Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Improvement principles
Philosophy and History, KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Philosophy and History of Technology, Philosophy.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0071-3919
2019 (English)In: Journal of Safety Research, ISSN 0022-4375, E-ISSN 1879-1247, Vol. 69, p. 33-41Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction: The improvement principles are a group of safety principles whose central message is that no risk level above zero is fully satisfactory, and that we should therefore always strive to improve safety. The major safety principles in this group are: as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), best available technology (BAT), the substitution principle, vision zero, and continuous improvement. Method: This article investigates their similarities and differences, the ways in which they can incorporate compromises with objectives other than safety, and the difficulties that may arise in their application. A particular emphasis is put on comparisons with two major competing groups of principles, namely acceptance principles, which draw a sharp line between acceptable and unacceptable states of affairs, and weighing principles such as CBA that search for an optimized compromise between safety and other objectives. Results: In comparison to their main competitors, the improvement principles have the important advantage of consistently encouraging safety enhancements. However, some of the problems in their application can probably best be tackled by including them in a combined approach that also makes use of acceptance and/or weighing principles. Two such combined approaches are proposed. The choice between them should be based on the underlying value structure of the decision problem. Practical applications: Guidance is given for the choice of safety principles and for the combined use of more than one such principle.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2019. Vol. 69, p. 33-41
Keywords [en]
Acceptance principles, ALARA, Aspiration principles, Continuous improvement, Improvement principles
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-246410DOI: 10.1016/j.jsr.2019.02.001ISI: 000474500300004Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85062223633OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-246410DiVA, id: diva2:1301480
Note

QC 20190402

Available from: 2019-04-02 Created: 2019-04-02 Last updated: 2019-07-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Hansson, Sven Ove

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hansson, Sven Ove
By organisation
Philosophy
In the same journal
Journal of Safety Research
Philosophy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 6 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf