ARTICLE IN PRESS

Applied Ergonomics 35 (2004) 575–581

www.elsevier.com/locate/apergo

Forklift safety, traffic engineering and intelligent

transport systems: a case study
Tim Horberrya,, Tore J Larssona,b, Ian Johnstona, John Lambertc
a
Accident Research Centre, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia
b
Centre for Design, Occupational Safety & Health, Royal Institute of Technology, SE-136 40 Haninge, Sweden
c
John Lambert and Associates, 235 Wandana Drive, Victoria 3216, Australia
Received 23 June 2003; accepted 24 May 2004

Abstract

This paper details a forklift safety demonstration project undertaken at two manufacturing sites in Victoria, Australia. The
purpose of the work was both to help improve safety at the two sites, and, more broadly, to develop, help implement and evaluate a
series of human-centred design interventions involving vehicles and pedestrian workers. The ‘before’ and ‘after’ case study presented
here summarises the background to the research and introduces the test sites. Thereafter, it describes the overall nature of the safety
interventions proposed and introduces the methods developed to assess safety. For the traffic engineering interventions, positive
safety results were found in terms of reductions in the number of potentially hazardous interactions involving forklifts. Similarly, for
the vehicle interventions, the research found that forklift drivers and managers considered the newly developed and installed
Intelligent Transport Systems to be broadly acceptable in operational conditions, and the systems’ intended safety benefits were well
understood. The results are discussed and conclusions are drawn regarding human factors aspects of forklift safety.
r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction 20,000 are seriously injured in forklift-related incidents

The use of forklifts has continued to increase in
many industrial and transport operations in recent
years. Indeed, forklifts have become an essential device
for materials handling (Feare, 1999), as well as a
flexible transport vehicle for a large number of
tasks. While forklifts offer many benefits, such as
improving productivity or reducing manual handling,
they also pose a significant occupational hazard,
especially when used in close proximity to ‘pedestrian’
workers.
Due to the physical weight of such vehicles, crashes
between forklift and unprotected workers frequently
cause severe injury or even death. To illustrate the
problem, nearly 100 workers are killed and another
Corresponding author. Tel: +61-3-9905-4363.
E-mail address: tim.horberry@general.monash.edu.au
(T. Horberry).
each year in the United States (Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1998). Recent data from the Australian state
of Victoria (with a population of less than 4 million)
reveal 46 forklift fatalities between 1985 and 2001
(WorkCover Victoria, 2003a). Likewise, provinces in
Canada have identified the occupational hazard that
forklift operation poses; for example, in Ontario, 18
fatalities were recorded for the period 1990–1995
(Ministry of Labour, 1999). Forklift related crashes
contribute a significant proportion of workplace fatal-
ities all over the world, as well as an immense number of
serious and minor injuries.
Forklift crashes occur across all industry sectors,
however a significant fatality ‘blackspot’ exists within
the manufacturing sector (National Occupational
Health and Safety Commission (NOHSC), 1998). The
high number of pedestrian workers, narrow aisleways
and weight of forklifts are all contributors to the
problem in this sector (Collins et al., 1999).

0003-6870/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2004.05.004
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
576 T. Horberry et al. / Applied Ergonomics 35 (2004) 575–581
Certain risk factors are inherent, due to the design
and functional requirements of the forklift. Indeed, the
versatility, ease of operation, power and flexibility of a
forklift that enable it to be used for a multitude of tasks
in a wide variety of environments constitutes one of the
major risk factors. The narrow track coupled with a
variable centre of gravity makes vehicle stability a
primary concern. As with many other powered vehicle
crashes, speed is a determinant in many forklift
accidents. Given the environment in which forklifts
operate, their rate of travel has a direct bearing on the
level of risk to which pedestrian workers are exposed. As
pedestrian workers are involved in around 45% of
crashes, a need exists to control the speed of forklifts
when they are in a close proximity to pedestrian workers
(Larsson and Rechnitzer, 1994).
Despite the significant occupational safety problems
that the use of such vehicles can create, organisations
typically have ill-defined procedures and traffic manage-
ment policies with respect to forklift truck operations.
Whilst many of the hazards associated with forklift
operation are well known, risk controls thus far have
been low level interventions, concentrating on operator
protection and training. Little has been done to modify
the risk environment; instead a culture reliant upon
education to prevent the incidence of assumed erroneous
behaviour exists.
A lack of consideration of the interface between
pedestrian workers and forklifts in the workplace has
resulted in many of the more serious injuries and fatalities
(Larsson and Rechnitzer, 1994; Solman, 2002). Relying
upon an absence of operator errors is inadequate; it is the
belief of the authors that an array of engineering and
administrative interventions is required to combat the
risks. These interventions should include improved logis-
tics and traffic engineering, and the use of on-board
intelligent vehicle technologies (Janicak and Deal, 1999).
Clearly, there is much for ergonomists and related
professionals to do in this area, however, surprisingly
little human factors research has previously been
undertaken (with the notable exceptions of Hella et al.
(1991) and Solman (2002)). It was decided that a
successful demonstration research project undertaken
at sites where there were a high number of previous
forklift crashes should be of interest to all those wishing
to improve forklift safety. A project of this kind should
also illustrate the difficulties and opportunities in
designing and implementing workplace changes. As
such, it would provide useful lessons to regulators,
researchers and organisations that use forklifts.
The aim of this research was therefore to apply a
range of techniques and interventions to demonstrate
safety improvements in forklift operations. This was
reached through the development of both traffic
engineering interventions, particularly in those areas of
industry where the potential conflicts between forklift
trucks and pedestrian workers are frequent, and
Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS), fitted to forklifts
to reduce risks to the operator.
2. The test sites
Two operational sites of a large Australian manufac-
turing organisation were chosen to act as the ‘test-beds’.
As with many busy industrial workplaces, the test sites
chosen contained a large number of pedestrians and
vehicular traffic, especially forklifts. Few physical
barriers separated the vehicles and pedestrians, some
crossovers were not clearly marked and most personnel
(especially the forklift drivers) worked under consider-
able time pressure, often resulting in forklifts driving at
comparatively high speeds. In short, traffic management
in this complex socio-technical system was sub-optimal.
Further, some production workers were required to
work in very close proximity to forklifts when they too
were under considerable time pressure. At the extreme
this meant they occasionally passed close to the front of,
or under, forklift tynes (the metal lifting prongs).
3. Interventions proposed
A series of traffic and vehicle engineering interven-
tions were proposed. Both of these types of intervention
are outlined below. For each of the areas chosen for this
demonstration project, the project team gained a
thorough understanding of the problems by site visits,
technical documents and consultation discussions with
management and workforce.
3.1. Proposed traffic engineering changes: attaining
separation
The proposed engineering interventions were based
on a version of the hierarchy of control philosophy.
(1) Remove the problem by designing the environment
in which forklifts operate so that forklifts can never
come into contact with pedestrians.
(2) Place a barrier (physical or temporal) between
forklifts and pedestrians.
(3) Improve warnings/markings, visibility and effective
traffic rules, where forklifts and pedestrian traffic
intersect.
As much as possible, the engineering changes were
based on the principle that forklifts and pedestrians
should be physically separated. This separation should
occur both in work areas, and when travelling to and
from work areas (where pedestrians’ travel distance and
forklift crossover points are minimised).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Horberry et al. / Applied Ergonomics 35 (2004) 575–581
The full details of the traffic engineering changes
considered are beyond the scope of this paper, however,
they included:
 Segregating pedestrians and forklifts by completely
closing off some areas to either forklift or pedestrian
traffic.
 Opening up ‘pinch point’ areas to allow a greater
separation between forklifts and pedestrians. This
might include removing obstructions from aisles or
widening narrow roadways and intersections.
 Ensuring safe routes to workplaces for pedestrians
by means of clearly marked (and unobstructed)
walkways.
 Placing barriers/guardrails between pedestrians and
forklifts if both needed to use the same route.
 Redesigning pedestrian work areas where forklifts
previously needed to enter (for example, to collect
packed pallets of finished goods) by adding hand
pallet movers or temporal separation (meaning
forklifts could not enter the area when pedestrians
were present).
 Employing grade separation, whereby almost total
separation could be achieved by pedestrians using
bridges and upper floor access to work areas. In the
work reported here grade separation was not finally
implemented, largely for reasons of cost. However,
Fig. 1 shows a hypothetical example of how such
separation might be achieved.
3.2. Proposed changes to forklifts: reducing the risks to
operators by the use of ITS
ITS is a term that describes developments in commu-
nication and computing technologies applied to trans-
port services generally. The primary focus of ITS is to
provide improvements in safety, efficiency and environ-
Fig. 1. Computer generated image of a possible environment for
forklift pedestrian separation.
577
mental performance of all modes of transport and
industry. Forklift operations are a neglected area in
which ITS could have a safety benefit.
The approach taken by the project team was to
examine the known safety problems (identified by site
interviews, discussions with personnel and consultation
with the relevant forklift safety literature) then to
identify possible ITS solutions. As such, the ITS devices
were designed from an operator or problem-centred
perspective, rather than a technological availability
perspective.
In many cases ITS for forklifts are ‘emerging’
technology, there is a large amount of development
work being undertaken worldwide on such devices.
There are numerous ITS devices (or potential devices)
that could have safety benefits for forklift operations,
however, the scope of this project was such that only a
small number of devices on a small number of forklifts
could be demonstrated. It was decided that the forklift
ITS chosen should be those that could address two key
safety areas:
3.2.1. Seatbelt wearing by drivers—by means of an
intelligent seatbelt system
This system comprised a sensor in the seatbelt buckle
that detected when the buckle was connected; sensors in
the seat that detected when the operator was seated, and
a sensor that determined when the handbrake was
applied. The engine would only start if the following
procedure were undertaken: the forklift handbrake was
engaged, the sensors detected the operator was seated,
and then the seatbelt was connected. No other sequence
would allow the engine to start. Fig. 2 illustrates this
concept.
In order for the forklift engine to remain running on
alighting, the sequence had to be: firstly the handbrake
should be applied, secondly the seatbelt should be
disconnected and then finally the operator should
dismount. The reverse applied for getting on to the
running vehicle—seat sensor detected operator seated,
then the seatbelt sensor detected the seatbelt was
connected, and then the handbrake was released.
3.2.2. Excess forklift speed, especially when loaded—by
means of an intelligent load sensing/speed limiting system
This system comprised a pressure sensor that detected
and assessed the load being carried, and a two-stage
speed limiter system that set a lower speed when loaded.
The reduction in speed was determined by considering
the deceleration required to prevent the forklift tipping
forward; the speed limit was lowered such that total
stopping distances were the same as for hard braking
when empty. Fig. 3 provides further details of the design
and operation of this system.
Three forklifts were fitted with the seatbelt and speed
limiting systems. This fitment followed extensive testing
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
578 T. Horberry et al. / Applied Ergonomics 35 (2004) 575–581
Fig. 2. Schematic view of the seatbelt system operation.
Fig. 3. Speed limiting system—method of operation.
of prototype systems. All drivers and supervisors using
the systems received training regarding their usage,
together with information about the general purpose of
the interventions.
The choice of the two key safety areas was partly
based on forklift fatality figures (1985–2003) in which the
two highest causes of deaths were forklifts overturning
and crushing the driver (hence the fitting of seatbelts),
and pedestrians crushed/struck by forklifts (hence the
fitting of speed limiting systems) (WorkCover Victoria,
2003b). It should also be noted that these two areas
mirror several of the key enforcement/publicity areas in
recent Australian road safety campaigns (the fatal four:
speed, fatigue, seatbelt use and drunk driving).
4. Methods used
To quantify the possible safety benefits of the
interventions, two methods were developed and em-
ployed to assess employee behaviour and views of
workplace risks. These were:
1. Observations of forklift and pedestrian movements.
2. Employee surveys (a general survey before the
intervention, and a vehicle technology acceptability
survey after the interventions).
The purpose of the ‘before’ and ‘after’ observations
and surveys was to provide a benchmark in which the
effects of the interventions upon forklift/pedestrian
interaction behaviour and opinions could be evaluated.
In addition, using an operator-centred design philoso-
phy, the earlier observations and surveys helped inform
and direct the interventions.
4.1. Observational data
The approach taken was to look for critical ‘interac-
tions’. That is, cases where forklifts and pedestrians
came into close (or potentially close) contact. Addition-
ally, a rating of the severity of the interaction was also
recorded based on a three-point scale. The information
collected included:
 Number of pedestrians in the area being observed.
 Number of forklifts (at pedestrian level) in the area
being observed.
 Number of forklift/pedestrian ‘interactions’.
 Perceived severity of the forklift/pedestrian interac-
tions.
Observations were recorded at selected areas of the
two manufacturing sites—each observation period gen-
erally lasting one hour. The areas were chosen in
discussion with site management; they were in locations
that had either high traffic volumes or were known
‘blackspots’. Each area observed was roughly twice the
size of a tennis court. Recordings were made at the
beginning and end of shifts, during ‘normal’ periods of
work and at break times.
In terms of number of pedestrians and forklifts in the
areas observed, the approach taken was to record each
occasion a pedestrian or forklift moved to a different
location on the area being observed. So, for the purpose
of this study, a pedestrian or forklift movement of only a
couple of metres, or leaving the observation area entirely
would both count as a single movement.
Observations were obtained before and after the
interventions. The after observations were matched on
time and exact location as closely as possible with the
before observations. The ‘before’ observations and
surveys were undertaken approximately one month
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Horberry et al. / Applied Ergonomics 35 (2004) 575–581
before the interventions were implemented. After the
interventions were put into place, several weeks of
normal operations were allowed before the ‘after’
observations were undertaken to allow the forklift
drivers and other personnel to get familiar with the
intervention changes.
To help ensure the accuracy of the observations, two
experimenters (one an engineer, the other an ergono-
mist) independently recorded and then compared data
to check that they were obtaining the same results. After
a high level of inter-rater reliability was obtained, one
experimenter was used to collect the data. This
experimenter was an ergonomist and was not directly
responsible for the interventions, ensuring that the data
collected was not inadvertently biased due to the
experimenter having a vested interest in the interven-
tions producing positive safety results.
4.2. Survey data
The initial survey was undertaken to help inform the
interventions in the before condition; in the after
condition a different survey was used to target specific
vehicle technology issues.
In the initial survey the questions covered issues such
as basic demographic data, perceived exposure to
workplace hazards and perceived risks of being injured
by a forklift in their work area. In addition, views were
sought from workers regarding possible workplace
redesign options. Hundred and twenty relevant person-
nel from the two manufacturing sites completed this
survey.
The later ‘acceptability of the vehicle technology’
survey was undertaken by all the forklift drivers on the
main shift who used the modified forklifts, plus super-
visors/managers (six people in total). Only personnel
with direct operational experience of the new systems
forklift ITS devices were surveyed. This survey instru-
ment was specially constructed to assess specific vehicle
technology issues, however, detailed discussion of it is
beyond the scope of this paper. Questions were asked
about the seatbelt and the speed limiter/load sensor
systems, and following Van der Laan et al. (1997)
Acceptability was measured along two dimensions:
Satisfaction (e.g., how satisfying or unsatisfying is the
seatbelt system to use?) and Usefulness (e.g., the seatbelt
system is useful or useless for what reasons?).
5. The process of implementing the interventions
In developing the interventions the project team
undertook widespread consultations with workers,
supervisors and managers. However, implementation
remained the province of the company; due to a range of
technical, financial, operational and management con-
579
siderations only a limited number of the interventions
suggested were implemented. The implementation pro-
cess was not optimal due to practical difficulties such as:
no active project champions within the organisations,
the vehicle technology requiring further testing and
some redesign, time constraints with implementing all
the interventions, and more general time constraints
with persuading the company to accept the long term
process of organisational and workplace change.
Despite this, all of the vehicle engineering changes and
a range of the traffic engineering changes were
implemented within the course of the project. The traffic
engineering changes actually implemented included:
segregating pedestrians and forklifts by closing off one
area to pedestrians, opening up one ‘pinch point’ area to
allow greater separation, ensuring safe routes to work-
places for pedestrians by means of clearly marked
walkways, placing more barriers between pedestrians
and forklifts, and requiring greater use of hand pallet
movers. Some interventions proposed (e.g., grade
separation) were not implemented by the company,
mainly due to cost issues. The results of these changes
are reported below.
6. Results summary
Summary results of the observational data are
presented below, and differences found between the
before and after conditions are outlined. The overall
results of the later acceptability of the vehicle technology
survey are also reported.
6.1. Observational data
The results of the observational studies are shown in
Table 1.
6.1.1. Number of pedestrians and forklifts (at pedestrian
level) in the area being observed
As seen in the above table, the two observation
periods were found to be roughly equal in traffic and
pedestrian density (for example, 243 forklift movements
in the before condition, 264 in the after condition).
6.1.2. Number of forklift/pedestrian ‘interactions’
It is thought that the reduction in the total number of
interactions from 29 to 14 was mainly due to increased
forklift pedestrian separation in several locations. Due
to the low number of sites at which before/after
observations were made, the data were not subjected
to inferential statistical analysis; however, they do
suggest a major reduction in forklift/pedestrian interac-
tions as a result of the interventions.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
580 T. Horberry et al. / Applied Ergonomics 35 (2004) 575–581
Table 1
Observational data
Condition Number of Total pedestrian
observations movements
Before 5 60
After 5 64
6.1.3. Perceived severity of forklift/pedestrian
interactions (a score of 0 being minimal risk,
1 moderate risk, 2 being high risk, where a slight error in
judgement would result in contact)
The lower value after the interventions (0.2 as
compared with 0.8 before the interventions) indicates a
lower risk in terms of rated severity of the interactions
between forklifts and pedestrians. Again, due to the low
number of sites at which before/after observations were
made the data were not subjected to inferential
statistical analysis, however, they do suggest a major
reduction in forklift/pedestrian interaction severity as a
result of the interventions.
6.2. Acceptability of the vehicle technology survey data
The main results were that both the speed limiting and
seatbelt systems were still working successfully two
weeks after they were installed on forklifts, and that all
six drivers, supervisors and managers surveyed thought
the trial was worthwhile and would be willing to
continue undertaking the project for a longer period.
Overall the operators preferred the speed limiting system
to the seatbelt system, this seemed to be because the
seatbelt system interfered more with their habitual ways
of working (for example, drivers needed to get on and
off the forklifts up to 40 times per shift—the seatbelt
system therefore required them to invest extra effort on
numerous occasions during their shifts). However, all
agreed that safety benefits might come from both
systems if they were used on a permanent basis.
There were several comments regarding the fine-
tuning of the systems (e.g., modifying the exact speeds to
which the forklifts were limited, or slightly changing the
design of the actual seatbelt). However, as the systems
were newly developed technologies then it is not
unreasonable that a few teething problems were
experienced, which later iterations of the ITS technology
would address.
7. Discussion and conclusions
There are three main findings of this work. First,
effective forklift safety requires more than operator
training and personal protective equipment. This case
study has shown that detailed, workable traffic
Total forklift Total ped/fork Perceived severity of
movements interactions ped/fork interactions
243 29 0.8
264 14 0.2
and vehicle engineering interventions can be success-
fully developed and implemented. Forklift risk manage-
ment philosophies and strategies, academic theories
and technological promises in ITS can be converted
into concrete, feasible and human-centred engineering
designs.
Second, indicative results show that that such
engineering and vehicle technology interventions were
successful, for the limited time they were surveyed. Not
all the interventions proposed were implemented,
however, in terms of the more limited traffic engineering
interventions that were undertaken, the before/after
observational study found positive safety results in
terms of reductions in the number and severity of
potentially hazardous interactions involving forklifts
and pedestrians. In terms of the vehicle interventions,
the positive acceptability ratings by operators, super-
visors and managers are encouraging, especially as some
resistance-to-change inertia might be expected. Only one
case of an operator trying to override one of the systems
(the seatbelt interlock) was reported. Some fine-tuning is
needed, but as long as the end users are involved in the
iterative process of redesigning the ITS devices then it is
hoped that many of these remaining issues will be
relatively minor. As such, it is anticipated that ITS
devices, designed from a user-centred perspective, could
become a viable long-term method to help address
known forklift safety problems, and so fulfill the
previously stated expectations of other forklift safety
researchers (e.g., Larsson and Rechnitzer, 1994; Janicak
and Deal, 1999).
Third, fitting in with the great tradition of organisa-
tional change (e.g., Warr, 2002) this case study has also
found that the process of implementing the forklift
related safety interventions in a working organisation is
exceedingly difficult. In this case study, financial,
operational and managerial restrictions had a strong
influence on which recommended interventions were
implemented. Generally the cheaper interventions that
required fewer operational changes, less specialised
personnel and less effort to put into practice were
implemented. Senior management support is necessary
but not in itself sufficient. An enthusiastic project
champion from within the organisation, and large
investments of time and money are also required.
Despite the apparent successes of parts of this
project, a few restrictions should be noted. The traffic
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
T. Horberry et al. / Applied Ergonomics 35 (2004) 575–581
engineering interventions were only implemented at a
small number of areas. Although these results were
largely positive, they only represent a sample of the
possible forklift hazard reduction strategies proposed.
Also, in terms of the vehicle technology interventions, it
should be stressed that these were assessed on the
acceptability of the technology to drivers, supervisors
and managers. Although the forklift drivers used the
systems for about two weeks before they were surveyed,
there was little opportunity to collect data regarding the
direct safety effects of these devices (e.g., crash rates).
Overall, it is the contention of the authors that many
important outcomes have resulted from this project.
Further work to improve forklift-related safety will
hopefully carry on with the organisation hosting this
project. Likewise, further work is continuing with
forklift ITS developers and manufacturers. More gen-
erally, the vehicle and traffic engineering interventions
outlined here show a great deal of promise to help
reduce injuries in many organisations that use forklifts.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank WorkSafe Victoria
(Australia) for their funding of this research. Addition-
ally, the work of Peter McWhinney and colleagues from
Switched-On I & T Services on the development and
installation of the vehicle interventions is greatly
appreciated.
References
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1998. Occupational injuries and illnesses:
counts, rates, and characteristics, 1995. Washington, DC: US
Department of Labor, Bulletin 2493.
581
Collins, J.W., Smith, G.S., Baker, S.P., Warner, M., 1999. Injuries
related to forklifts and other powered industrial vehicles in
automobile manufacturing. Am. J. Ind. Med. 36 (5), 513–521.
Feare, T., 1999. Forklift operator training; What OSHA’s new rules
require you to do. Modern Materials Handling. Retrieved 8th
May 2003 from: http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m3137/2_52/
54665450/print.jhtml
Hella, F., Tisserand, M., Schouller, J.F., 1991. Analysis of eye
movements in different tasks related to the use of lift trucks. Appl.
Ergonom. 22 (2), 101–110.
Janicak, C.A., Deal, G.A., 1999. Occupational fatalities involving
forklifts. J. Trauma 47 (6), 1084–1087.
Larsson, T.J., Rechnitzer, G., 1994. Forklift trucks-analysis of severe
and fatal occupational injuries, critical incidents and priorities for
prevention. Safety Sci. 17, 275–289.
Ministry of Labour, 1999. Guideline for the Safe Operation and
Maintenance of Powered Lift Trucks. Publication Section of
Ministry of Labour, Ontario, Canada.
National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (NOHSC),
1998. Work-related fatalities in Australia, 1989–1992. Common-
wealth of Australia.
Solman, K.N., 2002. Analysis of interaction quality in human machine
systems: applications for forklifts. Appl. Ergonom. 33 (2), 155–166.
Van der Laan, J.D., Heino, A., De Waard, D., 1997. A simple
procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport
telematics. Transport. Res.—Part C: Emerging Technol. 5, 1–10.
Warr, P., 2002. Psychology at Work, In: Warr, P. (Ed.), Fifth Edition,
London, Penguin.
WorkCover Victoria, 2003a. News Releases and Articles. Retrieved
8th May 2003 from: http://www.workcover.vic.gov.au/dir090/vwa/
media.nsf/Site+Search/9EA9332CAF8B83614A256BE20080080C
WorkCover Victoria, 2003b. Guidance Note: Forklifts-instability
and excessive speed. Retrieved 8th May 2003 from: http://
www.workcover.vic.gov.au/dir090/vwa/alerts.nsf/b172c010ed2-
c47954a2566480001b218/248f4d0b77dcc60cca256cb1001b67f5?
OpenDocument
Dr. Tim Horberry is a Senior Research Fellow at the Monash
University Accident Research Centre, Australia. Professor Tore
Larsson is at the Centre for Design, Occupational Safety &
Health, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden. Professor Ian
Johnston is Director of the Monash University Accident Research
Centre Australia. John Lambert is Director of John Lambert and
Associates, Australia.