Empirical study of gap and correlation between philosophies Safety-I and Safety-II: A case of Beijing taxi service system

Abstract

In contrast to the conventional safety philosophy (Safety-I) which focuses on ‘what goes wrong’, a newborn one (Safety-II) focusing on ‘what goes right’ endows people with more opportunities to realize productive safety in complex socio-technical systems. Yet, it is challenging to make the best of both the philosophies in a period of knowledge transition when they may have to coexist. This work investigates how Safety-II may resemble, differ from, and correlate to Safety-I. From individual, environmental and organizational aspects, 9 impacting factors are identified and expounded comparatively in the two philosophies. To examine impact of the factors on accidents and resilience respectively, an empirical approach is presented in the context of Beijing taxi service system (BTSS). Multiple means such as questionnaire surveys, semi-structured interviews, and statistical analysis with bi-method (Correlation Analysis, and Data Envelopment Analysis) cross-checking are utilized comprehensively to support the empirical study. The results show that: a) individual factors play a dominant role in system risk/performance management, in respect to views of both Safety-I and II; and b) organizational factors are more influential in creating and maintaining system resilience. Based on the findings, possible patterns of integrating the two philosophies are instantiated through mutually complementary application to BTSS. Despite the context of BTSS, this work provides a feasible way of comparing between Safety-I and Safety-II, for beneficial reference of other socio-technical systems.