Fuzzy Fine-Kinney Occupational Health and Safety Risk Analysis in Offices: An Application in a Public Institution in Istanbul

Öz

In offices, there are numerous risks concerning the health and safety of employees, making it challenging to eliminate all risk factors at once. Risk analyses are conducted to prioritize risks based on urgency and to mitigate their danger levels. An occupational health and safety risk analysis was performed using the Fine-Kinney method for 330 hazard sources in a public institution conducting office activities in Istanbul. The uncertainty of parameters in the Fine-Kinney method complicates obtaining objective results; therefore, in the second phase, the parameters of probability, frequency, severity, and risk magnitude were processed according to the principles of fuzzy logic to achieve more objective and realistic outcomes. For the fuzzy analysis, two separate fuzzy models were developed using the same rule base. The difference between the models lies in the selection of membership functions; thus, the impact of membership function choice on the risk score has been explored. Lastly, by comparing Fine-Kinney and fuzzy model analyses, it was concluded that fuzzy models are more successful than the method, and the second fuzzy model, which uses triangular membership functions, was found to be more successful than the first fuzzy model which uses pi membership functions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fuzzy Fine-Kinney
• Risk analysis
• Occupational health and safety
• Office Workplaces

Ofislerde Bulanık Fine-Kinney İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Risk Analizi: İstanbul'daki Bir Kamu Kuruluşunda Bir Uygulama

Öz

Ofislerde çalışanların sağlığı ve güvenliği ile ilgili çok sayıda risk bulunmakta olup, tüm risk faktörlerini bir kerede ortadan kaldırmak zorlaşmaktadır. Risk analizleri, aciliyetlerine göre riskleri önceliklendirmek ve tehlike seviyelerini azaltmak için yapılmaktadır. İstanbul’da ofis faaliyetleri yürüten bir kamu kuruluşundaki 330 tehlike kaynağı için Fine-Kinney yöntemi kullanılarak iş sağlığı ve güvenliği risk analizi yapılmıştır. Fine-Kinney yöntemindeki parametre belirsizliği, nesnel sonuçlara ulaşmayı zorlaştırmaktadır; bu nedenle ikinci aşamada olasılık, frekans, şiddet ve risk büyüklüğü parametreleri bulanık mantık ilkelerine göre işlenerek daha nesnel ve gerçekçi sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Bulanık analiz için aynı kural tabanı kullanılarak iki ayrı bulanık model geliştirilmiştir. Modeller arasındaki fark, üyelik fonksiyonlarının seçiminde yatmaktadır; dolayısıyla üyelik fonksiyonu seçiminin risk puanı üzerindeki etkisi araştırılmıştır. Son olarak, Fine-Kinney ve bulanık model analizleri karşılaştırıldığında, bulanık modellerin yönteme göre daha başarılı olduğu sonucuna varılmış olup, üçgen üyelik fonksiyonlarının kullanıldığı ikinci bulanık modelin, pi üyelik fonksiyonlarının kullanıldığı birinci bulanık modelden daha başarılı olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Fuzzy Fine-Kinney
• Risk analizi
• Mesleki sağlık ve güvenlik
• Ofis çalışma alanları

Kaynakça

1. [1] Baybora D, Oral A.İ, Gerek HN, Kaplan Senyen T, Akın L, Ekmekci O, Piyal B. Occupational Health and Safety. Anadolu University, Eskişehir, Turkey, 2019.
2. [2] Kocabaş F, Aydın U, Canbey Ozguler V, İlhan MN, Demı̇rkaya S, Ak N, Ozbaş C. Relationship between psychosocial risk factors in the workplace and work related diseaes, occupational disease and work accident. Sosyal Guvence Dergisi. 2018; 7 (14) , 28–62. doi.org/10.21441/sguz.2018.68
3. [3] ILO world statistic, http://www.ilo.org/moscow/areas-of-work/occupational-safety-and-health/WCMS_249278/lang-- en/index.htm (accessed 03.05.23).
4. [4] Eurostat, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/health/data/database (accessed 02.04.2023).
5. [5] SGK Statistical Year Books, https://www.sgk.gov.tr/Istatistik/Yillik/fcd5e59b-6af9-4d90-a451-ee7500eb1cb4/
6. [6] Arpat B, Namal MK. Occupational Health and Safety. Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara, Turkey, 2020.
7. [7] Ozer MA. Process, performance and risk analysis/management in organizations, Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara, Turkey, 2020.
8. [8] İşsever H, Guler M, Erdoğan MS, Ersoy Yılmaz A, Ferdi T. Occupational health and safety. Istanbul University, Open and Distance Education Faculty, İstanbul, Turkey. 2022.

9. [9] Tengı̇lı̇moğlu D, Acar S, Kahyaoğlu F. The importance of ergonomics in design of office furnitures: an empirical study. Ankara Sağlık Hizmetleri Dergisi 7 (2), 23–36. 2008.
10. [10] Benligiray S. Office management, Anadolu University Open Education Faculty, Eskişehir, Turkey. 2005.
11. [11] Yavuz Ş, Gur B, Yavuz A. Investigation of the perception of occupational health and safety in employees in manufacturing works. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research 7 (59), 2618–2627. 2020. doi.org/10.26450/jshsr.2030
12. [12] Ulucan HF, Zeyrek S. Occupational health and safety in offices. https://dosyalar.nevsehir.edu.tr/be511600bb819cd8c66a174ca5598500/ofislerde_isg.pdf. 2012.
13. [13] Ozfırat MK, Yetkı̇n ME, Şı̇mşı̇r F, Kahraman B. 2016. Assessment of current hazard sources in longwall production in terms of work safety. Scientific Mining Journal 55 (1), 3–16. 2016.
14. [14] Kokangul A, Polat U, Dağsuyu C. A new approximation for risk assessment using the AHP and Fine Kinney methodologies. Safety Science 91, 24–32. 2017. doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.07.015.
15. [15] Gul M, Celik E, Akyuz E. A hybrid risk-based approach for maritime applications: the case of ballast tank maintenance. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 23 (6), 1389–1403.2017. doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2017.1317204.
16. [16] Oturakcı M, Dağsuyu C. Fuzzy Fine ‐ Kinney Approach in Risk Assessment and an Application. Karaelmas Journal of Occupational Health and Safety , 1 (1), 17–25. 2017.
17. [17] Gonen D, Karaoglan AD, Ocaktan MAB, Oral A, Atıcı H, Kaya B. A new risk assessment approach for the analysis of musculoskeletal disorders. Gazi University Faculty of Engineering and Architecture Journal, 33(2), 425-440, 2018. doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.416351.
18. [18] Gul M, Guneri AF, Baskan M. An occupational risk assessment approach for construction and operation period of wind turbines. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management. 4, 281-298 2018. doi:10.22034/gjesm.2018.03.003.
19. [19] Ilbahar E, Karaşan A, Cebi S, Kahraman C. A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Safety Science, 103, 124–136. 20108. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.025.
20. [20] Wang W, Liu X, Qin Y. A fuzzy Fine-Kinney-based risk evaluation approach with extended MULTIMOORA method based on Choquet integral. Computers & industrial engineering, 125, 111-123. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.08.019.
21. [21] Taranushina II, Popova OV . Occupational Risk Management at Hazardous Production Facilities Operating Hoisting Mechanisms. Occupational Safety in Industry. 2019. doi:10.24000/0409-2961-2019-11-82-88.
22. [22] Bac N, Ekmekci I. Psychosocial risk assessment by Fine Kinney and ANFIS method: A case study in a metal processing plant, in: Arezes, P.M., Boring, R.L. (Eds.), Advances in Safety Management and Human Performance. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 84–90. 2020.
23. [23] Erdebilli B, Gur L. Application of risk assessment with fuzzy Fine-Kinney method. Journal of Industrial Engineering, 31819, 75–86. 2020.
24. [24] Aboubakar BO, Li H, Souleymanou YA. Hydropower projects risk assessment and raking using combined SWARATOPSIS and Fine-Kinney methods, in 2021 10th International Conference on Power Science and Engineering (ICPSE). Presented at the 2021 10th International Conference on Power Science and Engineering (ICPSE), IEEE, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 81–91. 2021.
25. [25] Guney G, Kahraman B. Implementation of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Fine-Kinney method (FKM) against risk factors to determine the total cost of occupational health and safety precautions in environmental research laboratories. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 28 (4), 2606–2622. 2022. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2021.2010969.
26. [26] Tatar V, Yazıcıoglu O, Ayvaz B. A novel risk assessment model for work-related musculoskeletal disorders in tea harvesting workers. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 44 (2), 1-19. 2022. doi:10.3233/jifs-222652
27. [27] Fine, W.T. Mathematical evaluation for controlling hazards. Journal of Safety Research, 3, 157-166. 1971.
28. [28] Kinney GF, Wiruth AD. Practical risk analysis for safety management (No. NWC TP 5865). Naval Weapons Center, China Lake/California/USA. 1976.
29. [29] Başkaya Z. Fuzzy linear programming. Ekin Yayınevi, Bursa, Turkey, 2011.
30. [30] Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8, 338–353. 1965.
31. [31] Bozkuş E, Bozkuş O. Risk Assessment Approaches Based on Fuzzy Methods in Occupational Health and Safety. Journal of Occupational Health and Safety Academy, 4 (2), 49–64. 2021. doi.org/10.38213/ohsacademy.956021.
32. [32] Kıyak E, Kahvecioğlu A. Fuzzy logic and its application to flight control problem, Aviation and Space Technologies Journal, 1(2), 63–72. 2003.
33. [33] Yen, J, Langari R. Fuzzy logic: Intelligence, Control, and Information. Pearson Education, India. 1999.
34. [34] Ozdağoğlu A. Fuzzy operations, defuzzification and verbal thresholds, Detay Yayıncılık, Ankara, Turkey. 2016.
35. [35] Jevscek, M., 2016. Competencies assessment using fuzzy logic. RUO. Revija za Univerzalno Odlicnost 5, 187.
36. [36] Guttorp, P., 1990. Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science. Taylor & Francis.
37. [37] Meher, S.K., Shankar, B.U., Ghosh, A., 2007. Multispectral remote sensing image classification using wavelet-based features, in: Soft Computing in Image Processing. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 3–34.
38. [38] Pokoradi, L. Fuzzy logic-based risk assessment. 2002.