在建筑环境中平衡消防安全危险与安全威胁的决策

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Richard Kathage, David J. Brooks, Michael Coole
{"title":"在建筑环境中平衡消防安全危险与安全威胁的决策","authors":"Richard Kathage, David J. Brooks, Michael Coole","doi":"10.1057/s41284-024-00431-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The built environment faces challenges from fire hazards and threats by malicious actors. Risks presented from these hazards and threats are managed through the practices of fire safety and physical security. Whilst distinct disciplines, both impact the built environment systems, resulting in potential conflict. To manage this conflict, a complex process is required. Through the framework of Governmentality, using a mixed methods approach, the study explored the process which fire safety engineers and security practitioners undertake to manage this conflict. The study produced a conceptual model that explains how practitioners operate and manage risk associated with fire safety hazards and security threats. The model indicates that the process for resolving conflicts is a dichotomy between physical security and fire safety, with fire safety being the most dominate and influential. Nevertheless, both fire safety and physical security are subservient to building regulations in this process; however unlike security, fire safety is codified through building regulations. <i>Risk assessment</i> and the <i>design process</i> are core processes, but only used in decision-making when there is conflict between the fire safety and physical security. Findings demonstrated that context remains static for greater threats, whereas context is dynamic for fire safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":47023,"journal":{"name":"Security Journal","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision-making in balancing fire safety hazards against security threats within the built environment\",\"authors\":\"Richard Kathage, David J. Brooks, Michael Coole\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41284-024-00431-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The built environment faces challenges from fire hazards and threats by malicious actors. Risks presented from these hazards and threats are managed through the practices of fire safety and physical security. Whilst distinct disciplines, both impact the built environment systems, resulting in potential conflict. To manage this conflict, a complex process is required. Through the framework of Governmentality, using a mixed methods approach, the study explored the process which fire safety engineers and security practitioners undertake to manage this conflict. The study produced a conceptual model that explains how practitioners operate and manage risk associated with fire safety hazards and security threats. The model indicates that the process for resolving conflicts is a dichotomy between physical security and fire safety, with fire safety being the most dominate and influential. Nevertheless, both fire safety and physical security are subservient to building regulations in this process; however unlike security, fire safety is codified through building regulations. <i>Risk assessment</i> and the <i>design process</i> are core processes, but only used in decision-making when there is conflict between the fire safety and physical security. Findings demonstrated that context remains static for greater threats, whereas context is dynamic for fire safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47023,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Security Journal\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Security Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-024-00431-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-024-00431-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

建筑环境面临着火灾危险和恶意行为者威胁的挑战。这些危害和威胁所带来的风险可通过消防安全和实体安保实践加以控制。虽然这两门学科截然不同,但都会对建筑环境系统产生影响,从而导致潜在的冲突。要管理这种冲突,需要一个复杂的过程。这项研究通过 "政府性 "框架,采用混合方法,探讨了消防安全工程师和安保从业人员管理这种冲突的过程。研究提出了一个概念模型,解释了从业人员如何操作和管理与消防安全危险和安保威胁相关的风险。该模型表明,解决冲突的过程是实体安保和消防安全之间的二元对立,其中消防安全占主导地位,影响最大。尽管如此,在这一过程中,消防安全和实体安全都服从于建筑法规;但与安全不同的是,消防安全是通过建筑法规来规范的。风险评估和设计过程是核心过程,但只有在消防安全和实体安保发生冲突时才会用于决策。研究结果表明,对于更大的威胁而言,环境是静态的,而对于消防安全而言,环境是动态的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Decision-making in balancing fire safety hazards against security threats within the built environment

Decision-making in balancing fire safety hazards against security threats within the built environment

The built environment faces challenges from fire hazards and threats by malicious actors. Risks presented from these hazards and threats are managed through the practices of fire safety and physical security. Whilst distinct disciplines, both impact the built environment systems, resulting in potential conflict. To manage this conflict, a complex process is required. Through the framework of Governmentality, using a mixed methods approach, the study explored the process which fire safety engineers and security practitioners undertake to manage this conflict. The study produced a conceptual model that explains how practitioners operate and manage risk associated with fire safety hazards and security threats. The model indicates that the process for resolving conflicts is a dichotomy between physical security and fire safety, with fire safety being the most dominate and influential. Nevertheless, both fire safety and physical security are subservient to building regulations in this process; however unlike security, fire safety is codified through building regulations. Risk assessment and the design process are core processes, but only used in decision-making when there is conflict between the fire safety and physical security. Findings demonstrated that context remains static for greater threats, whereas context is dynamic for fire safety.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The?Security Journal?is a dynamic publication that keeps you informed about the latest developments and techniques in security management. Written in an accessible style it is the world's premier peer-reviewed journal for today's security researcher and professional. The journal is affiliated to ASIS International and has an advisory board which includes representatives from major associations expert practitioners and leading academics.The?Security Journal?publishes papers at the cutting edge in developing ideas and improving practice focusing on the latest research findings on all aspects of security. Regular features include personal opinions and informed comment on key issues in security as well as incisive reviews of books videos and official reports.What are the benefits of subscribing?Learn from evaluations of the latest security measures policies and initiatives; keep up-to-date with new techniques for managing security as well as the latest findings and recommendations of independent research; understand new perspectives and how they inform the theory and practice of security management.What makes the journal distinct?Articles are jargon free and independently refereed; papers are at the cutting edge in developing ideas and improving practice; we have appointed an Advisory Board which includes representatives from leading associations skilled practitioners and the world's leading academics.How does the journal inform?The?Security Journal?publishes innovative papers highlighting the latest research findings on all aspects of security; incisive reviews of books videos and official reports; personal opinions and informed comment on key issues.Topics covered include:fraudevaluations of security measuresshop theftburglaryorganised crimecomputer and information securityrepeat victimisationviolence within the work placeprivate policinginsuranceregulation of the security industryCCTVtaggingaccess controlaviation securityhealth and safetyarmed robberydesigning out crimesecurity staffoffenders' viewsPlease note that the journal does not accept technical or mathematic submissions or research based on formulas or prototypes.
×
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