Developments in the Safety Science Domain and in Safety Management From the 1970s Till the 1979 Near Disaster at Three Mile Island

Objective: What has been the influence of general management schools and safety research into causes of accidents and disasters on managing safety from 1970 till 1979? Method: The study was limited to original articles and documents, written in English or Dutch from the period under concern. For the Netherlands, the professional journal De Veiligheid (Safety) has been consulted. Results and conclusions: Dominant management approaches started with 1) the classical management starting from the 19th century, with scientific management from the start of the 20st century as a main component. During the interwar period 2) behavioural management started, based on behaviourism, followed by 3) quantitative management from the Second World War onwards. After the war 4) modern management became important. A company was seen as an open system, interacting with an external environment with external stakeholders. These schools management were not exclusive, but have existed in the period together. Early 20th century, the U.S. 'Safety First' movement was the starting point of this knowledge development on managing safety, with cost reduction and production efficiency as key drivers. Psychological models and metaphors explained accidents from ‘unsafe acts’. And safety was managed with training and selection of reckless workers, all in line with scientific management. Supported by behavioural management, this approach remained dominant for many years, even long after World War II. Influenced by quantitative management, potential and actual disasters after the war led to two approaches; loss prevention (up-scaling process industry) and reliability engineering (inherently dangerous processes in the aerospace and nuclear industries). The distinction between process safety and occupational safety became clear after the war, and the two developed into relatively independent domains. In occupational safety in the 1970s human errors thought to be symptoms of mismanagement. The term ‘safety management’ was introduced in scientific safety literature as well as concepts as loose, and tightly coupled processes, organizational culture, incubation of a disaster and mechanisms blinding organizations for portents of disaster scenarios. Loss prevention remained technically oriented. Till 1979 there was no clear relation with safety management. Reliability engineering, based on systems theory did have that relation with the MORT technique as a management audit. The Netherlands mainly followed Anglo-Saxon developments. Late 1970s, following international safety symposia in The Hague and Delft, independent research started in The Netherland

Introduction of the concept of risk within safety science in The Netherlands focussing on the years 1970–1990

Serious incidents in the 1970s and continuous growth of factories producing and/or using hazardous substances formed the basis of a quantitative approach to risk. While discussions of risk were conducted in all industrialised countries they were particularly important in The Netherlands due to space limitations and short distances between industrial plants and residential areas. This article is part of a series covering the history of the safety science discipline (Swuste et al., 2015; Van Gulijk et al., 2009; Swuste et al., 2010). The concept risk entered the Dutch safety domain before the 1970s in relatively isolated case studies and in managing flood defences in The Netherlands. Since the 1970s these case studies paved the way for the development of mathematical models for quantitative risk analysis that were based on experience from nuclear power plants, the process industries and reliability engineering from operations research. ‘External safety’ was a focal point for these early developments in the process industries: adverse effects of dangerous goods outside the factory’s property boundaries. The models were documented in standardised textbooks for risk analysis in The Netherlands, the so-called ‘coloured books’. These works contributed to the development of the Seveso Directive. For internal safety (taking place within property boundaries) semi-quantitative approaches were developed simultaneously. The models for quantitative risk analysis were deemed reliable, but the acceptability of a quantified risk was another matter. Making decisions on risk relates to complex societal issues, such as ethics, stakeholder perception of risks, stakeholder involvement, and politics, all of which made the decision making process far from straightforward. With the introduction of the abstract concept of risk in the Dutch safety science domain, the question of risk perception became important in Dutch safety research. The concept risk and methods for quantitative risk analysis first entered into Dutch law in environmental risk regulations. It took a while for risk to be accepted by occupational safety experts, but just before the turn of the century ‘occupational risk inventory and evaluations’ or RI&E methods were introduced into Dutch occupational safety legislation. This finalised the paradigm shift to risk-based safetydecision making in the Dutch safety science domain. While methods for quantifying risk are now widely applied and accepted, the proper use of risk perception and risk in the political decision process are still being debated

Safety management systems from Three Mile Island to Piper Alpha, a review in English and Dutch literature for the period 1979 to 1988

Objective: Which general management and safety models and theories trends influenced safety management in the period between Three Mile Island in 1979 and Piper Alpha in 1988? In which context did these developments took place and how did this influence Dutch safety domain? Method: The literature study was limited to original English and Dutch documents and articles in scientific and professional literature during the period studied. Results and conclusions: Models and theories of human errors, explaining occupational accidents were still popular in the professional literature. A system approach was introduced into mainstream safety science, starting in process safety, and subsequently moving into occupational safety. Accidents were thought to be the result of disturbances in a dynamic system, a socio-technical system, rather than just human error. Human errors were also perceived differently: they were no longer faults of people, but consequences of suboptimal interactions during process disturbances. In this period quality of safety research increased substantially, also in the Netherlands. Major disasters in the 1980s generated knowledge on process safety, and soon process safety outplaced developments in occupational safety, which had been leading before. Theories and models in this period had advanced sufficiently to explain disasters, but were still unable to predict probabilities and scenarios of future disasters. In the 1980s ‘latent errors’ appeared in safety literature, and in The Netherlands the concept of ‘impossible accidents' appeared. Safety management was strongly influenced by developments in quality management

Occupational safety theories, models and metaphors in the three decades since World War II, in the United States, Britain and the Netherlands: A literature review

Objective Which theories, models, and metaphors were developed in the period and countries under study, within what context, and if available based upon what collection of data. Method For the literature review, original articles were consulted, including volumes of the Dutch safety professional journal ‘De Veiligheid’ (Safety). Results and conclusions One theory and three models on accident causation were developed in the domain of safety science. The focus on the causes of accidents and on their prevention was gradually changing from victim behavior, via task aspects to management causes. Willem Winsemius, a Dutch physician, is the father of ‘task dynamics theory’, explaining, predicting accidents from the reflex reactions and improvisations of workers during process disturbances. Based on a survey of 1300 accidents at the former Dutch steel works Hoogovens, his theory described human behavior as a response reaction, instead of an accident cause. British observational research conducted on more than 2000 accidents also highlighted the relationship between tasks, actions, process disturbances, and accidents. And William Haddon Jr., an American physician introduced the ‘epidemiological triangle’, and the known ‘hazard – barrier – target’ model. Finally, the ergonomics domain developed two models on disturbed information flows and inadequate decisions of workers. The increased complexity in the military domain and the process industry, just after World War II initiated a movement to increase system reliability, leading to a number of safety techniques which were not based on systematic research, but were rather a coded collection of practical experiences. The accident proneness theory still remained popular in the professional safety domain in the Netherlands

Safety professionals in the Netherlands

The origin of occupational safety, as an area of main interest of the government, the industry, the unions, and scientists starts in the Netherlands at the end of the 19th century. Roughly in the same period occupational medicine becomes a separate domain. Only just after World War II are safety professionals organised in associations. Starting as a ‘Club/werkgroep van veiligheidsinspecteurs’ (Club/Working group of Company Safety Inspectors) in 1947, it changes in 1962 into the ‘Nederlandse Vereniging van Veiligheidstechnici, NVVT’ (Dutch Association of Safety Technicians). In 1978 there is another change into a professional association, and the ‘Nederlandse Vereniging van Veiligheidskundigen, NVVK’ (Dutch Association of Safety Professionals) is formed. In 1986 this association is transformed into a knowledge association, the ‘Nederlandse Vereniging voor Veiligheidskunde, NVVK’ (Dutch Association of Safety Science). Nowadays the NVVK is still a knowledge platform for and by safety experts in the Netherlands. The association is a network of 3000 safety experts in various disciplines and departments, and by far the biggest network of experts on working conditions in the Netherlands. The NVVK is actively involved in changes in legislation and regulations, and also represents the interests of members and safety experts in general. During these 71 years of organised safety professions, major changes in position and content have occurred.Safety and Security Scienc

Developments in the safety science domain, in the fields of general and safety management between 1970 and 1979, the year of the near disaster on Three Mile Island, a literature review

Objective: What influence has research conducted by general management schools and safety research had upon the causes of accidents and disasters in relation to the managing of safety between 1970 and 1979? Method: The study was confined to original articles and documents, written in English or Dutch from the period under consideration. For the Netherlands, the professional journal De Veiligheid (Safety) was consulted. Results and conclusions: Dominant management approaches started with (1) classical management starting from the 19th century incorporating as a main component scientific management from the early 20th century. The interwar period saw the rise of (2) behavioural management which was based on behaviourism, this was followed by (3) quantitative management from the Second World War onwards. After the war it was (4) modern management that became important. A company was seen as an open system, interacting with an external environment with external stakeholders. These management schools of thought were not exclusive, but existed side by side in the period under consideration. Early in the 20th century, it was the U.S. ‘Safety First’ movement that marked the starting point of this knowledge development in the sphere of safety managing, with cost reduction and production efficiency as the key drivers. Psychological models and metaphors were used to explain accidents resulting from ‘unsafe acts’. Safety was managed by training and targeting reckless workers, all in line with scientific management. Supported by behavioural management, this approach remained dominant for many years until long after World War II. Influenced by quantitative management, potential and actual disasters occurring after the war led to two approaches; loss prevention (up-scaling in the process industry) and reliability engineering (inherently dangerous processes in the aerospace and nuclear sectors). The distinction between process safety and occupational safety became clear after the war when the two evolved as relatively independent domains. In occupational safety in the 1970s human error was thought to be symptomatic of mismanagement. The term ‘safety management’ was introduced to scientific safety literature alongside concepts such as loosely and tightly coupled processes, organizational culture, disaster incubation and the notion of mechanisms blinding organizations to portents of disaster scenarios. Loss prevention remained technically oriented. Until 1979 there was no clear link with safety management. Reliability engineering that was based on systems theory did have such a connection with the MORT technique that served as a management audit. The Netherlands mainly followed Anglo-Saxon developments. In the late 1970s, following international safety symposia in The Hague and Delft, independent research finally began in the Netherlands