Research on a comprehensive evaluation system for occupational safety management in thermal power plants

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2026.S1.0002

Abstract

Abstract:

To enhance the safety management level of thermal power enterprises, a systematic evaluation index system was constructed based on the inherent safety concept and the 4M barrier theory, incorporating requirements from safety production standardization. By integrating AHP with GRA, a comprehensive evaluation model was established. An empirical study of six thermal power enterprises was conducted using their primary safety data. The results show that the average safety management score is 63.88 across the samples, with three enterprises below this average and only one performing excellently. Analysis of the secondary indicators reveals that "risk management" and "personnel management" are common weak modules, scoring 53.82 and 58.33 respectively, both below the overall average of 64.55 for all 13 modules. Within "risk management", the tertiary indicator "risk work planning" scores only 49.04, constituting the most significant deficiency. The proposed method can thus accurately pinpoint systemic shortcomings in safety management, providing data-driven support and a decision-making basis for optimizing key areas. This offers valuable insights for enhancing the overall safety performance of power enterprises.

Key words: thermal power enterprise, safety production management, index system, analytic hierarchy process (AHP), grey relational analysis (GRA)

CLC Number:

X913安全系统学

Tang Maolin, Sun Zhichun, Fan Simeng, Ju Hongjin, Xiao Haiping. Research on a comprehensive evaluation system for occupational safety management in thermal power plants[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(S1): 6-13.

Figures/Tables 13

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

References 15

[1]	佟瑞鹏, 王露露, 许素睿, 等. 本质安全、行为安全、过程安全与功能安全的比较研究: 基于安全管理范式转换[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(1): 7-15. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.01.1045
	Tong Ruipeng, Wang Lulu, Xu Surui, et al. Comparative study of inherent safety, behavior-based safety, process safety and functional safety based on safety management paradigm shift[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(1): 7-15. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.01.1045
[2]	酒江波, 刘尚志, 鞠松霖, 等. 基于本质安全理论的化工过程安全管理研究[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2023, 30(5): 11-18.
	Jiu Jiangbo, Liu Shangzhi, Ju Songlin, et al. Research on chemical process safety management based on inherent safety theory[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2023, 30(5): 11-18.
[3]	中华人民共和国中央人民政府. 国务院安委会部署开展安全生产治本攻坚三年行动[EB/OL]. (2024-02-05). https://www.gov.cn/lianbo/bumen/202402/content_6930470.htm.
[4]	罗云, 黄西菲, 许铭. 安全生产科学管理的发展与趋势探讨[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2016, 12(10): 5-11.
	Luo Yun, Huang Xifei, Xu Ming. Exploration on development and trend of scientific management on work safety[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2016, 12(10): 5-11.
[5]	程磊, 史浩镕, 贺智勇, 等. 基于变权-云模型的煤矿安全生产评价研究[J]. 河南理工大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 43(5): 10-18.
	Cheng Lei, Shi Haorong, He Zhiyong, et al. Research on coal mine safety production evaluation based on variable weight-cloud model[J]. Journal of Henan Polytechnic University (Natural Science), 2024, 43(5): 10-18.
[6]	阳建新, 李发菊, 段伟强. 基于PCA-TOPSIS耦合模型的煤矿安全生产管理评价[J]. 中国矿业, 2023, 32(2): 24-30.
	Yang Jianxin, Li Faju, Duan Weiqiang. Evaluation of coal mine safety production management evaluation based on PCA-TOPSIS coupling model[J]. China Mining Magazine, 2023, 32(2): 24-30.
[7]	张文山. 重载铁路企业安全生产标准化评价体系的研究与应用[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(增刊1): 46-51.
	Zhang Wenshan. Research and application of safety production standardization evaluation system for heavy-haul railway enterprises[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(S1): 46-51. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.S1.0175
[8]	陈成, 王华, 李强. 基于AHP 的火电企业安全管理风险评价及预警研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(增刊1): 8-13.
	Chen Cheng, Wang Hua, Li Qiang. Research on risk assessment and early warning of safety management in thermal power enterprises based on AHP[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(S1): 8-13. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.S1.0005
[9]	高腾飞, 门凤臣, 刘宝军, 等. 基于数据挖掘的火电企业安全生产和技术监督评价系统[J]. 热力发电, 2021, 50(9): 49-54.
	Gao Tengfei, Men Fengchen, Liu Baojun, et al. Safety production and technical supervision evaluation system in thermal power enterprises based on data mining[J]. Thermal Power Generation, 2021, 50(9): 49-54.
[10]	吴宗之. 基于本质安全的工业事故风险管理方法研究[J]. 中国工程科学, 2007, 17(7): 46-49.
	Wu Zongzhi. Study on safety management system based on inherent safety theory[J]. Engineering Science, 2007, 17(7): 46-49.
[11]	佟瑞鹏, 王彪, 孙宁昊, 等. 行为追溯安全培训法(ACT)理论构建与应用[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(8): 24-29. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.08.0415
	Tong Ruipeng, Wang Biao, Sun Ninghao, et al. Theoretical construction and application of accident cause training method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(8): 24-29. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.08.0415
[12]	田水承, 景国勋. 安全管理学[M]. 北京: 机械工业出版社, 2009: 1-322.
[13]	尹永明, 张兴凯, 周建新, 等. 基于模糊综合评判的冲击地压危险性分区预评价技术研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2017, 13(3): 180-185.
	Yin Yongming, Zhang Xingkai, Zhou Jianxin, et al. Study on zoning pre-evaluation technology of rock burst risk based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2017, 13(3): 180-185.
[14]	张仰行. 基于AHP-TOPSIS法的煤矿机电设备安全评价模型及应用[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(增刊1): 179-184.
	Zhang Yanghang. Safety evaluation model of electromechanical equipment in coal mines based on AHP-TOPSIS method and its application[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(S1): 179-184. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.S1.0025
[15]	雷长群. 安全生产领域基本概念辨析及双重预防机制研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2017, 13(2): 17-21.
	Lei Changqun. Study on basic concepts discrimination and double prevention mechanism in the field of work safety[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2017, 13(2): 17-21.

模块	元素	期望目标
人员管理 C	C₁领导力与承诺	通过书面的相关记录文件,建立执行层面安健环风险管理的全面承诺、参与、职责与问责,确保领导力与承诺可验证、可追溯
	C₂安健环教育培训	通过专业系统的安健环教育培训,提升员工的安健环技能与意识,满足岗位需求
	C₃保障支持	确保足够的安健环资源可用

二级指标模块	AHP权重
A	0.078 2
B	0.113 5
C	0.061 0
D	0.061 0
E	0.113 5
F	0.061 0
G	0.126 1
H	0.113 5
I	0.061 0
J	0.056 5
K	0.061 0
L	0.061 0
N	0.032 7

指标	AHP权重	全局权重
A₁	0.4	0.031 28
A₂	0.2	0.015 64
A₃	0.4	0.031 28

安全评级	总体安全水平
优秀	[75,+∞]
良好	[65,75)
及格	[60,65)
待改进	(-∞,60)