Abstract
Large scale transport accidents are rare, yet carry the potential for significant loss of life and property. Investigations into the causes of such events are likely to come from many different, and sometimes competing, interest groups. Whilst the concept of multiple causality is well understood, are accident investigations able to beat the multiple competing interests, biases and influences that face them to reach the systemic causes of accidents? The paper considers fundamental challenges in accident investigations that go way beyond the initial technical challenge into practical, political and philosophical differences. As investigation capability increases, care must be taken to ensure that the increased threat of criminal litigation does not destroy the opportunities for learning created through good accident investigation.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
ATSB (2001) Investigation report 199904538 Boeing 747–438, VH-OJH Bangkok, Thailand,23 September 1999. Department of Transport and Regional Services, Canberra
Clarke, Lord Justice (2000) Thames safety inquiry final report. Presented to Parliament by theSecretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions by command of Her Majesty
CPS (2008) Memorandum of understanding between the Crown Prosecution Service and the AirAccidents Investigation Branch, Marine Accident Investigation Branch and the Rail AccidentInvestigation Branch. Crown Prosecution Service
Cullen, Right Honorable Lord (2007) Public inquiries and the advancement of safety. Proc 5thInt Semin Fire Explos Hazards, Edinburgh, UK
Dekker S (2002) The field guide to human error investigations. Ashgate, Aldershot
FSF, RAeS, ANAE, CANSO, ERA, IFATCA, PAMA, ISASI (2010) Joint resolution regardingcriminalization of aviation accidents. http://flightsafety.org/files/resolution_01-12-10.pdf.Accessed 15 October 2011
ICAO (2010) Annex 13 to the Chicago convention on international civil aviation - aircraft accident and incident investigation. Tenth Edition. ICAO, Montreal
Mahon, Justice PT (1981) Report of the Royal Commission to inquire into the crash on MountErebus, Antarctica of a DC10 aircraft operated by Air New Zealand Limited. New ZealandGovernment
Michaelides-Mateou S, Mateou A (2010) Flying in the face of criminalization: the safety implications of prosecuting aviation professionals for accidents. Ashgate, Aldershot
NTSB (2005) Information for friends and family - major accident investigations. LeafletSPC0501. National Transportation Safety Board. http://www.beta.ntsb.gov/publictn/2005/SPC0501.pdf. Accessed 18 September 2011
Quinn KP (2007) Battling accident criminalization. Aerosafety World. J Flight Saf Found, Arlington, Virginia
Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Reason J (1997) Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Ashgate, Aldershot
Rosenkrans W (2008) Defensible analysis. Aerosafety World. J Flight Saf Found, Arlington,Virginia
Walker MB, Bills KM (2008) Analysis, causality and proof in safety investigations. ATSBTransport Safety Report, Aviation Research and Analysis Report AR-2007-053
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this paper
Cite this paper
Braithwaite, G. (2012). Accident Investigation – are we reaching the Systemic Causes of Accidents?. In: Dale, C., Anderson, T. (eds) Achieving Systems Safety. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2494-8_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2494-8_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2493-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2494-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)