Value Conflicts in Designing for Safety: Distinguishing Applications of Safe-by-Design and the Inherent Safety Principles

This paper defines the differences between these approaches and analyses what type of research would be more suitable for each of these. By applying both approaches to a case study focusing on miniaturized processes using Hydrogen Cyanide, we find that both approaches encounter internal value-conflicts and suffer from external lock-ins such as company culture and infrastructure.

We conclude that: (1) as the ISPs provide guidelines for (add-on) safety measures, these are more able to deal with lock-ins while SbD suggests strategies for more ‘open’ scenarios, (2) applied research (TRLs 5 – 9) may already suffer from external barriers such as lock-ins while fundamental research (TRLs 1 – 5) is not subject to these yet, therefore (3) fundamental research would be more appropriate for applying SbD, while the ISPs would be more appropriate for applied research, and (4) application of either approach should not be associated with a specific field of interest, but instead with the associated known or uncertain risks.