Articulating the Differences Between Safety and Resilience: The Decision-Making Process of Professional Sea-Fishing Skippers

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: As the world's most dangerous profession, sea fishing enables discussion of the concept of resilience and its articulation to the notion of safety in complex systems. BACKGROUND: In the small, emerging community working on this concept, the prevailing idea to improve safety is that resilience must be reinjected into the know-how of complex systems. METHOD: Thirty-four male skippers, divided into two groups, took part in an interactive simulation of a fishing campaign. They had to make decisions in situations of trade-off between safety and production goals. RESULTS: From the time they left the harbor, the fishermen never gave up on fishing, even in extreme conditions, and regardless of whether or not the catch was good. Not being suicidal, however, they used multiple expert strategies to reduce risk without giving up on their fishing activity. CONCLUSION: Systems run by craftspeople are very resilient because they rely on a high level of adaptability, based on the actors' expertise, linked to an exposure to frequent and considerable risk. Each actor is responsible for his or her own safety. The final discussion bears on the question of knowing whether or not it is possible to design a safe system while preserving its craftsmanship and therefore its native resilience. APPLICATION: The results of these studies suggest potential adverse effects of classic safety interventions in complex sociotechnical systems either in terms of professional reluctance to accept new recommendations or through the emergence of new sources of risk.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 145 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.