“To blow the whistle is to alert a third party that a person or entity has done, or is doing, something wrong. So, literally, “whistle-blowing” means that a party, in good faith, conveys or transmits a concern, allegation or information indicating that a prohibited practice is occurring or has occurred in the Global Fund or in a Global Fund-financed operation.” [ ]
Most often, the policies and guidance specified who can be considered a whistleblower, including staff, former staff, and others who would know about suspected or actual wrongdoing in the work context [ 42 , 46 ]. ‘Other reporters’ might be people interviewing for a job, suppliers or vendors, and volunteers [ 35 , 42 ]. A few sources mentioned ‘consumers’ as potential whistleblowers. For example, a website created by a citizen group in India was advertised as a place where consumers and employees could raise issues [ 38 ]. Only one source directly mentioned patients as whistleblowers [ 47 ].
Our review found few references to whistleblowing policies structured to reward whistleblowers monetarily. Multilaterals and global funding mechanisms did not have reward policies [ 42 , 44 , 45 ], possibly because they see whistleblowing as a staff obligation grounded in duty [ 42 , 45 ]. However, financial incentive programmes were mentioned as operating in the U.S., India, China, and the Republic of Korea [ 22 , 46 , 48 ].
A whistleblowing system was implemented in India in 2010 by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare and the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation to combat substandard and falsified medical products. It included a reward scheme equivalent to 20% of the value of the seized consignment of fake medicines, to a maximum value of Rs 25 Lakh ($54,750 USD). Rewards for individual government officials were capped at Rs 5 Lakh ($10,950) per consignment and Rs 30 Lakh ($65,700) maximum during the officer’s career [ 46 , 48 ].
Policies varied in whether they allow anonymous complaints. All policies we reviewed had provisions for protecting confidentiality of reporting individuals, but where a channel does allow anonymous reporting, it is not possible to protect the reporter from retaliation (if someone later suspects or discovers the reporter). In India, the whistleblowing portal created for medical professionals and the public was only for anonymous complaints. Those managing the portal didn’t want to know who reported on whom, because the purpose of the portal was systems improvement, not detection for prosecution [ 38 ]. A pharmaceutical sector whistleblowing reward programme in India protected confidentiality, but they needed the name of the reporter to provide the reward so reporting was not anonymous [ 46 ].
Global Fund whistleblowing can be anonymous or confidential [ 42 ]. Gavi and WHO policies say they will protect the confidentiality of the reporter and shield them from retaliation; however, anonymous reporters cannot be protected from retaliation [ 44 , 45 ]. Moy [ 22 ] describes how a whistleblowing programme in Russia requires the witness to go public with the report. Policy in Bulgaria also does not allow anonymous reporting [ 41 ].
Whistleblowers often face retaliation [ 36 , 47 , 49 ]. Whistleblowing policies include a definition and examples of retaliation [ 15 , 44 , 45 ]. For example, the UN defines retaliation as ‘any direct or indirect detrimental action that adversely affects the employment or working conditions of an individual, where such action has been recommended, threatened or taken for the purpose of punishing, intimidating or injuring an individual’ as a result of the individual having reported misconduct [ 15 ].
The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime whistleblowing guidance acknowledges ‘personnel will not come forward if they are unsure that protective measures will be put in place to minimize the risk they are taking.’ Protections from retaliation should extend to witnesses of the wrongdoing, colleagues and family of the whistleblower, and those who helped facilitate reporting [ 15 ]. Possible measures include [ 15 , 41 ]:
WHO provides access to an ‘ethics advice’ line and a process for reporting retaliation and reviewing retaliation claims [ 45 ]. The European Union Directive on Whistleblowing states that whistleblowers should be protected if they have reasonable grounds to believe allegations are true [ 43 ]. Because whistleblowers may have violated loyalty or confidentiality to share this information, they could lose their jobs. Regular citizens do not face that imbalance [ 43 ]. Low socioeconomic status of workers may make them especially susceptible to retaliation for reporting fraud [ 22 ]. India passed a Whistleblower Protection Act that became law in 2014. The law has provisions to punish public officials who break the confidentiality of the whistleblower with up to three years in prison and a fine of Rs 50,000 ($805 USD). However, the law does not provide protection for private workplace retaliation and provides no implementation details [ 50 ].
Systems can encourage whistleblowers to disclose internally to someone in direct chain of command, or externally to regulatory officers, inspectors, auditors, police, Members of Parliament, citizen groups, or media. One example of an external whistleblowing system is Transparency International’s worldwide network of Advocacy and Legal Aid Centres currently operating in more than 60 countries ( https://www.transparency.org/en/alacs ). The centres collectively received more than 1,800 reports from victims of wrongdoing or witnesses to corruption related to COVID-19 in countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ireland, Kenya, Nigeria, Russia, the United Kingdom, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe [ 51 , 52 ].
Yet, the definition of internal versus external is not always clear. For example, Gavi’s Audit and Investigation unit operates several whistleblowing channels, accepting reports via a web-based portal, by mail and email, and through voice-messaging. It then has a three-stage process to assess reports to determine if it requires further investigation. Some might consider this external reporting, since the group receiving the reports is not in the direct line of command; however, it is still within the Gavi organisation. We found no evidence of empirical studies involving health or pharmaceutical organisations to document attitudes and perceptions about internal versus external whistleblowing.
The second sub-question of our review was to determine what evidence exists about the types and frequency of corruption reported through whistleblowing. Five out of 22 articles (23%) were coded as having relevant information.
The analysis shows that whistleblowing at multilateral organisations is increasing over time. We also found concerns about retaliation may be suppressing whistleblowing in other types of organisations, such as government agencies.
In 2015, the Global Fund OIG’s office launched a campaign with resources for anti-corruption, transparency, and accountability [ 53 ]. Researchers believe the campaign may have helped increase reporting over time [ 34 ]. From 2013 to 2020, Gavi received about three whistleblower reports per year [ 39 ]. Reports substantially increased to 67 in 2021, but a large number were categorised as ‘non-substantive, misdirected … or reflect anti-vaxxer sentiment.’ In other words, the issue raised did not have a significant impact on the organisation’s activities or was not about wrongdoing. After investigation, 16 were found to have merit. These included 14 related to vaccine equity (i.e. complaints about deviations from agreed upon vaccine priorities) and two related to core Gavi activities. The equity complaints were mostly at the start of the COVID vaccine delivery process, and such complaints are now slowing, possibly because supply became less limited [ 39 ].
Between Jan and Nov 2020, WHO received 276 reports from staff and the general public through its Integrity Hotline ( Figure 2 ). Fifty (18.1%) were on breaches of code of ethics and professional conduct, conflict of interest, discrimination and favoritism; 25 (9.0%) were related to human resource issues and breaches of staff regulations/rules; 22 (8.0%) were about suspected fraud, corruption or bribery; 11 (4.0%) were about abuse of authority and harassment; and 159 (57.6%) sounded alarm about substantial danger to public health and personal safety, mainly related to the COVID-19 pandemic. No information was available on whether investigations were completed or the outcomes of such investigations. WHO also reported a significant increase in people seeking ethics advice, continuing a pattern from 2019. In 2020, they received 400 individual requests, possibly due to awareness-raising activities and COVID-19 [ 40 ].
WHO integrity hotline complaints, Jan-Nov, 2020.
Fourteen percent of the anti-fraud experts surveyed by Milata [ 49 ] reported the emergence of whistleblowers related to COVID-19 fraud and corruption, including reports related to procurement fraud and medical bribes to access COVID testing and treatment.
Though the previous examples show an increase in whistleblowing reports to multilateral organisations, reporting at the national level could be suppressed where people fear retaliation. Moy reported that only three in 10 individuals in South Africa felt safe blowing the whistle, despite the official Protected Disclosures Act of 2000, which protects public and private employees who disclose information of unlawful or corrupt conduct by their employers or fellow employees [ 22 ]. A newspaper report in 2021 described how a whistleblower in the Gauteng Province Department of Health in South Africa was killed in a shooting, possibly because she was a witness in the investigation of COVID-related fraud [ 54 ].
The third review sub-question was to assess what is known about factors that influence whistleblowing. Seven of the 22 sources (32%) described facilitators and impediments to reporting wrongdoing.
We did not identify empirical studies of factors affecting whistleblowing in the health sector in LMICs. However, four factors were mentioned as being possible facilitators: financial rewards for whistleblowing or financial support after experiencing retaliation, appeal to duty, assurance of confidentiality, and having multiple channels for reporting. In addition, patients who cannot afford to pay informally may blow the whistle on health staff who obstruct their access to care.
The prospect of a financial reward was seen as an important motivating factor in India [ 46 ]. In contrast, the Global Fund relies on employees’ perception of professional responsibility. The Global Fund describes this duty in their whistleblowing policy [ 42 ]:
This whistle-blowing policy springs from the duty of the Global Fund to act as a responsible custodian or trustee of funds entrusted to it, by protecting the interests and assets of all its stakeholders – donor countries, recipient countries, or diverse beneficiaries alike.
European Partners Against Corruption and European Contact-point Network Against Corruption mentioned that offering financial and psychological assistance to whistleblowers through an independent fund might reduce fear of retaliation [ 41 ]. The promise of confidentiality was seen as important to encourage reporting in India [ 46 ]. Policies often include many provisions to protect confidentiality throughout the investigation process.
Having multiple channels for reporting can also be a facilitating factor. Some people are more comfortable reporting in person, others prefer to report in writing (submit by post, physical complaint box or an online platform), or would like to report orally by telephone or voice message [ 43 ]. General research on whistleblowing suggests that whistleblowing practices may differ for men versus women; women may lack means and resources to report, may be particularly influenced by social norms, and have greater fear of retaliation [ 55 ]. This suggests that gender sensitivity is needed in designing reporting channels.
Finally, patients and their families may be more inclined to blow the whistle if they believe there is no other way to access care. In Morocco, a father who blew the whistle had been asked for a speed bribe to get needed care for his child [ 47 ]. He could not pay, and saw blowing the whistle to the police as the only way to get care.
The most frequently mentioned impediments to whistleblowing were fear of retaliation and perceived lack of protection (discussed further under sub-question 5). A second, related factor is lack of trust. Some people may fear reporting because they suspect that the higher-level officials, to whom they are reporting, may also be corrupt [ 47 ]. The European Union Directive on Whistleblowing states that ‘Lack of confidence in the effectiveness of reporting is one of the main factors discouraging potential whistleblowers’ [ 43 ].
Other factors include lack of knowledge that people are legally entitled to assistance from authorities if they are asked for a bribe [ 47 ], and fear on the part of outside companies that they will lose revenue if they report knowledge of corruption [ 48 ].
The fourth review sub-question was to consider evidence on how country or cultural context affects whistleblowing. Only three sources (14%) included relevant information.
Chatterjee claimed that India’s endemic corruption makes people less willing to blow the whistle [ 50 ]. The author noted a number of violent attacks on Indian whistleblowers, and extreme cases of retaliation such as two medical officers from Uttar Pradesh who were murdered after having reported healthcare corruption. Additionally, medical professionals have been harassed by officials and fired from jobs [ 50 ]. This situation may be similar in the Middle East and North Africa region, where Transparency International has noted that whistleblowing is ‘almost completely unheard of’ and no countries have adequate protections [ 56 ].
Moy observes that cultural context can be an impediment to whistleblowing. In some cultures, the whistleblower is perceived negatively and stereotyped as a disgruntled employee or disloyal worker [ 22 ]. Although Moy does not mention specific cultures, Soon & Manning note that in China, personal relationships, fear of retaliation, and media coverage may discourage whistleblowing [ 37 ]. Guanxi refers to existing or potential informal relationships based on reciprocal obligation in the workplace and socially [ 57 ]. If a person has a good personal relationship, or guanxi , with a work colleague, they may be reluctant to blow the whistle and risk damaging that relationship or not fulfiling the obligation for loyalty and trust that it assumes. Drawing media coverage may also be feared because it could impact guanxi [ 37 , 58 ].
The final sub-question for the scoping review was to understand what is known about the outcomes of whistleblowing for whistleblowers and for the organisation itself. Eight out of 22 sources (36%) included information relevant to this review question.
Articles described how organisations or individuals retaliate against whistleblowers. Whistleblowers risk career and livelihood, and may suffer financial, health, reputational and personal consequences [ 22 , 35 ]. Retaliation includes workplace harassment, job loss, workplace restrictions, and reduction of responsibilities [ 15 , 36 , 47 , 50 ]. Health workers who reported misconduct were subjected to severe official reprisals including demotion, reprimand, and psychiatric referral [ 37 ]. They were threatened, treated as a ‘traitor’, pressured to resign, or stalled in career progression [ 37 , 48 ]. Some faced false criminal conduct charges [ 36 ]. In extreme cases, whistleblowers have suffered physical harm or death [ 50 ].
Actions to suppress whistleblowers were documented through a survey of anti-fraud professionals from 58 countries [ 49 ]. Researchers reported that in 46% of countries represented, whistleblowers had been suppressed.
We found little documentation of how whistleblowing led to prosecution or system changes. The European Union’s 2019 directive on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law describes how whistleblowing could enhance food safety and prevention of disease transmission through the detection of fraud and corruption and subsequent enforcement and prosecution [ 43 ]; yet, we could not find reports to document actual outcomes.
Introduction of a whistleblowing mechanism and I Speak Out Now! campaign in Malawi led to increased arrests, fines, and prosecutions [ 34 ], though no further information was available. In Morocco, a whistleblower complaint about under-the-table payments resulted in police launching a sting operation. An undercover agent offered an informal payment to the nurse who had been identified by the whistleblower. After accepting the informal payment, the nurse was arrested, prosecuted, and received a sentence of two months in prison [ 47 ]. The patient was given the care they needed. Yet, while this may be a good deterrence strategy in the short term, the reporting was not used to identify the drivers of this type of corruption or identify sustainable solutions. Longer-term, sustainable anti-corruption strategies should use whistleblower information to address root causes of the informal payment practice, such as low wages and drug shortages [ 59 ]. None of the sources reviewed provided evidence of how organisations may have used information gained from whistleblowers to determine the drivers of corruption, or to strengthen health systems.
This scoping review was designed to explore the extent and type of evidence in the literature on whistleblowing as an anti-corruption strategy in health and pharmaceutical organisations in LMICs. We found that most of the literature is descriptive or normative, including policies, guidance, reports and commentary. We found no theoretical articles or scholarly critiques of whistleblowing for anti-corruption in the areas of interest. Our study revealed little evidence of data such as surveys, court cases, case studies, or administrative data being collected and used to study whistleblowing or develop policy and procedures. There is little research on how whistleblowing complaints in the health sector are being used to strengthen health systems. This suggests a broken feedback loop and disconnect between the national integrity system and organisational change.
International agencies working in the health arena have promulgated whistleblowing policies and guidance that can help inform country-level health and pharmaceutical sector policy. These policies and guidance documents include definitions and justifications, details on who is covered by the policy, channels for whistleblowing and procedures for investigating claims, provisions for confidentiality, and protection from retaliation. Yet, we did not find empirical evidence to justify policy effectiveness. An important area of future research should be to evaluate whistleblowing policies and programmes, to determine if this is a worthwhile investment at the sectoral level.
Our findings support the ideas raised in previous systematic reviews, i.e. that current research provides little insight on the way whistleblowing is approached in different healthcare systems, and the importance of studying how to provide support for whistleblowers within specific organisational contexts [ 20 ]. Similar to findings by Kelly and Jones [ 27 ], we found that few sources focused on the complex environment and interactions affecting whistleblowing at the personal and organisational level. It is important to understand how these factors intertwine to influence in the decision to blow the whistle, and how they may affect organisational responsiveness [ 27 ]. Theories may be useful in guiding this work of understanding motivational factors [ 13 , 60–62 ].
Case study research may also show how factors in the environment (such as leadership style, organisational culture and values, design features of the whistleblowing system such as modalities of reporting) interact with personal characteristics (gender, tenure, organisational role, personality) to affect whistleblowing frequency, and how the organisation uses the information to address corruption risks and strengthen health systems. For example, researchers in Brazil found that women reported wrongdoing less often than men, and experienced more retaliation [ 63 ]. Although public service motivation increased intent to blow the whistle (and was stronger in women), the experience of past retaliation suppressed intent to blow the whistle in the future. The researchers hypothesise that the relationship between gender and whistleblowing may be related to the low power-status position of women in organisations. Thus, in cultures where gender inequalities are less important, and legal foundations for whistleblowing are stronger, gender effects may be minimised [ 63 ].
Our scoping review has several implications for research. First, empirical work is needed to collect data from whistleblowing reports, court cases, or surveys to analyse types and frequencies of whistleblowing, and the personal, situational, and organisational factors facilitating whistleblowing for anti-corruption in the health and pharmaceutical organisations. Surveys and qualitative work to explore attitudes and perceptions of those involved (potential whistleblowers, managers, etc.) may provide data that can help guide and adapt policies. Empirical work can help us to evaluate factors that contribute to the decision to blow the whistle, and moderating factors that influence the strength or direction of the relationship. Programme evaluations can help us to determine if policies are effective, and what impacts result for the person blowing the whistle, and the organisation as a whole.
Secondly, building on empirical findings, more conceptual work is needed to develop theory on whistleblowing for anti-corruption in the health and pharmaceutical sector in LMICs. Researchers should document and critique whistleblowing models and strategies in health and pharmaceutical organisations. Strategies may vary across countries due to differing social norms, political environment, and structure of the health and pharmaceutical sectors. This information can be correlated with empirical data on whistleblowing perceptions, impact and consequences to develop theory and guide effective policies and protection mechanisms. Researchers should involve civil society actors to gain their perspectives.
Third, a critically important area for research is effective interventions to protect whistleblowers. The lowest income countries have most risk of corruption, yet they are most challenged by lack of resources to protect whistleblowers. Possibilities of protection for whistleblowers managed through third parties could be considered, building on examples of contracting out of government procurement services as an anti-corruption strategy [ 64 ].
Finally, whistleblowing systems may require culture change to overcome negative stereotypes of whistleblowers as traitors who cannot be trusted, and to build a culture of improvement. Further study is needed to understand the impact of cultural beliefs and norms on willingness to report, and how to combat negative perceptions of whistleblowing. This can draw on research designs from other sectors [ 65 , 66 ].
There are several limitations to our study. First, given timing and resource constraints, we chose to include three academic databases for this review along with grey literature. Yet, as others have noted, whistleblowing literature is not well developed in the health sector and may appear in other disciplines not captured. Searching more databases could identify additional sources. Secondly, the exclusion of articles in the review that considered research-related fraud could mean that important experiences of applying whistleblowing in the pharmaceutical sector (where there are likely many examples due to the inclusion of whistleblowing hotlines as part of corporate compliance schemes) were not captured, limiting the findings. Investigation into whistleblowing and research-related fraud in LMICs could be a topic for further research. Third, scoping reviews are designed to consider the extent, range, and nature of literature in the topic area and not to assess the quality of research. Thus, it is possible that some findings from these sources lack adequate evidence due to problems with the quality of methods used. Fourth, we limited the search to English language only. This may have excluded relevant articles published in other languages. Finally, we did not examine whistleblowing policies in health systems at the national or sub-national level in LMICs, or do specific outreach to find policies of international organisations that might not be available online. This might be a useful exercise for future work in this field.
Corruption in the health sector is a serious and growing problem, especially affecting those who are most disadvantaged [ 8 ]. Whistleblowing can reduce the frequency and cost of corruption by allowing organisations to identify potential wrongdoing and address problems at an early stage. Yet, in order to work, whistleblowing systems must be carefully designed and adapted to context, with protections in place for whistleblowers. This review found that limited research has been conducted on whistleblowing in health, pharmaceutical, and related organisations focusing on anti-corruption and fraud in LMICs. Many avenues for further research could be productive and help inform policy and practice. This includes surveys, case studies, and other types of empirical research to examine the factors associated with the decision to report and the impact of whistleblowing on the organisation and the person blowing the whistle. Documentation of existing policies and sharing of experiences in policy implementation at all stages could help countries seeking to mainstream whistleblowing as a sector-specific anti-corruption strategy.
Acknowledgments.
The authors would like to thank Claire Sharifi, Reference Librarian and Nursing and Health Sciences Liaison, for her assistance in developing the protocol and methods for the scoping review. We would also like to acknowledge support received from the WHO Collaborating Centre for Governance, Accountability, and Transparency in the Pharmaceutical Sector at the University of Toronto through the Connaught Global Challenge Award.
This research was supported by a Faculty Development Fund Award from the University of San Francisco School of Nursing and Health Professions. The online publication fee was supported by the Connaught Global Challenge Award, administered through the WHO Collaborating Centre for Governance, Accountability, and Transparency in the Pharmaceutical Sector at the Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto
Responsible Editor
Jennifer Stewart Williams
TV created the study design, developed the protocol and search criteria, conducted the literature search and screening, charted data, synthesised results, wrote the initial draft, and reviewed the final manuscript. BA participated in the development of the protocol and search criteria, conducted the literature search and screening, charted data, synthesised results, and reviewed drafts of the manuscript including the final draft. KM participated in the development of the protocol, charted data, synthesised results, and reviewed drafts of the manuscript, including the final draft.
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Because this review extracted data from secondary sources and did not involve human subjects research, ethical approval was not required.
Little is known about how whistleblowing is understood and used to detect corruption in health and pharmaceutical organisations in LMICs. This scoping review documented components of whistleblowing policies implemented by international organisations, and factors that may affect motivation for whistleblowing. We need further research to understand how whistleblowing systems operate in LMIC contexts, factors that enhance the effectiveness of such systems, and outcomes experienced by organisations and individuals involved.
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2022.2140494
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
Analysing near-miss incidents in construction: a systematic literature review.
3. research methodology, 4.1. a statistical analysis of publications, 4.2. methods used to obtain information about near misses, 4.2.1. traditional methods.
4.3.1. quantitative and qualitative statistical methods, 4.3.2. analysis using artificial intelligence (ai), 4.3.3. building information modelling, 4.4. key aspects of near-miss investigations in the construction industry, 4.4.1. occupational risk assessment, 4.4.2. causes of hazards in construction, 4.4.3. time series of near misses, 4.4.4. material factors of construction processes, 4.5. a comprehensive overview of the research questions and references on near misses in the construction industry, 5. discussion, 5.1. interest of researchers in near misses in construction (question 1), 5.2. methods used to obtain near-miss information (question 2), 5.3. methods used to analyse the information and data sets (question 3), 5.4. key aspects of near-miss investigations in the construction industry (question 4), 6. conclusions.
Institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.
Year | Source Title | DOI/ISBN/ISSN | Reference |
---|---|---|---|
1999 | Construction Management and Economics | 10.1080/014461999371691 | [ ] |
2002 | Structural Engineer | 14665123 | [ ] |
2009 | Building a Sustainable Future—Proceedings of the 2009 Construction Research Congress | 10.1061/41020(339)4 | [ ] |
2010 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.04.009 | [ ] |
2010 | Automation in Construction | 10.1016/j.autcon.2009.11.017 | [ ] |
2010 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.06.006 | [ ] |
2012 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000518 | [ ] |
2013 | ISARC 2013—30th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction and Mining, Held in Conjunction with the 23rd World Mining Congress | 10.22260/isarc2013/0113 | [ ] |
2014 | Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Civil Engineering | 10.1680/cien.14.00010 | [ ] |
2014 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2013.12.012 | [ ] |
2014 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000795 | [ ] |
2014 | 31st International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction and Mining, ISARC 2014—Proceedings | 10.22260/isarc2014/0115 | [ ] |
2014 | Construction Research Congress 2014: Construction in a Global Network—Proceedings of the 2014 Construction Research Congress | 10.1061/9780784413517.0181 | [ ] |
2014 | Construction Research Congress 2014: Construction in a Global Network—Proceedings of the 2014 Construction Research Congress | 10.1061/9780784413517.0235 | [ ] |
2014 | Construction Research Congress 2014: Construction in a Global Network—Proceedings of the 2014 Construction Research Congress | 10.1061/9780784413517.0096 | [ ] |
2015 | Automation in Construction | 10.1016/j.autcon.2015.09.003 | [ ] |
2015 | 32nd International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction and Mining: Connected to the Future, Proceedings | 10.22260/isarc2015/0062 | [ ] |
2015 | ASSE Professional Development Conference and Exposition 2015 | - | [ ] |
2015 | Congress on Computing in Civil Engineering, Proceedings | 10.1061/9780784479247.019 | [ ] |
2016 | Automation in Construction | 10.1016/j.autcon.2016.03.008 | [ ] |
2016 | Automation in Construction | 10.1016/j.autcon.2016.04.007 | [ ] |
2016 | IEEE IAS Electrical Safety Workshop | 10.1109/ESW.2016.7499701 | [ ] |
2016 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001100 | [ ] |
2016 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.11.025 | [ ] |
2016 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001049 | [ ] |
2016 | IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications | 10.1109/TIA.2015.2461180 | [ ] |
2017 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2017.06.012 | [ ] |
2017 | ENR (Engineering News-Record) | 8919526 | [ ] |
2017 | 6th CSCE-CRC International Construction Specialty Conference 2017—Held as Part of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering Annual Conference and General Meeting 2017 | 978-151087841-9 | [ ] |
2017 | Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) | 10.1007/978-3-319-72323-5_12 | [ ] |
2017 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001209 | [ ] |
2017 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.08.027 | [ ] |
2017 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.08.022 | [ ] |
2018 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.04.004 | [ ] |
2018 | International Journal of Construction Management | 10.1080/15623599.2017.1382067 | [ ] |
2018 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001420 | [ ] |
2018 | Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering | 10.1117/12.2296548 | [ ] |
2019 | Automation in Construction | 10.1016/j.autcon.2019.102854 | [ ] |
2019 | Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications | 10.1016/j.physa.2019.121495 | [ ] |
2019 | Sustainability (Switzerland) | 10.3390/su11051264 | [ ] |
2019 | Computing in Civil Engineering 2019: Data, Sensing, and Analytics—Selected Papers from the ASCE International Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering 2019 | 978-078448243-8 | [ ] |
2019 | Journal of Health, Safety and Environment | 18379362 | [ ] |
2019 | Computing in Civil Engineering 2019: Data, Sensing, and Analytics—Selected Papers from the ASCE International Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering 2019 | 978-078448243-8 | [ ] |
2019 | Computing in Civil Engineering 2019: Smart Cities, Sustainability, and Resilience—Selected Papers from the ASCE International Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering 2019 | 10.1061/9780784482445.026 | [ ] |
2019 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001582 | [ ] |
2019 | Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing | 10.1007/978-3-030-02053-8_107 | [ ] |
2020 | Accident Analysis and Prevention | 10.1016/j.aap.2020.105496 | [ ] |
2020 | Advanced Engineering Informatics | 10.1016/j.aei.2020.101062 | [ ] |
2020 | Advanced Engineering Informatics | 10.1016/j.aei.2020.101060 | [ ] |
2020 | ARCOM 2020—Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 36th Annual Conference 2020—Proceedings | 978-099554633-2 | [ ] |
2020 | International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation | 10.1108/IJBPA-03-2020-0018 | [ ] |
2020 | Communications in Computer and Information Science | 10.1007/978-3-030-42852-5_8 | [ ] |
2021 | Journal of Architectural Engineering | 10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000501 | [ ] |
2021 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105368 | [ ] |
2021 | ACM International Conference Proceeding Series | 10.1145/3482632.3487473 | [ ] |
2021 | Reliability Engineering and System Safety | 10.1016/j.ress.2021.107687 | [ ] |
2021 | Proceedings of the 37th Annual ARCOM Conference, ARCOM 2021 | - | [ ] |
2022 | Buildings | 10.3390/buildings12111855 | [ ] |
2022 | Safety Science | 10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105704 | [ ] |
2022 | Sensors | 10.3390/s22093482 | [ ] |
2022 | Proceedings of International Structural Engineering and Construction | 10.14455/ISEC.2022.9(2).CSA-03 | [ ] |
2022 | Journal of Information Technology in Construction | 10.36680/j.itcon.2022.045 | [ ] |
2022 | Forensic Engineering 2022: Elevating Forensic Engineering—Selected Papers from the 9th Congress on Forensic Engineering | 10.1061/9780784484555.005 | [ ] |
2022 | Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience | 10.1155/2022/4851615 | [ ] |
2022 | International Journal of Construction Management | 10.1080/15623599.2020.1839704 | [ ] |
2023 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-13979 | [ ] |
2023 | Heliyon | 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21607 | [ ] |
2023 | Accident Analysis and Prevention | 10.1016/j.aap.2023.107224 | [ ] |
2023 | Safety | 10.3390/safety9030047 | [ ] |
2023 | Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management | 10.1108/ECAM-09-2021-0797 | [ ] |
2023 | Advanced Engineering Informatics | 10.1016/j.aei.2023.101929 | [ ] |
2023 | Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management | 10.1108/ECAM-05-2023-0458 | [ ] |
2023 | Intelligent Automation and Soft Computing | 10.32604/iasc.2023.031359 | [ ] |
2023 | International Journal of Construction Management | 10.1080/15623599.2020.1847405 | [ ] |
2024 | Heliyon | 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26410 | [ ] |
Click here to enlarge figure
No. | Name of Institution/Organization | Definition |
---|---|---|
1 | Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) [ ] | “A near-miss is a potential hazard or incident in which no property was damaged and no personal injury was sustained, but where, given a slight shift in time or position, damage or injury easily could have occurred. Near misses also may be referred to as close calls, near accidents, or injury-free events.” |
2 | International Labour Organization (ILO) [ ] | “An event, not necessarily defined under national laws and regulations, that could have caused harm to persons at work or to the public, e.g., a brick that falls off scaffolding but does not hit anyone” |
3 | American National Safety Council (NSC) [ ] | “A Near Miss is an unplanned event that did not result in injury, illness, or damage—but had the potential to do so” |
4 | PN-ISO 45001:2018-06 [ ] | A near-miss incident is described as an event that does not result in injury or health issues. |
5 | PN-N-18001:2004 [ ] | A near-miss incident is an accident event without injury. |
6 | World Health Organization (WHO) [ ] | Near misses have been defined as a serious error that has the potential to cause harm but are not due to chance or interception. |
7 | International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) [ ] | Near misses have been defined as potentially significant events that could have consequences but did not due to the conditions at the time. |
No. | Journal | Number of Publications |
---|---|---|
1 | Safety Science | 10 |
2 | Journal of Construction Engineering and Management | 8 |
3 | Automation in Construction | 5 |
4 | Advanced Engineering Informatics | 3 |
5 | Construction Research Congress 2014 Construction in a Global Network Proceedings of the 2014 Construction Research Congress | 3 |
6 | International Journal of Construction Management | 3 |
7 | Accident Analysis and Prevention | 2 |
8 | Computing in Civil Engineering 2019 Data Sensing and Analytics Selected Papers From The ASCE International Conference | 2 |
9 | Engineering Construction and Architectural Management | 2 |
10 | Heliyon | 2 |
Cluster Number | Colour | Basic Keywords |
---|---|---|
1 | blue | construction, construction sites, decision making, machine learning, near misses, neural networks, project management, safety, workers |
2 | green | building industry, construction industry, construction projects, construction work, human, near miss, near misses, occupational accident, occupational safety, safety, management, safety performance |
3 | red | accident prevention, construction equipment, construction, safety, construction workers, hazards, human resource management, leading indicators, machinery, occupational risks, risk management, safety engineering |
4 | yellow | accidents, risk assessment, civil engineering, near miss, surveys |
Number of Question | Question | References |
---|---|---|
Q | Are near misses in the construction industry studied scientifically? | [ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ] |
Q | What methods have been used to obtain information on near misses and systems for recording incidents in construction companies? | [ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ] |
Q | What methods have been used to analyse the information and figures that have been obtained? | [ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ] |
Q | What are the key aspects of near misses in the construction industry that have been of interest to the researchers? | [ , , , , , , , , , , , , ] |
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
Woźniak, Z.; Hoła, B. Analysing Near-Miss Incidents in Construction: A Systematic Literature Review. Appl. Sci. 2024 , 14 , 7260. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167260
Woźniak Z, Hoła B. Analysing Near-Miss Incidents in Construction: A Systematic Literature Review. Applied Sciences . 2024; 14(16):7260. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167260
Woźniak, Zuzanna, and Bożena Hoła. 2024. "Analysing Near-Miss Incidents in Construction: A Systematic Literature Review" Applied Sciences 14, no. 16: 7260. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167260
Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
COMMENTS
Abstract. Public administration scholars have provided a variety of theoretical insights to understand bureaucratic whistleblowing, and have emphasized its ethical, legal, and practical rationales in the context of democratic bureaucracy. To enhance our understanding of this principled dissent behavior in the public sector, this study ...
Kang conducted a systematic review of whistleblowing in the public sector to examine methods and theoretical models [25]. The review included 71 peer-reviewed publications and dissertations in ...
This literature review examines the literature for the design specifications developed for whistleblowing systems under consideration of the risk for organizational insiders to blow the whistle.
Article on Whistleblowing in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review, published in Review of public personnel administration 43 on 2022-03-02 by Minsung Michael Kang. Read the article Whistleblowing in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review on R Discovery, your go-to avenue for effective literature search.
Whistleblowing in the public sector: a Systematic literature review. MM Kang. Review of Public Personnel Administration 43 (2), 381-406, 2023. 24: 2023: ... Does whistleblowing always compromise bureaucratic reputation? Exploring the role of accountability institutions through bureaucratic reputation theory
Literature Review on Whistleblower Protection. ... The first law aiming to regulate whistleblowing in the public sector, the Law on the Protection of Informers in Kosovo, was enacted in 2011 but it lacked clarity on many aspects related to its implementation (Fol, Reference Fol 2017). Seven years later, in 2018, the Kosovo Parliament approved a ...
Whistleblowing in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar Ambivalence, Political Consensus and Conditionality: Support for Whist...
There is a consensus in the literature that whistleblowing can operate as an instrument for deterring wrongdoing and promoting transparency in organizations. As such, whistleblowing connects with sustainability, and in particular with the UN sustainable development goals (SDG 16, reducing corruption) for transparency and accountability in public sector entities. The purpose of this study is to ...
when employing the framework. The wheel of whistle-blowing sheds light on how these questions have been answered in the literature so far, and the paths that can be taken in the future. In sum, this paper addresses the burgeoning opportuni-ties to study whistleblowing by critically reviewing exist-ing whistleblowing studies and integrating them ...
Public administration scholars have provided a variety of theoretical insights to understand bureaucratic whistleblowing, and have emphasized its ethical, legal, and practical rationales in the context of democratic bureaucracy. To enhance our understanding of this principled dissent behavior in the public sector, this study systematically reviews 71 whistleblowing articles and dissertations ...
To enhance our understanding of this principled dissent behavior in the public sector, this study systematically reviews 71 whistleblowing articles and dissertations that address three aspects in the literature: (1) definitions and theories; (2) methods and data, and (3…
For a systematic literature review of whistleblowing in the public sector see Kang (Citation 2023). Examples include corruption, fraud, or unethical actions in the organization. Such scandals are often revealed because employees within the organization believe that these should be stopped, and as a result they are being reported (Zhang et al ...
in September 2021 to find current systematic or scop-ing reviews related to whistleblowing, health, and corruption. This search found four reviews. Kang conducted a systematic review of whistle-blowing in the public sector to examine methods and theoretical models [25]. The review included 71
understanding of this principled dissent behavior in the public sector, this study systematically reviews 71 whistleblowing articles and dissertations that address three aspects in the literature: (1) definitions and theories; (2) methods and data,
Whistle-blowing, as a form of dissent in American bureaucracies, first emerged in force during the late 1960's and early 1970's, and was institutionalized in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. ... Whistleblowing in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review. M. Kang. Political Science. Review of Public Personnel Administration. 2022;
Whistle-blowing, as a form of dissent in American bureaucracies, first emerged in force during the late 1960's and early 1970's, and was institutionalized in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. ... Whistleblowing in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review. Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar. The efficacy of protection: the ...
Kang conducted a systematic review of whistleblowing in the public sector to examine methods and theoretical models [Citation 25]. The review included 71 peer-reviewed publications and dissertations in public administration, political science, and business. ... Kang MM. Whistleblowing in the public sector: a systematic literature review. Rev ...
Dryburgh M. M. (2009). Personal and policy implications of whistle-blowing. Public Integrity, 11, 155-170. Crossref. Google Scholar. Dworkin T. M., Baucus M. (1998). Internal vs. external whistleblowers: A comparison of whistleblowing processes. ... Whistleblowing in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review. Go to citation Crossref ...
Systematic Literature Review: Whistleblowing Intentions in Indonesian Public Sector Organizations. January 2022. DOI: 10.4108/eai.10-8-2022.2320836. Conference: Proceedings of the 3rd ...
To enhance our understanding of this principled dissent behavior in the public sector, this study systematically reviews 71 whistleblowing articles and dissertations that address three aspects in the literature: (1) definitions and theories; (2) methods and data, and (3) factors associated with whistleblowing intention and behavior.
Kang conducted a systematic review of whistleblowing in the public sector to examine methods and theoretical models . The review included 71 peer-reviewed publications and dissertations in public administration, political science, and business. ... [25] Kang MM. Whistleblowing in the public sector: a systematic literature review. Rev Public ...
Abstract. Since Miceli and Near's seminal work, scholars and practitioners have sought to identify determinants of whistleblowing behaviors. For example, Miceli, Near, Rehg, and Van Scotter argued that proactive personality, less co-worker invalidation, and leverage in the specific situation lead to whistleblowing.
In a conceptual study, Kalyanasundram (2018) suggested that factors such. as the size of the board of directors, the high independence of the member r e-. sponsible for the whistleblowing system ...
The construction sector is notorious for its high rate of fatalities globally. Previous research has established that near-miss incidents act as precursors to accidents. This study aims to identify research gaps in the literature on near-miss events in construction and to define potential directions for future research. The Scopus database serves as the knowledge source for this study. To ...
Sound and noise play a critical role in the experience of urban environments. We review the literature on sound environments in Montreal and their effects on city users, including public sector reports from the City of Montreal and Montreal's public health agency in addition to academic research, published between 2010 and 2020. 73 studies were analyzed according to scale, methodologies ...