IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i16p8387-d610567.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of the Level of Preventive Action Method by Observation of the Characteristic Value for the Assessment of Occupational Risks on Construction Sites

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio José Carpio de los Pinos

    (Department of Applied Mechanics and Project Engineering, Toledo School of Industrial and Aerospace Engineering, Campus of International Excellence in Energy and Environment, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Real Fábrica de Armas, Edif. Sabatini. Av. Carlos III, s/n, 45071 Toledo, Spain)

  • María de las Nieves González García

    (Escuela Técnica Superior de Edificación, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Avenida Juan de Herrera, 6, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • José Antonio Soriano

    (Department of Applied Mechanics and Project Engineering, Toledo School of Industrial and Aerospace Engineering, Campus of International Excellence in Energy and Environment, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Real Fábrica de Armas, Edif. Sabatini. Av. Carlos III, s/n, 45071 Toledo, Spain)

  • Benito Yáñez Araque

    (Applied Intelligent Systems Research Group, Department of Physical Activity and Sports Sciences, Campus of International Excellence in Energy and Environment, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain)

Abstract

The special circumstances of the high accident rate in the construction industry compared to other sectors are significant and represent a major concern for many countries. Construction work involves a large number of risks that cause or may cause accidents with serious consequences for the worker’s health, even death. The Level of Preventive Action is a novel methodology of occupational risk assessment adapted to building works. It is based on the development of the mathematical formulation of William T. Fine’s method. Its implementation covers four of the techniques for combating risk: Safety at Work, Industrial Hygiene, Ergonomics and Psychosociology. It evaluates, quantitatively, the amount of preventive action required based on the characteristic complexity of the work units, their location and their interdependence. The method protocol defines a new observation parameter called Characteristic Value which is inherent to the real situation of the construction process. The aim of this study is to develop the characterisation of the Characteristic Value in the Level of Preventive Action method. It also justifies the procedure to obtain this Characteristic Value and how its implementation and result should be interpreted. Finally, the methodology is applied on a real case.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio José Carpio de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González García & José Antonio Soriano & Benito Yáñez Araque, 2021. "Development of the Level of Preventive Action Method by Observation of the Characteristic Value for the Assessment of Occupational Risks on Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-27, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:16:p:8387-:d:610567
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/16/8387/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/16/8387/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avdiu, Besart & Nayyar, Gaurav, 2020. "When face-to-face interactions become an occupational hazard: Jobs in the time of COVID-19," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    2. Antonio José Carpio-de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González-García, 2020. "Development of the Protocol of the Occupational Risk Assessment Method for Construction Works: Level of Preventive Action," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-33, September.
    3. Antonio José Carpio-de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González-García & Ligia Cristina Pentelhão & J. Santos Baptista, 2021. "Zero-Risk Interpretation in the Level of Preventive Action Method Implementation for Health and Safety in Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Xiaoyan Jiang & Sai Wang & Jie Wang & Sainan Lyu & Martin Skitmore, 2020. "A Decision Method for Construction Safety Risk Management Based on Ontology and Improved CBR: Example of a Subway Project," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, June.
    5. Irene Houtman & Marianne van Zwieten & Stavroula Leka & Aditya Jain & Ernest de Vroome, 2020. "Social Dialogue and Psychosocial Risk Management: Added Value of Manager and Employee Representative Agreement in Risk Perception and Awareness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Matthew R. Hallowell & Siddharth Bhandari & Wael Alruqi, 2020. "Methods of safety prediction: analysis and integration of risk assessment, leading indicators, precursor analysis, and safety climate," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 308-321, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Moreno-Garcia & Benito Yáñez-Araque & Felipe Hernández-Perlines & Luis Rodriguez-Benitez, 2022. "An Aggregation Metric Based on Partitioning and Consensus for Asymmetric Distributions in Likert Scale Responses," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(21), pages 1-17, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antonio José Carpio-de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González-García & Ligia Cristina Pentelhão & J. Santos Baptista, 2021. "Zero-Risk Interpretation in the Level of Preventive Action Method Implementation for Health and Safety in Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    2. Matthias Dütsch, 2022. "COVID-19 and the labour market: What are the working conditions in critical jobs?," Journal for Labour Market Research, Springer;Institute for Employment Research/ Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), vol. 56(1), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Yuan, Kaibin & Li, Wanli & Zhang, Weijun, 2023. "Your next bank is not necessarily a bank: FinTech expansion and bank branch closures," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    4. Vicente Javier Clemente-Suárez & Stephanie Rodriguez-Besteiro & Juan José Cabello-Eras & Alvaro Bustamante-Sanchez & Eduardo Navarro-Jiménez & Macarena Donoso-Gonzalez & Ana Isabel Beltrán-Velasco & J, 2022. "Sustainable Development Goals in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-26, June.
    5. Abel Brodeur & David Gray & Anik Islam & Suraiya Bhuiyan, 2021. "A literature review of the economics of COVID‐19," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 1007-1044, September.
    6. Chiara Burlina & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2024. "Inequality, poverty, deprivation and the uneven spread of COVID-19 in Europe," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(2), pages 263-284, February.
    7. Richard Florida & Todd Gabe, 2023. "COVID-19, the New Urban Crisis, and Cities: How COVID-19 Compounds the Influence of Economic Segregation and Inequality on Metropolitan Economic Performance," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 37(4), pages 328-348, November.
    8. Ali Zarifhonarvar, 2023. "A Survey on the Impact of Covid-19 on the Labor Market," The Journal of Social Sciences Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, 03-2023.
    9. Bossavie,Laurent Loic Yves & Garrote Sanchez,Daniel & Makovec,Mattia & Ozden,Caglar, 2020. "Do Immigrants Push Natives towards Safer Jobs ? Exposure to COVID-19 in the European Union," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9500, The World Bank.
    10. Naudé, Wim, 2020. "Industrialization under Medieval Conditions? Global Development after COVID-19," IZA Discussion Papers 13829, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Caselli, Mauro & Fracasso, Andrea, 2021. "Covid-19 and Technology," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1001, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    12. Tanaka, Kiyoyasu, 2023. "What hinders digital communication? Evidence from foreign firms in Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    13. Köhler, Timothy & Bhorat, Haroon & Hill, Robert & Stanwix, Benjamin, 2023. "Lockdown stringency and employment formality: evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 57, pages 1-3.
    14. Hatayama,Maho & Viollaz,Mariana & Winkler,Hernan Jorge, 2020. "Jobs' Amenability to Working from Home : Evidence from Skills Surveys for 53 Countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9241, The World Bank.
    15. Akeem Pedro & Anh-Tuan Pham-Hang & Phong Thanh Nguyen & Hai Chien Pham, 2022. "Data-Driven Construction Safety Information Sharing System Based on Linked Data, Ontologies, and Knowledge Graph Technologies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Chad Sparber & Madeline Zavodny, 2022. "Immigration, Working Conditions, and Compensating Differentials," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(4), pages 1054-1081, August.
    17. Feng Li & Pengchao Zhang & Xin Huang & Jiabin Sun & Qian Li, 2022. "Emergency Decision-Making for Middle Route of South-to-North Water Diversion Project Using Case-Based Reasoning and Prospect Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-29, October.
    18. Dingel, Jonathan I. & Neiman, Brent, 2020. "How many jobs can be done at home?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    19. Chijioke O Nwosu & Umakrishnan Kollamparambil & Adeola Oyenubi, 2022. "Socio-economic inequalities in ability to work from home during the coronavirus pandemic," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 33(2), pages 290-307, June.
    20. Crowley, Frank & Doran, Justin, 2020. "Covid-19, occupational social distancing and remote working potential in Ireland," SRERC Working Paper Series SRERCWP2020-1, University College Cork (UCC), Spatial and Regional Economic Research Centre (SRERC).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:16:p:8387-:d:610567. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.