我国较大及以上生产安全事故特征及严重程度分析

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.02.0946

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为实现我国较大及以上生产安全事故(MWSA)数据的有效管理,减少事故发生及降低事故严重程度,基于2010—2022年国务院安委会挂牌督办的278起MWSA,建立通用的MWSA数据库,从事故发生时间、空间、行业、类型维度探究事故特征分布,并依据事故严重程度的综合量化指标,构建分位数回归模型全面识别事故严重程度的影响因素。结果表明:在时空分布上,6—9月的事故起数和死亡人数处于高峰,日照充足的白天(7:00—18:00)事故起数和死亡人数占比多达2/3,经济发达省/直辖市(京津江浙沪闽)事故较少;爆炸和车辆伤害为主要事故类型。在0.05的显著性水平下,事故类型、发生日期、季节、日照条件、天气、平均温度、企业员工规模、企业成立时长等8个因素分别在不同分位点处与事故严重程度显著相关。其中,天气、平均温度是低严重度事故中影响事故后果的重要因素,100人以下的企业员工规模因素增大了极端严重事故发生的可能性。

关键词: 较大及以上生产安全事故(MWSA), 事故严重程度, 事故特征, 分位数回归, 异质性, 数据库

Abstract:

A comprehensive database of MWSA was established to facilitate the data management to reduce the frequency and severity of accidents in China. From 2010 to 2022, a total of 278 records, supervised by the State Council Security Committee, were collected and stored in the MWSA database. The distribution of accident characteristics was explored for the dimensions of accident time, space, industry and type, which were examined in this study. Using a comprehensive quantitative index, a quantile regression model was developed to identify factors that significantly influenced accident severity. The results show that in terms of spatial and temporal distribution, the number of accidents and deaths from June to September is at the peak, and the number of accidents and deaths on sunny days (7:00-18:00) accounts for as much as two-thirds. There are fewer accident records in Beijing, Tianjin, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai and Fujian. Explosions and vehicle injuries notably stand out as the primary accident types. At a significance level of 0.05, the accident severity is correlated with various factors, including accident type, date, season, sunlight, weather, average temperature, company staff size and company establishment time. Weather and average temperature emerge as pivotal factors influencing low-severity accidents. Moreover, enterprises with less than 100 employees are more prone to severe accidents.

Key words: major work safety accidents(MWSA), accident severity, accident characteristics, quantile regression, heterogeneity, database

中图分类号:

X928.02事故处理

焦宇, 马玉蕾, 李显, 马洪亮, 康与涛. 我国较大及以上生产安全事故特征及严重程度分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(2): 94-102.

JIAO Yu, MA Yulei, LI Xian, MA Hongliang, KANG Yutao. Analysis on characteristics and severity of major work safety accidents in China[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(2): 94-102.

图/表 11

表1

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

表2

表3

图8

参考文献 30

[1]	国家统计局. 2010—2022年中华人民共和国国民经济和社会发展统计公报[EB/OL].[2023-08-11]. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/tjgb/ndtjgb/.
[2]	XU Qingwei, XU Kaili. Analysis of the characteristics of fatal accidents in the construction industry in China based on statistical data[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021, 18(4): DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18042162.
[3]	王伟, 刘志云, 崔福庆, 等. 1981—2020年我国较大及以上危化品事故统计分析与对策研究[J]. 应用化工, 2021, 50(8): 2187-2193.
	WANG Wei, LIU Zhiyun, CUI Fuqing, et al. Statistical analysis and countermeasures of large and above chemical accidents in China during 1981-2020[J]. Applied Chemical Industry, 2021, 50(8): 2187-2193.
[4]	XIANG Yue, WANG Ziyun, ZHANG Cheng, et al. Statistical analysis of major industrial accidents in China from 2000 to 2020[J]. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2022,141: DOI: 10.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.106632.
[5]	张慧, 王冬雪, 王启飞. 2005—2016年我国较大及以上煤矿事故特征分析[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2019, 19(5): 1847-1852.
	ZHANG Hui, WANG Dongxue, WANG Qifei. Analysis of the characteristic features of major severe coal mining accidents in all over the country in the period of 2005 to 2016[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2019, 19(5): 1847-1852.
[6]	焦宇, 李显, 刘琦, 等. 2005—2019年我国重特大安全生产事故特征分析[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2021, 21(6):2875-2882.
	JIAO Yu, LI Xian, LIU Qi, et al. Analysis of the characteristics of major accidents and particularly serious accidents from 2005 to 2019 in China[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2021, 21(6): 2875-2882.
[7]	王琼, 欧阳振华, 易海洋. 近年来我国重特大事故特征与演变趋势分析[J]. 华北科技学院学报, 2022, 19(2):108-113.
	WANG Qiong, OUYANG Zhenhua, YI Haiyang. Analysis on the characteristics and evolution trend of major accidents in my country in recent years[J]. Journal of North China Institute of Science and Technology, 2022, 19(2): 108-113.
[8]	SHAO Bo, HU Zhigen, LIU Quan, et al. Fatal accident patterns of building construction activities in China[J]. Safety Science, 2019, 111: 253-263. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.07.019
[9]	KALE O A, BARADAN S. Identifying factors that contribute to severity of construction injuries using logistic regression model[J]. Teknik Dergi, 2020, 31(2): 9919-9940. doi: 10.18400/tekderg.470633
[10]	HALABI Y, XU Hu, LONG Danbing, et al. Causal factors and risk assessment of fall accidents in the U.S. construction industry: a comprehensive data analysis (2000-2020)[J]. Safety Science, 2022, 146: DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105537.
[11]	赵丹, 马社强, 张雨萌, 等. 农村公路交叉口交通事故特征关联性与风险因素分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(7): 146-151. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.07.022
	ZHAO Dan, MA Sheqiang, ZHANG Yumeng, et al. Correlation and risk factors analysis of traffic crash at intersections on rural highways[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(7): 146-151. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.07.022
[12]	ANARKOOLI A J, HOSSEINPOUR M, KARDAR A. Investigation of factors affecting the injury severity of single-vehicle rollover crashes: a random-effects generalized ordered probit model[J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2017, 106: 399-410. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2017.07.008
[13]	何雅琴, 段雨阳, 王晨. 基于累积Logistic模型的行人交通事故严重程度分析及对策研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2021, 21(3):1165-1172.
	HE Yaqin, DUAN Yuyang, WANG Chen. Analysis of the pedestrian traffic accidents and countermeasures for heightening such safety based on the cumulative Logistic model[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2021, 21(3): 1165-1172.
[14]	谷旭佳. 交叉口人车事故风险及伤害程度统计分析方法[D]. 北京: 北京交通大学, 2021.
	GU Xujia. Statistical analysis methods of crash risk and injury severity of pedestrian-vehicle crashes at intersections[D]. Beijing: Beijing Jiaotong University, 2021.
[15]	HAHOVSKY D B, VILLENEUUVE E F, SCHNEIDER W J, et al. An alternative approach to cognitive and achievement relations research: an introduction to quantile regression[J]. Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 2020, 6(2): 83-95. doi: 10.1007/s40817-020-00086-3
[16]	QIN Xiao, NG M, REYES P E. Identifying crash-prone locations with quantile regression[J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2010, 42(6): 1531-1537. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.03.009
[17]	QIN Xiao, REYES P E. Conditional quantile analysis for crash count data[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 2011, 137(9): 601-607. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000247
[18]	SONG Bing, ZHANG Zhipeng, QIN Yong, et al. Quantitative analysis of freight train derailment severity with structured and unstructured data[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2022, 224: DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2022.108563.
[19]	BENLAGHA N. Risk factors of road accident severity and the development of a new system for prevention: new insights from China[J]. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2020,136: DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2019.105411.
[20]	国务院安全生产委员会. 重大生产安全事故查处挂牌督办通知书[EB/OL].[2023-08-11]. https://www.mem.gov.cn/gk/sgcc/sggpdbqk/.
[21]	COOK B L, MANNING W. Thinking beyond the mean: a practical guide for using quantile regression methods for health services research[J]. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 2013, 25(1): 55-59. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-0829.2013.01.011 pmid: 24948867
[22]	XU Siyu, HU Hao, WEISBROD R. Development of a worldwide ferry safety database utilizing relational database approach[J]. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security, 2019, 11(4): 353-376.
[23]	ZHANG Xiaoling, DENG Yongliang, LI Qiming, et al. An incident database for improving metro safety: the case of shanghai[J]. Safety Science, 2016, 84: 88-96. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.11.023
[24]	KYU-YOUNG W, NAVATHE S B. Integration of expert systems and database management systems: an extended disjunctive normal form approach[J]. Information Sciences, 1992, 64(1/2): 57-81. doi: 10.1016/0020-0255(92)90111-K
[25]	WANG Bing, WU Chao, HUANG Lang, et al. Prevention and control of major accidents (MAs) and particularly serious accidents (PSAs) in the industrial domain in China: current status, recent efforts and future prospects[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2018, 117: 254-266. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2018.04.025
[26]	WANG Bing, LI Dinglin, WU Chao. Characteristics of hazardous chemical accidents during hot season in China from 1989 to 2019: a statistical investigation[J]. Safety Science, 2020,129: DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104788.
[27]	杨姮. 中国经济发展与交通事故关系的实证研究[D]. 厦门: 厦门大学, 2014.
	YANG Heng. The study on relationship between economical development and traffic accidents of China[D]. Xiamen: Xiamen University, 2014.
[28]	郑霞忠, 仝立杨, 陈国梁. 建筑业安全生产水平时空演变及影响因素分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(1): 27-34. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.01.005
	ZHENG Xiazhong, TONG Liyang, CHEN Guoliang. Spatial-temporal evolution characteristics and influencing factors of work safety level in construction industry[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(1): 27-34. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.01.005
[29]	任强, 程根银, 杨文光. 基于模糊评价的事故等级划分应用研究[J]. 华北科技学院学报, 2018, 15(4):43-46.
	REN Qiang, CHENG Genyin, YANG Wenguang. Application research on accident classification based on fuzzy evaluation system[J]. Journal of North China Institute of Science and Technology, 2018, 15(4): 43-46.
[30]	KASS G V. An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data[J]. Applied Statistics, 1980, 29(2): 119-127. doi: 10.2307/2986296

字段名称	事故ID	事故等级ID	死亡人数	受伤人数	重伤/失踪人数	直接经济损失
数据类型	int	char	int	int	int	decimal
字段大小	4字节	4字节	4字节	4字节	4字节	12字节

变量类别	变量	变量分组	事故频数 (占比/%)	变量类别	变量	变量分组	事故频数 (占比/%)
事故属性	行业	交通运输业=1^*	76(27.3)	环境条件	发生日期	工作日=0^*	196(70.5)
		矿业=2	107(38.5)		发生日期	非工作日=1	82(29.5)
		商贸制造业=3	23(8.3)		季节	春秋冬=0^*	196(70.5)
		建筑业及其他=4	72(25.9)		季节	夏=1	82(29.5)
	类型	车辆伤害=1^*	72(25.9)		日照条件	白天=0^*	187(67.3)
		火灾=2	23(8.3)		日照条件	夜晚=1	91(32.7)
		爆炸=3	80(28.8)		天气	晴=0^*	170(61.2)
		坍塌=4	23(8.3)		天气	恶劣天气=1	108(38.9)
		中毒和窒息=5	28(10.1)		平均温度		15.7(±10.7)
		其他=6	52(18.7)	事故企业	经营状态	正常=0^*	149(46.4)
环境条件	发生地区	西南=1^*	42(15.1)			非正常(违法/规、停产/业)=1	129(53.6)
		西北=2	30(10.8)			非正常(违法/规、停产/业)=1	129(53.6)
		华中=3	55(20.0)		员工规模	(0,100] =1^*	172(61.9)
		华南=4	18(6.5)			(100,999] =2	71(25.5)
		华东=5	63(22.7)			[1 000,+∞) =3	35(12.6)
		华北=6	37(13.3)		成立时长(月)		120.5(±89.0)
		东北=7	33(11.9)

变量	Q (0.25)		Q (0.50)		Q (0.75)		Q (0.90)		OLS
变量	参数估计值	p	参数估计值	p	参数估计值	p	参数估计值	p	参数估计值	p
常量	7.017	<0.001^**	7.764	<0.001^**	10.738	<0.001^**	13.057	<0.001^**	10.412	<0.001^**
事故类型	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
火灾	-1.603	0.168	1.149	0.237	-0.658	0.546	-4.920	0.041^*	-1.211	0.432
爆炸	-5.529	<0.001^**	-2.228	0.070	-1.369	0.297	-0.776	0.866	-1.918	0.066
坍塌	-5.119	<0.001^**	-2.822	0.032^*	-4.268	0.003^**	-5.179	0.056	-3.792	0.015^**
中毒和窒息	-7.279	<0.001^**	-6.648	<0.001^**	-5.224	<0.001^**	-7.874	<0.001^**	-6.638	<0.001^**
其他	-6.380	<0.001^**	-5.595	<0.001^**	-5.584	<0.001^**	-5.514	<0.001^**	-5.790	<0.001^**
发生日期	2.109	0.003^**	2.583	0.002^**	2.473	0.001^**	3.960	0.008^**	2.749	0.001^**
季节	1.719	0.029^*	2.074	0.047^*	2.374	0.019^*	3.963	0.125	2.989	0.006^**
日照条件	1.159	0.053	1.547	0.071	4.396	<0.001^**	4.317	<0.001^**	2.565	0.002^**
天气	1.167	0.020^*	0.792	0.312	0.265	0.719	0.630	0.633	1.168	0.144
平均温度	-0.085	0.001^**	-0.055	0.183	-0.047	0.230	-0.103	0.228	-0.063	0.181
员工规模	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
(100,999]	0.401	0.619	0.612	0.477	-0.458	0.627	-3.063	0.016^**	0.101	0.914
[1000,+∞)	2.027	0.140	1.766	0.138	1.457	0.314	1.953	0.371	1.378	0.278
成立时长	0.007	0.036^*	0.009	0.034^*	0.006	0.230	0.010	0.112	0.007	0.130