IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i12p5164-d375922.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Safety Science, a Systems Thinking Perspective: From Events to Mental Models and Sustainable Safety

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Blokland

    (Safety & Security Science Group (S3G), Delft University of Technology, 2628 BX Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Genserik Reniers

    (Safety & Security Science Group (S3G), Delft University of Technology, 2628 BX Delft, The Netherlands
    Center for Corporate Sustainability (CEDON)—KULeuven—Campus Brussels, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
    Department of Engineering Management, Faculty of Applied Economic Sciences (ENM), University of Antwerp, B-2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

Abstract

In the past one hundred years, concepts such as risk, safety and security have become ever more important and they represent a growing concern in our society. These concepts are also important subjects of study to enhance sustainability. During the past fifty years, safety science has gradually developed as an independent field of science. In this period, different concepts, theories, models and research traditions have emerged, each with its specific perspective. Safety science is now focused on finding ways to proactively achieve safety versus reaching safety in a reactive way. We think this increasing awareness and search for proactiveness can be found and presented when viewed in light of the systems thinking iceberg model, where increasing awareness and proactiveness can be seen as digging deeper into this systems thinking iceberg, discovering the levels of systems, structures and ultimately the mental models that are “below the waterline”. It offers a way forward in understanding, and proactively managing, risk, safety, security and sustainable performance, in organizations and ultimately in society as a whole.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Blokland & Genserik Reniers, 2020. "Safety Science, a Systems Thinking Perspective: From Events to Mental Models and Sustainable Safety," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:5164-:d:375922
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/5164/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/5164/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Blokland & Genserik Reniers, 2019. "An Ontological and Semantic Foundation for Safety and Security Science," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Stacey M. Conchie & Ian J. Donald & Paul J. Taylor, 2006. "Trust: Missing Piece(s) in the Safety Puzzle," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1097-1104, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mahdieh Delikhoon & Esmaeil Zarei & Osiris Valdez Banda & Mohammad Faridan & Ehsanollah Habibi, 2022. "Systems Thinking Accident Analysis Models: A Systematic Review for Sustainable Safety Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-28, May.
    2. Peter Blokland & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "Achieving Organisational Alignment, Safety and Sustainable Performance in Organisations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-35, September.
    3. Stanislav Avsec & Magdalena Jagiełło-Kowalczyk & Agnieszka Żabicka & Joanna Gil-Mastalerczyk & Agata Gawlak, 2024. "Human-Centered Systems Thinking in Technology-Enhanced Sustainable and Inclusive Architectural Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-45, November.
    4. Michal Titko & Jozef Ristvej, 2020. "Assessing Importance of Disaster Preparedness Factors for Sustainable Disaster Risk Management: The Case of the Slovak Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2020. "The Landscape of Risk Communication Research: A Scientometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-31, May.
    2. Stacey M. Conchie & Calvin Burns, 2008. "Trust and Risk Communication in High‐Risk Organizations: A Test of Principles from Social Risk Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 141-149, February.
    3. Peter Blokland & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "Achieving Organisational Alignment, Safety and Sustainable Performance in Organisations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-35, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:5164-:d:375922. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.