Citation

Chenhui Y, Gui FU, Zhirong WU, Jinkun Z. China Saf. Sci. J. 2024; 34(1): 27-34.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2024, China Occupational Safety and Health Association, Publisher Gai Xue bao)

DOI

10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.01.0195

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In order to explore the similarities and differences, advantages and disadvantages between the definition of cause factors in LCM and the 24Model, a review of the definition of causes and results at various levels for both models was conducted. The definition content and its guidance role in safety practices, focusing on accident causation analysis, were compared. An empirical analysis was conducted using a coal mine gas explosion accident as an example to identify differences in the analysis results between the two models. The research shows that LCM is the first one-dimensional event sequence model that incorporates management factors into accident causation analysis. It provides clear definitions of cause factors at various levels and their logical relationships. However, LCM has issues with overlapping and repetitive definitions of causal factors and fails to reveal deeper accident cause factors such as guiding principles for safety work. 24Model, as a systematic accident causation model, predominantly defines various factors in terms of the organization. It describes the concepts of events, accidents, and safety, categorizing individual safety acts, safety capabilities, and organizational safety management systems, providing meanings and explanations. It explores organizational safety culture and reflects it with 32 elements. Both models' accident causation analysis methods are built on the definitions of cause factors at different levels and are applicable to their respective theoretical frameworks.

Language: en