Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Safety Science
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/safety

Safety management in construction: 20 years of risk modeling T

a b,⁎ c d e
Maryam Alkaissy , Mehrdad Arashpour , Baabak Ashuri , Yu Bai , Reza Hosseini
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia
c
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Tech, United States
d
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3800, Australia
e
School of Architecture and Built Environment, Deakin University, Australia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Construction industry has one of the highest rates of fatalities and injuries compared to other industries, despite
Health and safety management technological advancements and implementations of occupational health and safety initiatives. In this paper, a
Integrated system modeling systematic review has been conducted on the contemporary literature of safety risk management. The interface
Optimization and Simulation with system modeling has been investigated to identify correlations between the two, and opportunities for
Quality management
improving project performance metrics such as quality, productivity, and cost. Findings show that simulation
Risk monitoring and control
and optimization technics have advanced in the past 20 years but there is room for improvement when it comes
Scientometric analysis
to modeling safety related risks. This review paper contributes to the literature of safety management by pro-
viding insight into dynamics of different simulation and optimization modeling techniques. Future research
opportunities have been identified including the need for construction safety research on integrating multi-
method modeling approaches.

1. Introduction and background
Work health and safety is an area in need of improvements within
the construction domain despite the advancements in technological
applications of robust occupational health and safety management
systems (Lingard et al., 2019). Current focus of literature is on safety
management techniques to moderate impacts of unwanted events
(Choe, 2017) and efficient and user-friendly risk management at dif-
ferent company and project levels (Gunduz, 2018). For example, AHP-
based analysis of safety risks for near miss events (Raviv, 2017), in-
tegrating exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modeling
to analyze safety risk factors (Liu, 2018), and integration of risk man-
agement processes in model-based environment (Melzner, 2018). Other
studies have focused on fuzzy qualitative risk management models to
reduce occupational safety risks (Pinto, 2014), modeling and simulating
univariate and bivariate safety related risks at the situational level
(Tixier, 2017), and real-time safety risk evaluation model to improve
decision quality in construction buildings/structures (Zhang, 2019).
Modeling has been adopted in previous studies to investigate the
relation between safety and other project performance metrics such as
quality in construction (Nnaji, 2016). There are numerous studies
within the literature that explored the theoretical links between
productivity and safety including the Lean Construction (Moaveni,
2019), and the Entropy Theory (Sun, 2010). Other modeling efforts
focused on relations between safety and direct/indirect costs in the
construction industry (Lu, 2016). Cost-benefit analysis considering
safety related risks provides an appropriate analytical tool to quantify
direct/indirect costs of accidents (Ikpe, 2008). Indirect costs of acci-
dents in construction have been analyzed using the Iceberg Theory
(Hamid, 2008).
There have been a few studies adopting a holistic review of mod-
eling applications in construction safety management. System modeling
through optimization and simulation tools for safety risk management
has been the focus of such papers (see Fig. 1). Optimization is generally
defined as the action of making the most effective use of a situation or a
resource. In construction safety domain, optimization is often used to
reduced incidents and injuries during any stage of a construction pro-
ject (Rajguru and Mahatme, 2015). Simulation, on the other hand, is
used to capture the operational details of construction projects and
analyzing what-if scenarios (Baniassadi, 2018). Simulating safety risk
attributes in a construction project can highlight numerous scenarios
enabling decision makers to improve performance metrics.
This review paper conducts a mixed-method review of literature to
explore the existing body of knowledge around safety risk management

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: Maryam.alkaissy@monash.edu (M. Alkaissy), Mehrdad.arashpour@monash.edu (M. Arashpour), baabak.ashuri@coa.gatech.edu (B. Ashuri),
yu.bai@monash.edu (Y. Bai), reza.hosseini@deakin.edu.au (R. Hosseini).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104805
Received 4 December 2019; Received in revised form 20 March 2020; Accepted 3 May 2020
Available online 21 May 2020
0925-7535/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Alkaissy, et al.
Fig. 1. Venn representation of review paper's focus.
using simulation modeling and optimization over the past two decades.
The conducted mixed-method review explored the interface between
safety risk management and system modeling with implications for
quality, productivity, and cost. Limitations and future research oppor-
tunities have also been identified.
2. Research methods
2.1. Literature search
Focus of this work is to investigate the relation between safety risk
management and system modeling with focus on contemporary
methods of simulation and optimization developed in the past 20 years.
As can be seen in stage 1 of Fig. 2, literature search was conducted to
better understand how modeling serves safety risk management and
implications for quality, productivity, and cost of construction projects.
Among other simulation methods the focus was placed on Discrete
Event (DE), Agent Based Modeling (ABM) and System Dynamics (SD).
Furthermore, linear and non-linear optimization modeling were ana-
lyzed.
2.2. Mixed-method review and analysis
This review paper adopts mixed-method analysis integrating
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis
(PRISMA). This method is used to analyze the existing body of knowl-
edge on the concept of safety risk management (Fig. 3). This systematic
review implements a logical, repeatable, and transparent process to
minimize non-relevant results, which distinguishes it from the tradi-
tional descriptive review. Systematic review process is done by pro-
viding a precise overview of published works through comprehensive
literature search (Newaz et al., 2018). As can be seen in different stages
of Fig. 3, different sets of keywords were chosen to ensure all relevant
and necessary articles are included. Five groups of keywords have been
implemented to capture the literature related to safety risk manage-
ment through multi-method system modeling.
Academic databases including Scopus, Google Scholar, Science
Direct and Web of Science were focused on as these cover more quality
publications compared to others (Aghaei Chadegani et al., 2013). The
preliminary search process produced a total of 732 papers, which were
refined excluding non-relevant and removing duplicates. In order to
2
Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805
ensure the alignment of scope, further screening was done by ex-
amining abstract, which resulted in a further shortlisting of articles. The
final sets of papers were then selected by critically evaluating the full
text on topics relating safety risks in construction and the different
project performance indices, as well as, the different modeling ap-
proaches used to correlate the relations between the project indices and
safety risks in construction. For example, in stage 3 (Eligibility), 18
records were excluded after full text review as they were not relevant to
the review domain. The 4-stage process is shown in Fig. 3.
Manual selection of relevant papers is often regarded biased as it
depends on researchers’ preferences. Therefore, a computer aided
analysis that investigates correlations and facilitates visualizations of
citation networks should complement the PRISMA analysis (Oraee
et al., 2017). In this review paper, a scientometric analysis method by
employing VOS viewer and Gephi software that are widely used to
analyze publication networks and link to the topic of investigation. The
visualized bibliometric network can be created based on citation, bib-
liographic coupling, co-citation and/or co-authorship. These softwares
have some interesting built-in functionalities such as text mining that
can be used to build and envision co-occurrence networks of significant
terms mined from a body of scientific literature (Perianes-Rodriguez
et al., 2016).
Keywords serve as descriptors of papers contents, and they re-
present the fundamental topics covered in research paper (Su and Lee,
2010). Thus, a network representation of keywords re-occurrence was
mapped, and the results are reflected in Fig. 4 in what appears to be the
most important nodes of research streamline, displaying connections
between construction safety management and modeling paradigms. The
interrelation between these keywords presents the frequency of re-oc-
currence in the literature. The node’s density in the figure represents
the higher level of citations for a study, while the links among nodes are
representative of citations in pair and group articles. These links be-
come stronger (closer nodes) if two neighboring nodes have similar co-
authors or frequent pair citations. (Van Eck and Waltman, 2011). Fur-
ther analysis of nodes in the network representation revealed emer-
gence of three correlated areas to safety, i.e. quality, productivity, and
cost of construction. Although the search criteria have some level of
impact on node appearances in Fig. 4, the links are independent to the
search criteria.
Author’s citations have also been mapped and the results are re-
flected in Fig. 5, in what appears to be the most authors citation in
safety risk modeling literature. It can be noted from the dense and
proximity of nodes, the strong citations between Li H, Sack R., and Lee
S. as the three authors share common interest in modeling construction
productivity and relations to safety. Moreover, a strong citation relation
exists between Hallowell M., Tixier J., and Fang D. with common in-
terests in safety risk quantification in constriction,
Using the procedural method for searching the literature enabled
the precise selection of the articles with maximum relevance to the
review’s focus modeling paradigms used in safety risk management.
The papers were mainly from 18 different journals with Journal of
Construction Engineering and Management, Safety Science and
Automation in Construction having the highest number of relevant
publications (see Fig. 6). All selected articles were sourced from high-
impact journals.
The interrelation of journal source citations among the selected
papers was analyzed. The most journal source citations are linked to the
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Safety Science,
and Automation in Construction. This network representation is logical
as these three journals have published the greatest number of relevant
articles to safety risk management in the analyzed domain (see Fig. 7).
Fig. 8 illustrates the distribution of articles based on their publica-
tion years. It can be noted that between the years (1999–2008) few
articles were published on safety risk modeling. However, an increase
in published papers were recorded between (2009–2019) with larger
number of publications in 2013. Overall, the results show the interest of
M. Alkaissy, et al. Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805

Fig. 2. Framework of research stages and processes.

scholars and researchers in the last decade. It is expected that more Project quality in construction can be quantified in different ways
researches will publish on the topic since modeling applications in including rework analysis (Arashpour et al., 2014). Rework is defined
construction safety is an evolving subject. After shortlisting papers and as the process of doing an operation at least one extra time due to
visualization of citation networks in this section, the interpretation of quality deviations and non-conformance to project’s requirements
literature search is discussed in the next section. (Nasirzadeh, 2013). Rework has been found to be related to injury rates
in construction activities. Love (2016) implemented a rework preven-
tion program, which resulted in significant reduction of incidents after
3. Discussions and literature trends
the introduction. Their study found a larger number of incidents prior
to the introduction of the rework reduction program. This is because
3.1. The correlation between safety and quality
workers can be distracted by ad hoc rework tasks while undertaking
their routine project tasks. In other words, safety is situational, and
Two decades of modeling safety risks shows that construction in-
found to link accidents causations with quality in construction as ex-
dustry is improving slower than other neighboring industries such as
plained by the distraction theory (Nnaji, 2016). Teo (2017) demon-
manufacturing due to project complexity issues (Loushine et al., 2004).
strated the correlation between injuries, rework and personnel hours
Such issues were found to be the root cause for many human casualties,
after performing a linear regression analysis with injury data as the
process disruptions, delays, and cost overruns (Shah, 2016, Maemura
dependent variable, and rework frequency and personnel hours as the
et al., 2018). The analysis of literature revealed that safety, quality,
independent variables. The results also revealed that both variables
productivity, and cost are core performance indicators that specify
account for 68.2% of variations in injury frequency.
project success (Wanberg et al., 2013). These are not independent in-
Risk modeling literature suggest that recordable injury rate is po-
dicators and for example, Hoonakker (2010) found that when quality
sitively correlated to rework, and first-aid rate is positively correlated to
management systems are implemented, safety can be improved. Pheng
the number of defects (Wanberg et al., 2013). Dynamic mathematical
(2003) highlighted the similarity between safety management and
modeling and simulating techniques for modeling quality in construc-
quality management programs and proposed a framework for in-
tion projects were investigated in Nasirzadeh (2013), where fuzzy logic
tegrating quality and safety management systems. Such integration of
and system dynamics simulation scheme were integrated. The model
the two programs reportedly results in an effective use of limited pro-
considered uncertainties associated with the parameters as well. System
ject resources.

3
M. Alkaissy, et al. Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805

Fig. 3. PRISMA paper review flow diagram.

dynamics causal model was also utilized by Mohamed (2011) to si- enabler on predefined safety objectives over project duration was also
mulate interactions and relationships among construction safety culture simulated and European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM)
predefined enablers (Leadership, Policy and Strategy, People, Partner- Excellence model was adopted as a conceptual framework. It was found
ships and Resources, and Processes). The potential impact of each that by improving enablers, there will be a significant performance

Fig. 4. Network representation of keywords re-occurrence in literature.

4
M. Alkaissy, et al.
Fig. 5. Network representation of author's citations in literature.
improvement. Jeschke (2017) found that by improving enablers there
will be a significant site performance improvement. A leadership
training program named ’Toolbox-training’ was implemented to im-
prove construction foremen’s daily tasks knowledge and communica-
tion skills in relation to sites daily risks, and the training was found
successful in improving the enablers of quality management in relation
to safety. Other modeling studies revealed that organizations with ad-
hoc safety implementation should primarily focus on enhancing the
leadership enabler to rapidly and successfully progress to higher con-
struction safety culture maturity levels (Mohamed, 2011; Assadzadeh
et al., 2019). Other studies have utilized evolutionary game theory to
describe the complex and dynamic interactions among construction
stakeholders and impacts on project quality and safety. The results
provided an overview of stakeholders’ interactions among stakeholders
and supported positive outcomes for optimizing quality supervision
procedures and safety improvements (Guo, 2018).
3.2. The correlation between safety and productivity
Improving worker’s safety and productivity are amongst main
concerns in the construction industry, where organizations are under
continuous pressure to produce more efficiently within a safer working
environment (Arashpour et al., 2018). Construction productivity, can
be measured by the number of actual work hours required to accom-
plish a proper unit of work and is often quantified by the hours of work
over value of the work achieved (Abourizk and Dozzi, 1993). The link
between construction safety and productivity has been the focus of
some previous research efforts. Findings show that safety at work
generates a better environment with reduced costs and delays that can
improve productivity (Baniassadi, 2018). Numerous studies have been
conducted on productivity and safety interface. Zhang et al. (2019)
found that as workers move around on sites to accomplish different
tasks, they are more likely to take unsafe shortcuts due to a variety of
Fig. 6. Distribution of papers based on publication source.
5
Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805
motives, such as saving time and easing physical activities. (Usmen and
Vilnitis, 2015) illustrated the positive correlation between safety and
productivity such that productivity losses were higher with safety vio-
lations than with preventive safety practices. Also, lean production
principles are applicable to both safety and quality in construction, and
carry a vital role in increasing the productivity, as these three compo-
nents in construction projects are interrelated. Baniassadi (2018) ad-
dressed the existing relationship between safety and productivity in
construction projects and introduced a framework using Task Demand
Assessment (TDA) to measure safety risk of construction activities and
analyze how changes in operation parameters can affect the likelihood
of accidents (Mitropoulos, 2010). The challenge to perform an activity
safely was reflected in task demand, where concurrent safety and pro-
ductivity improvements are identified as a feasible solution to the
competing objectives (Arashpour et al., 2019).
Theories linking productivity and safety in construction have been
the focus of research in several published papers. Salem (2006) de-
monstrated improvements made by implementing the lean construction
theory, where incident rates decreased, and project performance results
improved. Moaveni (2019) presented lean construction theory through
the lens of safety, by proposing transformation, flow and value model
(TFV) and an integration of safety in construction projects as one of the
factors affecting project productivity and achieving optimal value for
stakeholders. In addition to the aforementioned theoretical integration
of safety and productivity in construction, the entropy theory has also
been another research mainstream. Risk management at the design
plays an important role in improving safety and project productivity
(Sun, 2010). In large-scale construction projects, designing safety risk
management is complex, but with the aid of entropy theory, safety risks
management can be done at the design stage (Sun, 2010).
Twenty years of risk modeling in construction has revealed the
correlation between safety and project productivity. Baniassadi (2018)
utilized discrete events simulation to model a wide range of
M. Alkaissy, et al.
Fig. 7. Network representation of journal source citations.
construction scenarios. Their modeling framework was found to be
capable of developing ex-ante plans for safety and productivity im-
provements. Goh (2019) modeled construction as production processes,
and their approach resulted in productivity and safety improvements
with increased resource utilization and reduced safety risks. Jiang
(2015) modeled the assessment and control of construction safety as a
complex system and designed a system dynamic model for the causa-
tion of unsafe behaviors based on a holistic cognitive analysis. Their
findings showed a positive correlation between safety and productivity
in construction. A novel approach for improving productivity and safety
of construction projects was proposed in Hammad (2012) by adopting a
multi-agent systems architecture, real-time simulation and automated
resource control. In this way, a multi-layer agent-based architecture is
constructed to screen, manage, and control construction resource op-
erations, and to resolve conflicts at the managerial level.
3.3. The correlation between safety and cost
Poor safety records impose massive direct and indirect costs an-
nually on the construction industry (Lu, 2016). López-Alonso (2013)
investigated the interrelationships between costs of accidents, fre-
quency of happening, and health and safety plan budgets. It was found
that the average number of accidents is correlated with total number of
workers and expenditures on health and safety. Average accident
Fig. 8. Publication distribution by years.
6
Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805
number is also inversely related to the cost of accident prevention
(López-Alonso, 2013). Cost estimation techniques can be categorized
into qualitative and quantitative groups (Niazi et al., 2006). Qualitative
cost estimation techniques use expert judgement to estimate project
costs, while quantitative methods rely on cost analysis of project de-
signs, processes, and distinctive attributes through numerical methods
(Chou, 2011). Probabilistic costing is commonly used in project’s early
estimates to compensate for deficiencies, and identify the chances and
degree of cost overruns, thus giving a room to control the size of pro-
jects and contingency funds estimations against different uncertainties
including safety risks (Chou, 2011). It was found that costs of accidents
being directly related to the total number of workers, the average
number of subcontractors’ workers. It was also confirmed that cost of
accident prevention is independent of the project stage and progress.
Cost-benefit analysis provides a proper tool to examine key issues such
as direct/indirect costs of incidents and benefits of safety management
investments (Ikpe, 2008). Indirect costs of accidents in construction
projects can be represented by the Iceberg Theory (Hamid, 2008).
Iceberg Theory states that the initial cost of an accident is only the tip of
what it really costs to the construction industry. The hidden or indirect
costs of an accident is around 10 times more than that of direct costs
(Hamid, 2008, Onn, 2004)
Two decades of modeling safety risks reveals that costs associated
with accidents in construction can affect project performance in various
M. Alkaissy, et al.
ways, by translating into delays, shattered company image, and loss of
market to competitors (Nasirian et al., 2019). Heravi (2014) confirmed
that optimized resource utilization maximizes quality and minimizes
the risks associated with unsafe movement of construction resources.
They developed a time–cost-quality optimization model based on
Monte Carlo simulation for analyzing safety related issues. Further-
more, Agent-based model simulation has been used to provide a fra-
mework to investigate interactions between different safety factors,
human and environmental variables (Lu, 2016). Telis et al. (2011) Used
finite elements and desirability analysis to simulate an innovative op-
timization of construction designs with safety, cost and total displace-
ments as design characteristics. Cost-effective safety investments under
different construction scenarios were proposed to deliver optimal safety
performance. Pan (2009) introduced a hybrid dynamic simulation to
support decision makers in the construction industry to optimize re-
source utilization, resulting in reduced costs, efficient work schedules,
and enhanced productivity.
3.4. Safety risk modeling and optimisation
Construction safety management risk modeling often relies on past
injury records to indicate the likelihood and severity of potential ac-
cidents for a specific construction work task or project (Sousa, 2014).
However, all safety risk management studies operate under the as-
sumption that previous trends will remain relatively stable in the short
term, such that the magnitude of previous risks reflects future events
(Alruqi and Hallowell, 2019). Understandably, an optimal way for
improving safety performance is accident prevention. Gunduz (2018)
proposed a risk management method with practical control level stra-
tegies make construction workplaces safer. A quantitative safety risk
model was developed by Ning (2018) to aid site managers in evaluation
of site layout scenarios. The developed model involved identification
and arrangement of safety factors for analysis and assessment function
development. The linear attenuation law along with safety incidents
likelihood model correspondingly were followed to establish the
quantitative analysis functions for safety risks. Choe (2017) prepared a
relative injury-index data for construction trades in terms of common
hazard types and sources of injuries and proposed a safety risk quan-
tification model by occupations. The resultant model can develop a
better understanding of dynamic nature of the construction industry
incidents. Mitropoulos (2010) constructed safety risk management
based on task demand and provided a new method to analyze safety
risks related to construction activities. Their method quantifies safety
risks based on characteristics of the related task rather than estimating
the safety risk in terms of probability and consequences. Alomari
(2018) studied risk perception and impact of different risk factors on
worker safety in construction jobsites. Safety risk evaluation is chal-
lenging due to the dynamic nature of construction work environments
and lack of consistent record keeping. Gunduz (2018) proposed a dy-
namic risk model in view of changes in time, construction environ-
ments, and interaction between different construction stakeholders to
optimize the control of safety risks. A comprehensive statistical model
was developed by (Arashpour et al., 2013) to utilize real-time tracking
information collected from construction sites, and reporting risks
caused by parallel-running activities. In the event of an increasing risk
exposure for workers in construction sites, input variables are analyzed
to derive proactive measures. A web-based approach for safety risk
early warning was developed by Ding (2013). They used an urban
metro construction project as the case study to adopt the approach with
a hybrid data fusion model based on multisource information. Safety
risk management and early warnings were automatically generated in
the model to facilitate triggering preventive or corrective measures.
Optimization modeling has been widely used in previous research.
For example, Zhang and Fan (2014) developed a near optimal risk re-
sponse strategy by considering the integration of project cost, schedule,
and safety. The results demonstrated the potential for improving safety
7
Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805
performance as well as traditional project success measures. Rahimi
(2018) proposed a linear mixed-integer programming model to opti-
mize risk response strategy to meet the objective functions, i.e. mini-
mizing the effect of risks on project quality, productivity, and cost,
while taking in consideration the construction project constrains such
as budget and technical dependencies. In their study, a hybrid approach
based on failure mode effects analysis based on principles of ISO 31000
was utilized to identify, evaluate, and control risks effectively. The re-
sults showed the possibility of selecting near optimum risk response
strategies. Fang (2011) introduced a non-linear genetic algorithm op-
timization risk response plan model, while making it possible to analyze
risk response and anticipate effects on the global risk network. They
claimed that project managers and decision-makers may benefit from
the proposed technique by providing them an integrated framework to
look ahead and supports safety risk management.
As an important development in this domain, Hallowell (2011)
presented a safety risk-based injury prevention framework using risk
quantification and analysis techniques. The results showed that return
on investment for effective injury prevention strategies depends on a
number of parameters such as cost of injuries and frequency of occur-
rence, the implementation of specific injury prevention techniques and
their sequences, mitigation approaches, and organization’s attitude to-
wards safety risks. Sousa (2015) proposed an occupational safety and
health risk model at the activity level in construction by providing
methods to quantify risk in monetary terms. Their aim was to facilitate
the accurate estimation of risk mitigation costs/benefits. Similarly,
Tixier (2017) proposed a fully data-driven method to define and si-
mulate univariate and bivariate construction safety risk at the situa-
tional level. The combinations of kernels and copulas techniques pro-
vided a robust tool to model and observe safety risks, and the approach
can be used to make safety risk related decisions under uncertainty of
data.
A summery findings of the selected articles for this review paper is
illustrated in Table 1. The table incorporates project performance me-
trics correlations to safety, the methodology used in the selected paper,
as well as, a brief finding or aim of the selected paper. The paper’s aim
is to identify and develop the existing body of knowledge on the topic of
safety risk management and modeling. Although the literature contains
numerous studies on safety risk modeling, there is a gap in using multi-
method system modeling safety risk management. It is found that errors
by using only one modeling method accumulate over time resulting in
difficult decision making (Glock et al., 2016). Using multi-method
modeling approaches, and utilizing all their capabilities, is a more ro-
bust approach to manage risk (Bokor et al., 2019). This approach can
enable practitioners and decision makers to explore safety risk impacts
that result from different project activities and evaluate alternative
means of safety risk management. For example: Multi-method modeling
can be a hybrid SD-ABM to precisely model complexity (Schieritz and
Milling, 2003). Another example is the hybrid of DES-ABM which can
propose framework to integrate unlimited behavioural activities into
project activity planning (Goh and Askar Ali, 2016). Also, Hybrid
SD–DES simulation may present a methodology enabling modellers to
benefit from capabilities of one simulation paradigm to compensate
another one’s deficiencies (Moradi et al., 2015).
Nevertheless, multi-method modeling can benefit organizations on
the innovation level and organizations continuous development
(Hallowell and Gambatese, 2010). Integrating multi-method system
modeling with an effective systematic management of safety risk at all
its level improves worker health and safety, as well as productivity.
Eliminating and controlling risks in the workplace by an effective safety
risk management can improve and reduce the number of workplace
injuries and their severities, endorse worker’s health quality and their
work capacity, eliminate illnesses and their associated costs, help ad-
vance quality and productivity of work, which result in creating an
innovative environment for workers (safe Wok Australia 2015). With
the aid of multi-method technological advancements system modeling
 M. Alkaissy, et al.
Table 1
Comparative review of key areas addressed, and their feature modeling approach.
Source Safety Quality Productivity Cost Modeling Approach Conclusions

(Nasirzadeh, 2013) x x . . Fuzzy Logic, SD Negative impact of quality failures on safety

(Mohamed, 2011) x x x . EFQM, SD, Linear Regression Effect of safety enablers on project delivery
(Guo, 2018) x x . . Evolutionary game theory, SD Effect of dynamic interaction of safety risks on Quality
(Nnaji, 2016) x x . . Distraction theory, statistical analysis The dynamic relation between distraction and delivery of projects and workers’ safety
(Love et al. 2016) x x . . Swiss cheese model, statistical analysis Safety incidents reduction through rework prevention program
(Wanberg et al., 2013) x x . . TQM, linear Regression Mathematically model the interaction between safety risks and quality
(Hoonakker, 2010) x x . . TQM, Qualitative analysis Barriers to quality implementation in construction
(Pheng, 2003) x x . . Statistical model Compatibility of quality management standards with occupational health standards in construction.
(Teo, 2017) x x . . Linear Regression Analysis Relation between rework, injury rate, and personnel hours
(Zhang, 2019) x . x . Cognitive analysis, ABM Quantitative analysis of unsafe behaviors of construction workers and relations to accidents.
(Baniassadi, 2018) x . x . TDA, DES Relation between productivity, safety, and project profitability
(Choudhry, 2017) x . x . Statistical model Simultaneous relation between construction safety and productivity
(Jiang, 2015) x . x . Planned behavior theory, SD, Cognitive cause-effect relationship between occupational accidents, safety behaviors, and productivity
analysis
(Fayek, 2005) x . x . Fuzzy logic, fussy export system Labor productivity factors and relations to safety
(Mitropoulos and Namboodiri, 2009) x . x . TDA Effect of change in project parameters disturb safety and productivity
(Zhang et al., 2019) x x . x Real-time evaluation model Real-time safety risk evaluation model for metro construction adjacent to buildings structures.
(Salem, 2006) x . x . Lean assessment model Lean construction method of project delivery with low injury records.
(Goh, 2019) x x x . DES Reduction in process time, and increases in process efficiency and labor productivity can be achieved
(Aminbakhsh et al., 2013) x . . x AHP, COS model Safety risk management of different potential risk incidents.
(Ning, 2018) x . . x Quantitative safety risk management Systematic evaluation framework for risk factors that occurs in the preconstruction stage
(Choe and Leite, 2017) x . x . Safety risk quantification model Interrelation between occupational sources of injuries and injury severity and productivity in construction
(Wang, 2006) x . x x Simulation based model Assessment of expected accident costs for construction activitiesin a network schedule.
(Zhang and Fan, 2014) x x x x Optimization model Integration of project cost, schedule, and safety in construction
8

(Rahimi, 2018) x x x x Linear mixed integer programming model Risk responses model for optimizing projects delivery
(Hadikusumo and Rowlinson, 2002) x . . x VR, DFSP Visualization of the construction process that can be used to analyze safety hazards
(Hallowell, 2011) x . . x COS model evaluate the cost-benefit of investments in injury prevention
(Hallowell, 2010) x . . x POM technique Cost-effectiveness of safety management strategies
(Sousa, 2015) x . . x OSH-PRM Assist in conducting cost-benefit analysis for occupational safety and health risk management.
(Tixier, 2017) x . x . Stochastic simulation Quantitatively safety risk measurement in construction and relations to project performance.
(Turskis et al., 2012) x . x x reliability of production Review of reliability in construction production, the use of reserves, robust itineraries, and contingency of time
and cost
(Jung et al., 2016) x . . x Fuzzy-FMEA Understand the effect of contract changes at the construction phase on project delivery risks.
(Esmaeili and Hallowell, 2013) x . x . Delphi method, SSRAM Safety risk quantification using safety risk data into construction project schedules
(Windapo, 2013) x . . x Statistical analysis Negative relationship between degree of risk, level of risk, and cost of compliance and savings.
(Gurcanli et al., 2015) x . x x Logarithmic regression Early stage safety cost estimation using risk analysis activities and project scheduling by focusing on construction
activities.
(López-Alonso, 2013) x . . x Bivariate analysis, Statistical model Impact of safety investments on company’s construction costs.
(El-Rayes and Khalafallah, 2005) x . x x Multi-objective genetic algorithm Optimization of site lay-out and construction safety.
(Ning, 2013) x . . x Pareto-based ACO algorithm Minimize likelihood of accidents while optimizing site lay-out
(Zou and Sunindijo, 2013) x x x x SEM Construction safety performance relation with safety risks
(Mohamed, 2003) x . x x SD Balanced scorecard approach on determining efficient management framework towards safety in construction
(Mohamed, 1999) x . x x LTIFR SD model Correlation between SPI and SMI
(Rustom and Amer, 2006) . x . x Pareto model, regression analysis Factors affecting quality of building construction projects

Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805

(Zhou et al., 2009) x . x . Web-based model Hybrid data integration to web-based system for safety risk early warning in urban metro construction.
(Han et al., 2014) x x x . SD Schedule delays and rework are found critical factors for accident occurrence in construction projects which is
attributed to production pressure.
(Goh and Askar Ali, 2016) x . x . ABM, SD, DES Integrate safety considerations into early planning of construction processes to select suitable production and
safety target intrusions
(Mitropoulos and Cupido, 2009) x . x . Fuller's Task-Demand-Capability Interface Inspect production and teamwork on accidents occurrence, where strategies to prevent production errors appear
model to reduce the likelihood of accidents.
(Esmaeili and Hallowell, 2012) x . . x Diffusion model Predictive safety innovation model and cost-effectiveness
(Fang et al., 2004) x x x x Statistical model safety management Key factors for measuring safety management performance on construction sites
M. Alkaissy, et al.
at each level of safety risk management can be a vital importance, as it
can offer better visualization and control over safety risks in construc-
tion (Hallowell, 2011; Jung et al., 2017; Jiang, 2015; Kurien, 2018;
Rahimi, 2018)
4. Future research
Safety risk management is a complex domain in construction, and
system modeling is a useful tool in such a domain. Two decades of risk
modeling has resulted in the use of multiple simulation and optimiza-
tion paradigms that are becoming progressively common in the con-
struction safety literature (AL-Kaissy et al., 2019). Such paradigms can
facilitate better visualization and control of safety risks in construction
(Hallowell, 2011; Jiang, 2015; Kurien, 2018; Rahimi, 2018).
Future construction safety research should focus on integration of
multi-method modeling approaches for safety risk management in
construction. This enables in-depth investigation of correlations to
traditional performance metrics such as quality, productivity, and cost.
It is also important that future research recognizes the technological
advancements in construction and their dynamic relations to safety risk
management.
5. Limitations
The scope of this review has been limited to the high-impact jour-
nals within the construction literature. Moreover, the reviewed articles
have been limited to papers published from 1999 onward to ensure
recency. Furthermore, the main focus of this literature analysis has been
on quantitative modeling through various simulation and optimization
technics.
6. Conclusion
Failure to accurately model project safety risks leads to inferior
performance in hazardous construction environments. The focus of this
review is on modeling efforts over the past two decades within the
construction context. Review synthesis was set on current methods of
safety risk management and contemporary modeling including simu-
lation and optimization. For unbiased analysis of the literature, this
paper adopts Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and
Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). The main aim was to identify and analyze the
existing body of knowledge on the concept of safety risk management.
It was found that dynamic nature of construction work environment
along with the lack of consistent record keepings makes it more difficult
to model safety risks. Thus, research should stress on a more dynamic
safety risk modeling with considering variations in time, cost, quality
and interaction between different construction stakeholders. Previous
research demonstrated that optimum strategies to handle safety risks
can be developed with the aid of system modeling, while considering
resource constrains in construction projects. Findings show modeling
has advanced in the past 20 years but there is room for improvement
when it comes to multi-method modeling of safety related risks. Multi-
method modeling is needed to analyze different safety related risks in
complex construction environments. It is found that errors by using
only one modeling method accumulate over time resulting in difficult
decision making (Glock et al., 2016). Utilizing multi-method modeling
capabilities, is a robust approach to manage risks (Bokor et al., 2019).
This approach enables practitioners and decision makers to explore
safety risk impacts that result from different project activities and
evaluate alternative means of safety risk management. Nevertheless,
multi-method modeling can benefit organizations on the innovation
level and organizations continuous development (Hallowell and
Gambatese, 2010). Future research opportunities have been identified
including the need for construction safety research on integrating
quantitative and qualitative modeling approaches. The findings are
expected to provide useful insights to researchers in this context.
9
Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805
References
Abourizk, S.M., Dozzi, S.P., 1993. Application of computer simulation in resolving con-
struction disputes. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 119, 355–373. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)0733-9364(1993)119:2(355).
Aghaei Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., Ale
Ebrahim, N., 2013. A comparison between two main academic literature collections:
web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian Soc. Sci. 9, 18–26.
Alomari, K.A.G., J. A., Tymvios, N. 2018. Risk perception comparison among construction
safety professionals: Delphi perspective. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 144. doi: 10.1061/
(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001565.
Al-Kaissy, M., Arashpour, M., Fayezi, S., Nezhad, A., Ashuri, B., 2019. Process modelling
in civil infrastructure projects: a review of construction simulation methods. IAARC
Publications, pp. 368–375.
Alruqi, W.M., Hallowell, M.R., 2019. Critical success factors for construction safety: re-
view and meta-analysis of safety leading indicators. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 145.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001626.
Aminbakhsh, S., Gunduz, M., Sonmez, R., 2013. Safety risk assessment using analytic
hierarchy process (AHP) during planning and budgeting of construction projects. J.
Saf. Res. 46, 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2013.05.003.
Arashpour, M., Heidarpour, A., Akbar Nezhad, A., Hosseinifard, Z., Chileshe, N., Hosseini,
R., 2019. Performance-based control of variability and tolerance in off-site manu-
facture and assembly: optimization of penalty on poor production quality. Construct.
Manage. Econ. 1–13.
Arashpour, M., Kamat, V., Bai, Y., Wakefield, R., Abbasi, B., 2018. Optimization modeling
of multi-skilled resources in prefabrication: theorizing cost analysis of process in-
tegration in off-site construction. Autom. Constr. 95, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
autcon.2018.07.027.
Arashpour, M., Wakefield, R., Blismas, N., Lee, E.W.M., 2013. A new approach for
modelling variability in residential construction projects. Austral. J. Constr. Econ.
Build. 13, 83–92. https://doi.org/10.5130/AJCEB.v13i2.3120.
Arashpour, M., Wakefield, R., Blismas, N., Lee, E.W.M., 2014. Analysis of disruptions
caused by construction field rework on productivity in residential projects. J. Constr.
Eng. Manage. 140, 04013053. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.
0000804.
Assadzadeh, A., Arashpour, M., Rashidi, A., Bab-Hadiashar, A. & Fayezi, S. 2019. A review
of data-driven accident prevention systems: Integrating real-time safety management
in the civil infrastructure context. In: AL-Hussein, M., (Ed.), 36th International
Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, ISARC 2019. International
Association for Automation and Robotics in Construction I.A.A.R.C), pp. 289–296.
Australia, S.W. Work-related traumatic injury fatalities, Australia 2014. Canberra, 2015
[cited 2017 Nov 6].
Baniassadi, F. A., A., Mostafavi, A. 2018. A simulation-based framework for concurrent
safety and productivity improvement in construction projects. Eng., Constr. Archit.
Manage. 25, 1501–1515. doi: 10.1108/ECAM-12-2017-0266.
Bokor, O., Florez, L., Osborne, A., Gledson, B.J., 2019. Overview of construction simu-
lation approaches to model construction processes. Org., Technol. Manage. Constr.:
Int. J. 11, 1853–1861.
Choe, S., Leite, F., 2017. Construction safety planning: site-specific temporal and spatial
information integration. Autom. Constr. 84, 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
autcon.2017.09.007.
Choe, S.L.F., 2017. Assessing safety risk among different construction trades: quantitative
approach. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 143. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-
7862.0001237.
Chou, J.S., 2011. Cost simulation in an item-based project involving construction en-
gineering and management. Int. J. Project Manage. 29, 706–717. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ijproman.2010.07.010.
Choudhry, R.M., 2017. Achieving safety and productivity in construction projects. J. Civ.
Eng. Manage. 23, 311–318. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2015.1068842.
Ding, L.Y.Z.C., 2013. Development of web-based system for safety risk early warning in
urban metro construction. Autom. Constr. 34, 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
autcon.2012.11.001.
El-Rayes, K., Khalafallah, A., 2005. Trade-off between safety and cost in planning con-
struction site layouts. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 131, 1186–1195. https://doi.org/10.
1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2005)131:11(1186).
Esmaeili, B., Hallowell, M., 2013. Integration of safety risk data with highway con-
struction schedules. Construct. Manage. Econ. 31, 528–541. https://doi.org/10.
1080/01446193.2012.739288.
Esmaeili, B., Hallowell, M.R., 2012. Diffusion of Safety innovations in the construction
industry. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 138, 955–963. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.
1943-7862.0000499.
Fang, C. M., F., Zio, E., 2011. An integrated framework for the optimization of project risk
Response plan under resource constraints with genetic algorithm. In: 2011
International Conference on Quality, Reliability, Risk, Maintenance, and Safety
Engineering, ICQR2MSE 2011, 2011 Xi'an. Pp. 856–861. doi: 10.1109/ICQR2MSE.
2011.5976743.
Fang, D.P., Huang, X.Y., Hinze, J., 2004. Benchmarking studies on construction safety
management in China. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 130, 424–432. https://doi.org/10.
1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2004)130:3(424).
Fayek, A.R.O.A., 2005. Predicting industrial construction labor productivity using fuzzy
expert systems. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 131, 938–941. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)0733-9364(2005)131:8(938).
Glock, B., Popper, N., Breitenecker, F., 2016. Exploring the advantages of multi-method
modelling in the use case of a large socio-technical infrastructure system: the airport
city. SNE, 175.
M. Alkaissy, et al.
Goh, M.G., Y. M., 2019. Lean production theory-based simulation of modular construction
processes. Automat. Constr., 101, 227–244. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2018.12.017.
Goh, Y.M., Askar Ali, M.J., 2016. A hybrid simulation approach for integrating safety
behavior into construction planning: an earthmoving case study. Accid. Anal. Prev.
93, 310–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.09.015.
Gunduz, M.L.H., 2018. Construction safety risk assessment with introduced control levels.
J. Civil Eng. Manage. 24, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2018.284.
Guo, S. Z., P., Yang, J., 2018. System dynamics model based on evolutionary game theory
for quality supervision among construction stakeholders. J. Civ. Eng. Manage., 24,
316–328. doi: 10.3846/jcem.2018.3068.
Gurcanli, G.E., Bilir, S., Sevim, M., 2015. Activity based risk assessment and safety cost
estimation for residential building construction projects. Saf. Sci. 80, 1–12.
Hadikusumo, B.H.W., Rowlinson, S., 2002. Integration of virtually real construction
model and design-for-safety-process database. Autom. Constr. 11, 501–509. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0926-5805(01)00061-9.
Hallowell, M., 2010. Cost-effectiveness of construction safety programme elements.
Construct. Manage. Econ. 28, 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190903460706.
Hallowell, M.R., 2011. Risk-based framework for safety investment in construction or-
ganizations. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 137, 592–599. https://doi.org/10.1061/
(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000339.
Hallowell, M.R., Gambatese, J.A., 2010. Population and initial validation of a formal
model for construction safety risk management. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 136,
981–990. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000204.
Hamid, A.R.A.M., Muhd Zaimi, A.B.D., Singh, Bachan, 2008. Causes of accidents at
construction sites. Malaysian J. Civil Eng., 20.
Hammad, A.V., F., Zhang, C., Mawlana, M., Doriani, A., 2012. Towards the smart con-
struction site: Improving productivity and safety of construction projects using multi-
agent systems, real-time simulation and automated machine control. 2012 Winter
Simulation Conference, WSC 2012, 2012 Berlin. doi: 10.1109/WSC.2012.6465160.
Han, S., Saba, F., Lee, S., Mohamed, Y., Peña-Mora, F., 2014. Toward an understanding of
the impact of production pressure on safety performance in construction operations.
Accid. Anal. Prev. 68, 106–116.
Heravi, G.F.S., 2014. Group decision making for stochastic optimization of time, cost, and
quality in construction projects. J. Comput. Civil Eng. 28, 275–283. https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-5487.0000264.
Hoonakker, P.C., Pascale, Loushine, Todd, 2010. Barriers and benefits of quality man-
agement in the construction industry: an empirical study. Total Quality Manage., 21,
953–969.
Ikpe, E.H., F., Proverbs, D. A cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of construction health and safety
management: A theoretical discussion. 24th Annual Conference of the Association of
Researchers in Construction Management, ARCOM 2008, 2008 Cardiff. Pp.
1035–1043.
Jeschke, K. C. K., Pete, Rasmussen, Liselotte, Andersen, Lars Peter Sønderbo, Dyreborg,
Johnny, Ajslev, Jeppe, Kabel, Anders, Jensen, Ester, Andersen, Lars Louis, 2017.
Process evaluation of a Toolbox-training program for construction foremen in
Denmark. Saf. Sci., 94, 152–160.
Jiang, Z.F., D., Zhang, M. 2015. Understanding the causation of construction workers'
unsafe behaviors based on system dynamics modeling. J. Manage. Eng., 31. doi: 10.
1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000350.
Jung, J.H., Kim, D.Y., Lee, H.K., 2016. The computer-based contingency estimation
through analysis cost overrun risk of public construction project. KSCE J. Civ. Eng.
20, 1119–1130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-015-0184-8.
Jung, M., Moon, J., Park, M., Lee, H.S., Joo, S.U., Lee, K.P., 2017. Construction worker
hoisting simulation for sky-lobby lifting system. Autom. Constr. 73, 166–174. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.10.002.
Kurien, M. K., M. K., Kopsida, M., Brilakis, I. 2018. Real-time simulation of construction
workers using combined human body and hand tracking for robotic construction
worker system. Automat. Constr., 86, 125–137. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2017.11.005.
Lingard, H., Pirzadeh, P., Oswald, D., 2019. Talking safety: health and safety commu-
nication and safety climate in subcontracted construction workgroups. J. Constr. Eng.
Manage. 145. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001651.
Liu, W. Z., T., Zhou, W., Tang, J., 2018. Safety risk factors of metro tunnel construction in
China: An integrated study with EFA and SEM. Saf. Sci., 105, 98–113. doi: 10.1016/j.
ssci.2018.01.009.
López-Alonso, M.I.-D., M. P., Rubio-Gámez, M.C., Munoz, T.G., 2013. The impact of
health and safety investment on construction company costs. Saf. Sci., 60, 151–159.
doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2013.06.013.
Loushine, T. W., Hoonakker, P., Carayon, P., Smith, M. J. The relationship between safety
and quality management in construction. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2004. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles,
CA, pp. 2060–2064.
Love, P.E.D.T., P., Morrison, J., Grove, M. 2016. Quality and safety in construction:
creating a no-harm environment. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 142. doi: 10.1061/
(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001133.
Lu, M.C., Clara Man, Li, Heng, Hsu, Shu-Chien, 2016. Understanding the relationship
between safety investment and safety performance of construction projects through
agent-based modeling. Accident Anal. Prevent., 94, 8–17.
Maemura, Y., Kim, E., Ozawa, K., 2018. Root causes of recurring contractual conflicts in
international construction projects: five case studies from Vietnam. J. Constr. Eng.
Manage. 144, 05018008.
Melzner, J., 2017. Acquisition and processing of input data for an object - Oriented safety
risk simulation in building construction. In: Chan, V., (Ed.) 2017 Winter Simulation
Conference, WSC 2017, 2018. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.,
pp. 2425–2435. doi: 10.1109/WSC.2017.8247972.
Mitropoulos, P., Cupido, G., 2009. The role of production and teamwork practices in
construction safety: a cognitive model and an empirical case study. J. Saf. Res. 40,
10
Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805
265–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2009.05.002.
Mitropoulos, P.N., Manoj, 2010. New method for measuring the safety risk of construc-
tion activities: task demand assessment. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 137, 30–38.
Mitropoulos, P.T., Namboodiri, M., 2009. Integrating productivity and safety analysis
with the task demand methodology: A case of concrete paving. 2009 Construction
Research Congress - Building a Sustainable Future, 2009 Seattle, WA. Pp. 695–704.
DOI: 10.1061/41020(339)71.
Moaveni, S.B., Mojtahedi, Seyed Yaser, Mohammad, 2019. A conceptual model for a
safety-based theory of lean construction. Buildings 9, 23.
Mohamed, S., 1999. Empirical investigation of construction safety management activities
and performance in Australia. Saf. Sci. 33, 129–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-
7535(99)00028-4.
Mohamed, S., 2003. Scorecard approach to benchmarking organizational safety culture in
construction. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 129, 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9364(2003)129:1(80).
Mohamed, S.C.T., 2011. System dynamics modelling of construction safety culture. Eng.
Constr. Archit. Manage. 18, 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09699981111126179.
Moradi, S., Nasirzadeh, F., Golkhoo, F., 2015. A hybrid SD–DES simulation approach to
model construction projects. Constr. Innov. 15, 66–83.
Nasirzadeh, F.K., M., Afshar, A., Howick, S. 2013. Modeling quality management in
construction projects. Int. J. Civil Eng., 11, 14–22.
Nasirian, A., Arashpour, M., Abbasi, B., Zavadskas, E.K., Akbarnezhad, A., 2019. Skill Set
Configuration in Prefabricated Construction: Hybrid Optimization and Multicriteria
Decision-Making Approach. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 145 (9), 04019050. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001677.
Newaz, M.T., Davis, P.R., Jefferies, M., Pillay, M., 2018. Developing a safety climate
factor model in construction research and practice: a systematic review identifying
future directions for research. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manage. 25, 738–757. https://doi.
org/10.1108/ECAM-02-2017-0038.
Niazi, A., Dai, J. S., Balabani, S., Seneviratne, L., 2006. Product cost estimation: technique
classification and methodology review.
Ning, X.L., K. C., 2013. Cost-safety trade-off in unequal-area construction site layout
planning. Automat. Constr., 32, 96–103. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2013.01.011.
Ning, X.Q., J., Wu, C., 2018. A quantitative safety risk assessment model for construction
site layout planning. Saf. Sci., 104, 246–259. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.01.016.
Nnaji, C.G., J. A., 2016. Worker Distraction Impacts on Safety and Work Quality: An
Energy Component. In: Perdomo-Rivera, J.L.L.D.P., C., Gonzalez-Quevedo, A.,
Maldonado-Fortunet, F., Molina-Bas, O.I., (Eds.). Construction Research Congress
2016: Old and New Construction Technologies Converge in Historic San Juan, CRC
2016, 2016. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), pp. 3005–3014. doi: 10.
1061/9780784479827.299.
Onn, F.C., 2004. Keynote Address at the MEF Conference on Enhancing Malaysia's
Competitiveness in a Globalized Environment.
Oraee, M., Hosseini, M.R., Papadonikolaki, E., Palliyaguru, R., Arashpour, M., 2017.
Collaboration in BIM-based construction networks: a bibliometric-qualitative litera-
ture review. Int. J. Project Manage. 35, 1288–1301.
Pan, N.H., 2009. A hybrid optimization mechanism for constructing a dynamic simulation
system-An operational behavior analysis of a moving scaffolding system. Autom.
Constr. 18, 881–893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.03.012.
Perianes-Rodriguez, A., Waltman, L., Van Eck, N.J., 2016. Constructing bibliometric
networks: a comparison between full and fractional counting. J. Informet. 10 (4),
1178–1195.
Pheng, L.S.P., Young, Chin, 2003. Integrating ISO 9001 and OHSAS 18001 for con-
struction. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 129, 338–347.
Pinto, A., 2014. QRAM a qualitative occupational safety risk assessment model for the
construction industry that incorporate uncertainties by the use of fuzzy sets. Saf. Sci.
63, 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.10.019.
Rahimi, Y. T.-M., R., Iranmanesh, S.H., Vaez-Alaei, M., 2018. Hybrid approach to con-
struction project risk management with simultaneous FMEA/ISO 31000/evolutionary
algorithms: empirical optimization study. J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 144. doi: 10.
1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001486.
Rajguru, A., Mahatme, P., 2015. Effective techniques in cost optimization of construction
project: a review. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 4, 464–469.
Raviv, G.S., Aviad, Fishbain, Barak 2017. AHP-based analysis of the risk potential of
safety incidents: case study of cranes in the construction industry. Saf. Sci., 91,
298–309.
Rustom, R.N., Amer, M.I., 2006. Modeling the factors affecting quality in building con-
struction projects in Gaza strip. J. Constr. Res. 7, 33–47.
Salem, O.S., J., Genaidy, A., Minkarah, I., 2006. Lean construction: From theory to
Implementation. J. Manage. Eng., 22, 168–175.
Schieritz, N., Milling, P.M. Modeling the forest or modeling the trees A comparison of
system dynamics and agent-based simulation. In: Proceedings of the 21st
International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, 2003. Citeseer.
Shah, R.K., 2016. An exploration of causes for delay and cost overrun in construction
projects: a case study of Australia, Malaysia & Ghana. J. Adv. College Eng. Manage. 2,
41–55.
Sousa, V.A., Nuno, M., Dias, Luís A., 2014. Risk-based management of occupational safety
and health in the construction industry–Part 1: Background knowledge. Saf. Sci., 66,
75–86.
Sousa, V.A., Nuno, M., Dias, Luís A., 2015. Risk-based management of occupational safety
and health in the construction industry–Part 2: Quantitative model. Saf. Sci., 74,
184–194.
Su, H.-N., Lee, P.-C., 2010. Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: a
first look at journal papers in Technology Foresight. Scientometrics 85, 65–79.
Sun, L.F., G., Wang, M., 2010. Application of entropy in design risk management of the
M. Alkaissy, et al.
large-scale construction project. In: 2010 2nd IEEE International Conference on
Information Management and Engineering, ICIME 2010, 2010 Chengdu. Pp.
116–120. DOI: 10.1109/ICIME.2010.5477526.
Telis, E. S., Besseris, G., Stergiou, C., 2011. Simulation optimization of cost, safety and
displacements in a construction design. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering.
Elsevier B.V.
Teo, P.L., P.E.D., 2017. Re-Examining the association between quality and safety per-
formance in construction: from heterogeneous to homogeneous datasets. J. Constr.
Eng. Manage., 143. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001285.
Tixier, A.J.P.H., M.R., Rajagopalan, B., 2017. Construction safety risk modeling and si-
mulation. Risk Anal., 37, 1917–1935. doi: 10.1111/risa.12772.
Turskis, Z., Gajzler, M., Dziadosz, A., 2012. Reliability, risk management, and con-
tingency of construction processes and projects. J. Civ. Eng. Manage. 18, 290–298.
https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2012.672931.
Usmen, M., Vilnitis, M., 2015. Evaluation of safety, quality and productivity in con-
struction. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2015. IOP
Publishing, 012061.
Van Eck, N.J., Waltman, L. 2011. Text mining and visualization using VOSviewer. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1109.2058.
Wanberg, J., Harper, C., Hallowell, M.R., Rajendran, S., 2013. Relationship between
11
Safety Science 129 (2020) 104805
construction safety and quality performance. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 139, 04013003.
Wang, W.-C.L., Jang-Jeng, Chou, Shih-Chieh, 2006. Simulation-based safety evaluation
model integrated with network schedule. Autom. Constr., 15, 341–354.
Windapo, A., 2013. Relationship between degree of risk, cost and level of compliance to
occupational health and safety regulations in construction. Austral. J. Constr. Econ.
Build. 13, 67–82. https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v13i2.3270.
Zhang, P. L., N., Jiang, Z., Fang, D., Anumba, C.J., 2019. An agent-based modeling ap-
proach for understanding the effect of worker-management interactions on con-
struction workers' safety-related behaviors. Autom. Constr., 97, 29–43. doi: 10.1016/
j.autcon.2018.10.015.
Zhang, S., Shang, C., Wang, C., Song, R., Wang, X., 2019. Real-time safety risk identifi-
cation model during metro construction adjacent to buildings. J. Constr. Eng.
Manage. 145. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001657.
Zhang, Y., Fan, Z.-P., 2014. An optimization method for selecting project risk response
strategies. Int. J. Project Manage. 32, 412–422.
Zhou, F., Abourizk, S.M., Al-Battaineh, H.J.S.M.P., Theory, 2009. Optimisation of con-
struction site layout using a hybrid simulation-based system. 17, 348–363.
Zou, P.X.W., Sunindijo, R.Y., 2013. Skills for managing safety risk, implementing safety
task, and developing positive safety climate in construction project. Autom. Constr.
34, 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.10.018.