Duty or safety? Exploring emergency service personnel's perceptions of risk and decision-making when driving through floodwater
Duty or safety? Exploring emergency service personnel's perceptions of risk and decision-making when driving through floodwater
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.pdisas.2020.100068
复制
发表时间：
2020-01-01
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Taylor, Mel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ahmed, Mozumdar Arifa;Haynes, Katharine;Taylor, Mel
车辆相关的洪水死亡和救援，由于驾驶通过洪水是一个重大的应急管理问题的紧急服务。为了减少与这种危险驾驶行为相关的死亡、受伤和成本，必须制定战略，以阻止或减少人们在洪水中驾驶的发生率。在澳大利亚，人们被告知不要进入洪水-步行或车辆-与短语如果被洪水淹没，忘记它广泛使用的官方信息。作为负责洪水、风暴和海啸的第一反应者，澳大利亚国家紧急服务局（SES）的工作人员经常在洪水条件下工作，被认为是在洪水中驾驶的职业“风险”群体。虽然澳大利亚各州和地区的SES机构是独立领导的，但他们通常会向其人员宣传不进入洪水的政策。这些政策对于履行对雇员的注意义务、保护资产（车辆和设备）以及维护组织声誉（以身作则）都很重要。本研究旨在探讨SES人员在洪水中驾驶的行为。该研究探讨了那些有和没有驾驶过洪水的人的特征，然后使用SES人员乘坐车辆进入洪水的详细情况来分析他们对风险的感知，他们进入洪水的条件和背景，并确定是什么影响了他们的决定。编制了一份详细的在线问卷，并向一个机构的高级行政人员发放。来自670名受访者的数据表明，54.8%的人在过去两年中驾驶过洪水，并且确定了那些驾驶过洪水/没有驾驶过洪水的人的概况存在一些差异。那些更有可能在洪水中开车的人包括男性、服务时间较长的志愿者、每周开车时间较长的人、被部署在洪水条件下工作的人以及目前具有洪水救援资格的人。位置类型、水深和水流速度是人员在洪水中行驶时对风险感知贡献更大的条件。从201名受访者中获得了详细的信息，进入洪水的经验，通过洪水驾驶SES车辆，并提取了6个因素有关的决定，通过洪水驾驶。“组织培训和安全”，“外部控制点和“缺乏风险信号”被确定为具有最大的影响力的风险认知，导致决定驾驶通过洪水。研究结果对改善职业安全管理有若干实际影响，例如提升风险评估策略、检讨工作场所健康及安全政策、加强培训、提高紧急服务人员对洪水灾害情况的技能和知识，以及改善内部洪水风险沟通。(C)2020年，任作家。出版社：Elsevier Ltd
Vehicle-related flood fatalities and rescues due to driving through floodwater are a significant emergency management issue for emergency services. To reduce fatalities, injuries, and costs associated With this risky driving behaviour it is essential to develop strategies to stop or reduce the incidence of people driving through floodwater. In Australia, people are told not to enter floodwater - on foot or in vehicles - With the phrase If ifs flooded, forget it' widely used in official messaging. As first responders responsible for floods, storms and tsunamis, Australian State Emergency Service (SES) personnel are working in flood conditions regularly and are considered an occupationally 'at-risk' group for driving through floodwater. Although SES agencies across states and territories in Australia are independently led, they typically promote policies of not entering floodwater to their personnel. Such policies are important for meeting duty of care obligations to employees, for protection of assets (vehicles and equipment), and for upholding organisational reputation (leading by example). This study was undertaken to explore the behaviour of driving through floodwater by SES personnel. The study explored the characteristics of those who have and have not driven through floodwater, and then used detailed situations in which SES personnel entered floodwater in vehicles to analyse their perception of risks, the conditions and contexts in which they entered floodwater, and to identify what influenced their decision to enter.Following an earlier systematic literature review, a detailed online questionnaire was developed and administered to SES personnel from a single agency. Data from 670 respondents indicated that 54.8% had driven through floodwater in the previous two years, and a number of differences in the profile of those who had/had not driven through floodwater were identified. Those more likely to have driven through floodwater included males, volunteer personnel with longer lengths of service, those doing more driving hours per week, those deployed to work in flood conditions, and those with current flood rescue qualifications. The location type, water depth, and water velocity were conditions that contributed more to perception of risk at the time personnel drove through the floodwater. Detailed information about an experience of entering floodwater was obtained from 201 respondents who had driven through floodwater in SES vehicles, and six factors relating to the decision to drive through floodwater were extracted. 'Organisational training and safety', 'External locus of control and 'Absence of risk signals' were identified as having the greatest influence on risk perception leading to decisions to drive through floodwater. The findings of the study have a number of practical implications for the improvement of occupational safety management; such as upgrading risk assessments strategies, reviewing workplace health and safety policies, enhancing training, increasing skills and knowledge of emergency services personnel about floodwater hazard situations, and improving internal flood risk communication. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier ltd.