Author
Abstract
Historically in the Great British railway industry health and safety law has been subject to interpretation. This room for interpretation creates the possibility for different views to exist within the industry and has the potential to lead to risk aversion. In response to requests from within the industry the Safety Decisions Programme (SDP) was established to achieve clarity in the process for taking decisions. The Programme commissioned research to investigate how the public values safety and how best to build the public's values into decisions. As a result of this work, an industry publication has been published that describes the different types of decisions that are taken in the industry and the different considerations and criteria that apply to each. Several key principles emerge. The value of preventing a fatality (VPF) represents the best available measure of society's stable and underlying preferences for safety improvement and is used to help duty-holders determine whether a measure is legally required. 'Individual risk' is not a consideration in this judgement as it does not relate to the measure, but instead to the totality of risk to which categories of individual are exposed. Duty holders may voluntarily take decisions that go beyond what is reasonably practicable, for commercial reasons. These decisions might be affected by 'societal concerns' and risk aversion, but they are voluntary. The government might also choose to take such considerations into account when setting legislation. Neither of these types of decision has implications for the level at which the VPF is set.
Suggested Citation
G. J. Bearfield, 2009.
"Achieving clarity in the requirements and practice for taking safe decisions in the railway industry in Great Britain,"
Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3-4), pages 443-453, June.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:12:y:2009:i:3-4:p:443-453
DOI: 10.1080/13669870903050210
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:jriskr:v:12:y:2009:i:3-4:p:443-453. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.