@article{ref1,
title="Value conflicts in designing for safety: distinguishing applications of Safe-by-Design and the Inherent Safety Principles",
journal="International journal of environmental research and public health",
year="2021",
author="Bouchaut, Britte and Asveld, Lotte and Hanefeld, Ulf and Vlierboom, Alexander",
volume="18",
number="4",
pages="e1963-e1963",
abstract="Although both the Inherent Safety Principles (ISPs) and the Safe-by-Design (SbD) approach revolve around the central value of safety, they have a slightly different focus in terms of developing add-on features or considering initial design choices. This paper examines the differences between these approaches and analyses which approach is more suitable for a specific type of research-fundamental or applied. By applying the ISPs and SbD to a case study focusing on miniaturized processes using Hydrogen Cyanide, we find that both approaches encounter internal value-conflicts and suffer from external barriers, or lock-ins, which hinder implementation of safety measures. By applying the Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs), we gain insight in the matureness of a technology (thereby distinguishing fundamental and applied research) and the extent of lock-ins being present. We conclude that the ISPs are better able to deal with lock-ins, which are more common in applied research stages, as this approach provides guidelines for add-on safety measures. Fundamental research is not subject to lock-ins yet, and therefore SbD would be a more suitable approach. Lastly, application of either approach should not be associated with a specific field of interest, but instead with associated known or uncertain risks.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1661-7827",
doi="10.3390/ijerph18041963",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041963"
}