Abstract:

In order to elucidate the essential differences among safety-I, safety-II, and safety-III, to clarify the operational mechanisms of safety science paradigms, and to promote the sustained development of safety science as a scientific discipline, this study adopted literature review and comparative analysis methods. The theoretical distinctions among the three from epistemological and methodological dimensions were analyzed. Then the construction and transformation of the safety science paradigm from the perspective of philosophy of science were discussed, and their paradigm positions were clarified. The results indicate that: Safety-I represents traditional accident causation theories or models that emphasize causality. Safety-II is a resilience theory that studies safety issues from a positive perspective. Safety-III is a systemic accident model grounded in systems theory and cybernetics. The safety science paradigm comprises one entity with four aspects. These aspects include the paradigm-free stage, paradigm establishment stage, normal science research stage, paradigm crisis stage, and paradigm shift stage. Currently, the safety science paradigm is dominated by accident causation theory and remains in the normal science research stage. Although there are signs of a paradigm crisis, it has not yet entered the paradigm shift period. Safety-I and Safety-III are research contents within the accident causation theory paradigm. However, Safety-II reflects changes in both beliefs and research perspectives. It can be seen as a new research direction in safety science, but it has not yet become a new paradigm. The future development of the safety science paradigm has three possible forms. It requires continuous practice and exploration led by new technologies.

Key words: safety science paradigm, operational mechanism, safety-I, safety-II, safety-III, paradigm shift