Department of the Built Environment, College of Design and Engineering, National University of Singapore, 4 Architecture Drive, Singapore 117566, Singapore; Department of Building Economics, Faculty of Architecture, University of Moratuwa, Bandaranayake Mawatha, Katubedda, Sri Lanka.
Department of the Built Environment, College of Design and Engineering, National University of Singapore, 4 Architecture Drive, Singapore 117566, Singapore.
J Safety Res. 2022 Sep;82:352-366. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2022.06.011. Epub 2022 Jun 27.
Many countries introduced mandatory Design for Safety (DfS) or Prevention through Design (PtD) requirements to reduce construction accident rates. However, there is a knowledge gap on the relative importance of industry level interventions to improve the implementation of DfS regulations. Thus, this study aims to identify and prioritize a set of industry level interventions to help regulators and industry associations understand the industry's perceptions and improve the implementation of mandatory DfS.
A mixed method approach consisting of 59 semi-structured interviews, four focus group discussions, and an online poll was implemented.
Key challenges faced during DfS implementations were identified (lack of guidelines, lack of commitment towards DfS, the inadequate capability of DfS team, and limited effectiveness of DfS Professionals (DfSPs)). The study elicited eight industry level interventions to overcome these challenges and ranked them based on effectiveness and ease of implementation. The ranked industry level interventions in descending order are continuing training for DfSPs, samples and guidelines, DfS training for non-DfSPs, Building Information Modelling (BIM) for DfS review, strengthening DfSP as a profession, DfS awards for developers, third party audits for DfS reviews, and submission of DfS Risk Register to regulator.
Identified interventions were classified into four intervention categories: (a) improving competency/ knowledge; (b) technological tools; (c) checks/ audits; and (d) recognitions/ certifications. The key contributions of this study are the identification and prioritization of industry level interventions for DfS, and the classification of safety interventions available to industry associations and regulators.
Findings from this study help regulators and industry associations prioritize their resources to improve the implementation of mandatory DfS. Moreover, regulators and industry associations can also use the generic framework of industry level interventions to identify possible interventions to improve other mandatory WSH processes.
许多国家引入了强制性设计安全（DfS）或设计预防（PtD）要求，以降低建筑事故率。然而，对于提高 DfS 法规实施的行业层面干预措施的相对重要性，仍存在知识差距。因此，本研究旨在确定并优先考虑一系列行业层面的干预措施，以帮助监管机构和行业协会了解行业的认知，并改善强制性 DfS 的实施。
采用混合方法，包括 59 次半结构化访谈、4 次焦点小组讨论和在线投票。
确定了在 DfS 实施过程中面临的主要挑战（缺乏指南、对 DfS 的承诺不足、DfS 团队的能力不足以及 DfS 专业人员（DfSP）的效力有限）。研究提出了克服这些挑战的八项行业层面的干预措施，并根据有效性和实施的难易程度对其进行了排名。按降序排列的行业层面干预措施依次为：DfSP 持续培训、样本和指南、非 DfSP 的 DfS 培训、用于 DfS 审查的建筑信息模型（BIM）、加强 DfSP 专业、开发商的 DfS 奖、DfS 审查的第三方审计、以及向监管机构提交 DfS 风险登记册。
确定的干预措施分为四类：（a）提高能力/知识；（b）技术工具；（c）检查/审核；和（d）认可/认证。本研究的主要贡献是确定和优先考虑 DfS 的行业层面干预措施，并对行业协会和监管机构可用的安全干预措施进行分类。
本研究的结果有助于监管机构和行业协会优先分配资源，以改善强制性 DfS 的实施。此外，监管机构和行业协会还可以利用行业层面干预措施的通用框架来确定改善其他强制性 WSH 流程的可能干预措施。
