design practice |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Geographical Context, Risk Management, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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