Zero-Risk Interpretation in the Level of Preventive Action Method Implementation for Health and Safety in Construction Sites

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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of environmental research and public health 2021-03, Vol.18 (7), p.3534
Main Authors: Carpio-de Los Pinos, Antonio José, González-García, María de Las Nieves, Pentelhão, Ligia Cristina, Baptista, J Santos
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accident prevention
Accidents, Occupational - prevention & control
Construction
Construction Industry
Construction sites
Decision making
Ergonomics
Evaluation
Health risks
Humans
Hygiene
Methods
Occupational accidents
Occupational Health
Occupational safety
Perception
Quality control
Research Design
Responsible persons
Risk assessment
Values
Work environment
Working conditions
Workplace
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary: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.
ISSN:1660-4601
1661-7827
1660-4601
DOI:10.3390/ijerph18073534