Appraisal of a new risk assessment model for SME

Safety Science

Volumn 48, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 1361-1368

  Fera, M ^a   Macchiaroli, R ^a  

^a SECOND UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES   (Italy)

Author keywords

AHP; FMECA; Risk assessment; Safety at work; SCEBRA

Indexed keywords

AHP; APPLICATION STUDIES; ASSESSMENT MODELS; FMECA; INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS; LOGISTIC SERVICES; RISK ASSESSMENT METHODS; SAFETY AT WORK; SCEBRA; STEEL INDUSTRY; TYPICAL MODEL;

HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; INDUSTRY; IRON AND STEEL PLANTS; STEELMAKING;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; INDUSTRIAL WORKER; INDUSTRY; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL; WORK ENVIRONMENT;

EID: 77956231048     PISSN: 09257535     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.05.009     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Ale, et al. Quantifying occupational risk: the development of an occupational risk model. Safety Science 2008, 46:176-185.
2. Brito, et al. Multi-attribute risk assessment for risk ranking of natural gas pipelines. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2009, 94:187-198.
3. Chen, et al. Study on the methodology for evaluating urban and regional disaster carrying capacity and its application. Safety Science 2009, 47(1):50-58.
4. Doytchev, et al. Combining task analysis and fault tree analysis for accident and incident analysis: a case study from Bulgaria. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2008, 10.1016/j.aap.2008.07.014.
5. Fera, Macchiaroli Proposal of a quali-quantitative assessment model for the SMEs health and safety. Safety and Security Engineering 2009, 3:117-126.
6. Glickman, et al. Assessment of hazardous material risks for rail yard safety. Safety Science 2007, 45:813-822.
7. Grassi, et al. A fuzzy multi-attribute model for risk evaluation in workplaces. Safety Science 2008, 47(5):707-716.
8. Hetherington, et al. Safety in shipping: the human element. Journal of Safety Research 2006, 37:401-411.
9. Hu, et al. Formal safety assessment based on relative risks model in ship navigation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2007, 92:369-377.
10. IMO, 2002. Guidelines for formal safety assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO rule-making process, MSC/Circ. 1023.
11. Lingard, et al. Behavior-based in Hong Kong's safety management construction industry. Journal of Safety Research 1997, 28(4):243-256.
12. Martìn, et al. A Bayesian network analysis of workplace accidents caused by falls from a height. Safety Science 2009, 47:206-214.
13. Piniella, et al. Towards system for the management of safety on board artisanal fishing vessels: proposal for check-lists and their application. Safety Science 2009, 47:265-276.
14. Saaty T.L. Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process 2000, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.
15. Sari, et al. Stochastic modeling of accident risks associated with an underground coal mine in Turkey. Safety Science 2009, 47:78-87.
16. Van Duijne, et al. Considerations in developing complete and quantified methods for risk assessment. Safety Science 2008, 46:245-254.
17. Ventikos, Psaraftis Spill accident modeling: a critical survey of the event-decision network in the context of IMO's formal safety assessment. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2004, 107:59-66.
18. Wang J. Offshore safety case approach and formal safety assessment of ships. Journal of Safety Research 2002, 33:81-115.
19. Wirth, et al. When workplace safety depends on behavior change: topics for behavioral safety research. Journal of Safety Research 2008, 39:589-598.