Li, Z (2010) Highway work zone safety audits for safety improvements. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 17(5), pp. 512-526. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose-The paper aims to review current practices of road safety audits worldwide, investigate the perceptions of experts on highway work zone safety in the USA and issues of adopting work zone safety audits in the country, and propose a framework for developing guidelines for implementing work zone safety audits for safety improvements. Design/methodology/approach-The paper was conducted by reviewing the existing literature of road safety audits and administering four-week questionnaire surveys of experts on highway work zone safety in the USA. Findings-Road safety audits have been successfully adopted worldwide to maximize safety of the roadway environment for highway users. The questionnaire surveys have clarified leading causes of work zone safety problems and effective countermeasures, types of projects suitable for auditing and audit frequencies, audit team composition and funding sources, audit tasks and tools, and project staff safety training audits. A similar procedure for road safety audits could be adopted for work zone safety audits with emphasis on mitigating work zone safety impacts. Research limitations/implications- Additional survey participants from the highway user group may add valuable insights into the use of highway work zone safety audits for safety improvements. Practical implications-The paper findings would assist in preparing strategies and methodologies for developing the national highway work zone safety audit guidelines in the USA. Originality/value-The work zone safety audit guidelines to be developed could help transportation practitioners effectively conduct work zone safety audits for safety improvements in the country. All rights reserved.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accidents; construction industry; main roads; safety; surveys |
| Index terms: | team composition, questionnaire, practitioner, methodology, survey, user group, strategy, safety audit, safety training, construction industry, funding, audit |
| Subjects: | economic analysis, data collection methods, client relations, practitioner, occupational health and safety management, industry analysis, environmental health, management, performance measurement, research methods |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Organizational Design, Quality 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