Resilience Engineering Indicators and Safety Management: A Systematic Review

• Main Authors: Udara Ranasinghe (Author), Marcus Jefferies (Author), Peter Davis (Author), Manikam Pillay (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Elsevier, 2020-06-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 2093-7911; 10.1016/j.shaw.2020.03.009
• Keywords: RE indicators; resilience engineering; safety; safety management; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: Safety and Health at Work, Vol 11, Iss 2, Pp 127-135 (2020)

A safe work environment is crucial in high-risk industries, such as construction refurbishment. Safety incidents caused by uncertainty and unexpected events in construction refurbishment systems are difficult to control using conventional safety management techniques. Resilience engineering (RE) is proposed as an alternative to traditional safety management approaches. It presents a successful safety management methodology designed to deal with uncertainty in high-risk work environments. Despite the fact that RE resides in the safety domain, there is no common set of RE indicators to measure and assess resilient in the work environment. The main aim of this research is to explore RE indicators that have been identified as important in developing and assessing the resilient work environment in high-risk industries, particularly in construction refurbishment. Indicators have been attained through a systematic literature review of research and scholarly articles published between the years 2004 and 2019. The literature review explored RE indicators in various industries. Descriptive analysis and co-occurrence-based network visualization were used for data analysis. The findings revealed 28 RE indicators in 11 different high-risk industries. The results show that the four commonly used indicators were: top-management commitment, awareness, learning, and flexibility, all of which have a strong relationship with RE. The findings of this study are useful for stakeholders when making decisions concerning the most important RE indicators in the context of their research or practice as this would avoid the ambiguity and disparity in the identification of RE indicators.