Originally proposed by psychologist Gerald Wilde in 1982, the concept of risk homeostasis (i.e., risk compensation) posits that humans do not attempt to minimize risk of harm or bodily injury — instead, each person meets his or her own acceptable level of risk. Even though this concept was introduced completely independent of our industry, it has proven to be incredibly relevant. In instances where a new safety feature is implemented, people will adjust their behavior to elevate the level of risk closer to their acceptable level.
Numerous studies have supported this theory. In 1972, when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) implemented a requirement for childproof bottlecaps on aspirin and other drugs, the rate of aspirin poisoning in children did not decrease — likely due to a reduction in parental caution with respect to drug storage. In a 1997 study published in Safety Science, loggers who were required to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) like gloves and hardhats actually worked more quickly and carelessly. Thus, the use of PPE did not reduce injuries or accidents, as would be expected.
“Humans naturally consume safety features,” said Chris Tagoe in the 19th Global Congress on Process Safety (GCPS) Welcoming Keynote. In his talk, titled “Shaping a Process Safety Culture with ‘The Power of Many,’” Tagoe discussed how risk homeostasis plays a role in the way humans interact with process safety systems. For example, despite the safety features that have been installed in cars over the past decades, car accidents — as well as injuries and fatalities — still occur. “Better brakes allow us to tailgate closer,” quipped Tagoe. When it comes to process safety in chemical facilities, process safety managers and safety system designers must take this discrepancy into account.
Tagoe’s talk was one of many thought-provoking speeches given at the AIChE Spring Meeting and 19th GCPS. Held in Houston, TX, on Mar. 12–16, this event brought together more than 2,100 engineers, academicians, and process safety practitioners. With sessions appealing to practically every interest, I found the GCPS presentations on “Machine Vision Safeguard Management” (Phillip Hodge, Chevron), “Evaluating and Protecting Liquids that Burn” (John LeBlanc, FM Global), and “Personnel Change Management” (Hope Luebeck, Chemours) to be particularly informative.
Within the Spring Meeting, the 35th Ethylene Producers Conference drew large crowds. At the Kister Distillation Symposium, I had the pleasure of attending one of several presentations given by steam expert James Risko. (Risko is also the author of our cover story this month, “Improve Performance of Steam-Assisted Flares” pp. 40–46.) Gayle Schueller, Vice President and Chief Sustainability Officer at 3M, gave a luncheon keynote in which she shared her best practices for fostering a corporate culture that centers on sustainability — emphasizing that sustainability should not simply be a mandate from the top.
AIChE conferences always prove to be fruitful experiences, and this Spring Meeting was no exception. If there is one thing that I’ve taken away from the meeting, it is to consider the areas in my life where risk homeostasis may be playing a role — and to slow down and take caution despite the great safety features in my car.
Emily Petruzzelli, Editor-in-Chief
Copyright Permissions
Would you like to reuse content from CEP Magazine? It’s easy to request permission to reuse content. Simply click here to connect instantly to licensing services, where you can choose from a list of options regarding how you would like to reuse the desired content and complete the transaction.