Abstract

Risk assessment is a legal obligation for all companies in most countries worldwide. It aims to control the quality of working conditions and avoid externalizing the consequences of accidents and resulting costs to society. This work discusses the need for an adequate interpretation of the zero-risk concept from a technical-preventive perspective to assess occupational risks in construction sites. A critical analysis of several risk assessment methodologies was carried out, focusing on the evaluation criteria of little or no-risk situations. The verification of the results was made through a case study. The perception of health and safety risks by workers is very different from that of the evaluators. Often, when workers identify a situation as low-risk or even zero-risk, the evaluator assesses the same context as maximum risk. Given the workers’ and the evaluators’ responses, the Preventive Action Method establishes a new parameter, the Environment Congruence. This parameter is based on the perception of the preventive environment and gives more importance to the evaluators’ decision. When preventive action is optimal, the risk is low in all preventive observation settings. In conclusion, this study justifies the non-nullity of the risk and the difficulty of assessing zero-risk in construction sites. Therefore, evaluations with qualitative and quantitative non-risk approaches should be discarded.

Highlights

  • All companies must carry out mandatory risk assessments regarding their workers’health and safety, regardless of their production and size [1,2]

  • PreventiveasAction based on Absolute Risk and the Environment Assessparameters can be follows: ment parameters can be described as follows: Level of Preventive Action (Lpac) = (Rab )·(Epac ) = (P·C) · ((Rr ·Rb ·E)/(Ec ·Pi ·levels of worker satisfaction (Ls) ))

  • The Knowledge Gap is that the assumption of zero-risk is not correct since it does not exist and, in addition, the perception of risk depends largely on the individual or group of people considered

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Health and safety, regardless of their production and size [1,2] For this process, several risk assessment methodologies are available to analyze risk from different intervention areas, such as Occupational Safety, Industrial Hygiene, Ergonomics, and Psychosociology [3]; and its implementation can be individually or globally [4]. More recent research exposes the need for risk assessment to be carried out in an integrated way, covering the four main intervention areas (Occupational Safety, Industrial Hygiene, Ergonomics, and Psychosociology) [5], and thereby increasing the effectiveness of risk assessment. Medical procedures act on the individual with periodic medical examinations, health care, and physical rehabilitation [6,7,8]; on the other, different approaches focus on the work environment.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.