De Saram, D D and Tang, S L (2005) Pain and suffering costs of persons in construction accidents: Hong Kong experience. Construction Management and Economics, 23(6), pp. 645-658. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Direct financial costs of accidents are the tip of the iceberg when compared to the indirect costs. Notwithstanding the difficulties involved, it is very important to estimate the indirect costs borne by society, and the non-material losses due to pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life undergone by the victim. This study investigates the pain and suffering costs (non-material losses) of the victims of construction accidents in Hong Kong based on relevant High Court personal injury case judgements in the years 1999-2003. The 54 non-fatal accident cases and 14 fatal accident cases analysed indicate that the average percentage of compensation awarded for non-material damages (pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life) to that for material damages (loss of earnings, medical and travelling expenses, etc.) during those years is about 30%. This result enables estimating the pain and suffering costs of the society for a particular year if the total material losses of all construction accidents in that year are known. Based on previous research in which the material losses in Hong Kong were evaluated for the years 1999, 2000 and 2001, the corresponding pain and suffering costs could be estimated as 219 million, 150 million and 107 million Hong Kong dollars, respectively (US$1.00=HK$7.80).
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accidents; construction; costs; damages; Hong Kong losses; pain; suffering |
| Index terms: | indirect cost, injury, construction accident, estimate, estimating, Hong Kong, pain, compensation, society, damages |
| Subjects: | financial and cost management, health conditions and diseases, dispute resolution, cost management, communities and social development, occupational health and safety management, Geography |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Legal Issues, Procurement, Stakeholder Management, Cost Management, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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