Barry Turner: The Under-Acknowledged Safety Pioneer

IF 1.8 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Safety Pub Date : 2023-10-02 DOI:10.3390/safety9040068
Kym Bills, Leesa Costello, Marcus Cattani
{"title":"Barry Turner: The Under-Acknowledged Safety Pioneer","authors":"Kym Bills, Leesa Costello, Marcus Cattani","doi":"10.3390/safety9040068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Barry Turner’s 1978 Man-made Disasters and Charles Perrow’s 1984 Normal Accidents were seminal books but a detailed comparison has yet to be undertaken. Doing so is important to establish content and priority of key ideas underpinning contemporary safety science. Turner’s research found socio-technical and systemic patterns that meant that major organisational disasters could be foreseen and were preventable. Perrow’s macro-structuralist industry focus was on technologically deterministic but unpredictable and unpreventable “system” accidents, particularly rare catastrophes. Andrew Hopkins and Nick Pidgeon respectively suggested that some prominent writers who wrote after Turner may not have been aware of, or did not properly acknowledge, Turner’s work. Using a methodology involving systematic reading and historical, biographical and thematic theory analysis, a detailed review of Turner’s and Perrow’s backgrounds and publications sheds new light on Turner’s priority and accomplishment, highlighting substantial similarities as well as clear differences. Normal Accidents did not cite Turner in 1984 or when republished with major additions in 1999. Turner became better known after a 1997 second edition of Man-made Disasters but under-acknowledgment issues by Perrow and others continued. Ethical citation and potential reasons for under-acknowledgment are discussed together with lessons applicable more broadly. It is concluded that Turner’s foundational importance for safety science should be better recognised.","PeriodicalId":36827,"journal":{"name":"Safety","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/safety9040068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Barry Turner’s 1978 Man-made Disasters and Charles Perrow’s 1984 Normal Accidents were seminal books but a detailed comparison has yet to be undertaken. Doing so is important to establish content and priority of key ideas underpinning contemporary safety science. Turner’s research found socio-technical and systemic patterns that meant that major organisational disasters could be foreseen and were preventable. Perrow’s macro-structuralist industry focus was on technologically deterministic but unpredictable and unpreventable “system” accidents, particularly rare catastrophes. Andrew Hopkins and Nick Pidgeon respectively suggested that some prominent writers who wrote after Turner may not have been aware of, or did not properly acknowledge, Turner’s work. Using a methodology involving systematic reading and historical, biographical and thematic theory analysis, a detailed review of Turner’s and Perrow’s backgrounds and publications sheds new light on Turner’s priority and accomplishment, highlighting substantial similarities as well as clear differences. Normal Accidents did not cite Turner in 1984 or when republished with major additions in 1999. Turner became better known after a 1997 second edition of Man-made Disasters but under-acknowledgment issues by Perrow and others continued. Ethical citation and potential reasons for under-acknowledgment are discussed together with lessons applicable more broadly. It is concluded that Turner’s foundational importance for safety science should be better recognised.
巴里·特纳:被忽视的安全先锋
巴里·特纳1978年的《人为灾难》和查尔斯·佩罗1984年的《正常事故》都是影响深远的著作,但还没有进行详细的比较。这样做对于确立支撑当代安全科学的核心思想的内容和优先顺序具有重要意义。特纳的研究发现,社会技术和系统模式意味着重大的组织灾难是可以预见和预防的。Perrow的宏观结构主义行业关注的是技术确定性,但不可预测和不可预防的“系统”事故,特别是罕见的灾难。安德鲁·霍普金斯(Andrew Hopkins)和尼克·皮金(Nick Pidgeon)分别认为,在特纳之后创作的一些著名作家可能没有意识到,或者没有适当地承认特纳的作品。采用系统阅读和历史、传记和主题理论分析的方法,对特纳和佩罗的背景和著作进行了详细的回顾,揭示了特纳的优先地位和成就,突出了大量的相似之处和明显的差异。《正常事故》在1984年或1999年重版时都没有引用特纳。在1997年《人为灾难》第二版出版后,特纳的知名度有所提高,但佩罗等人对他的认识不足的问题仍在继续。讨论了伦理引用和潜在原因,以及更广泛适用的经验教训。结论是,特纳对安全科学的基础性重要性应该得到更好的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Safety
Safety Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
71
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信