Brown, M (1997) Compliance with health and safety legislation: Is deterrence the answer? In: Stephenson, P (ed.) Proceedings of 13th Annual ARCOM Conference, 15-17 September 1997, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
Laws are of little practical importance if people ignore them, therefore public compliance is central to the effectiveness of a law. An enforcing authority wishing to promote compliance must understand why people obey or disobey the law. Two contrasting theories have been suggested to answer this question - instumental and normative. The instrumental perspective underlies deterrent theory, it suggests that compliant behaviour is influenced by tangible, immediate incentives and penalties which are used by the individual to judge personal gains or losses. The normative perspective, in contrast, is concerned with the influence of what people regard as just and moral and their individual attitude of why they should voluntarily follow legal rules. health and safety legislation within the construction industry adopts an instrumental perspective by imposing strict duties on all parties to a project with a threat of punishment for non-compliance. This paper discusses variopus instrumental, normative and also social control mechanisms which can be used to integrate the concept of deterrence with normative control factors in order to achieve maximum compliance levels.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | compliance; instrumental; normative; deterrence; behaviour; legitimacy |
| Index terms: | construction industry, legitimacy, duty, effectiveness, social control, legislation, compliance, penalty, health and safety |
| Subjects: | health safety and environment, performance management, industry analysis, regulatory law, social justice, sociology, contractual role, legal systems |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Research Practice, Contract Administration, Organizational Design, Legal Issues, Quality Management, Ethics |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CT |
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