The way risk is determined and planned for in an industry where disasters exact an especially high toll needs to be revisited

The construction industry is a powerhouse, reshaping skylines and revitalising communities. But beneath the scaffolding, a growing threat is emerging.

In recent years, tragedies like the George building collapse in South Africa, the L’Aquila earthquake in Italy, the devastating earthquakes in Haiti and Christchurch, New Zealand, and the horrific Grenfell Tower fire in the UK have exacted a staggering toll: over 200,000 lives lost and nearly R1.2 trillion in damages. These disasters were more than accidents – they were the result of overlooked risks, a failure to prepare for the worst.

The construction industry isn’t alone in its vulnerability. The oil, gas, and extractives sectors have long understood that loss of life impacts share value. It’s only a matter of time before South Africa’s construction companies are held to the same standard – some are already, due to reputational impacts.

Insurers, who play an integral part in the construction ecosystem, are growing wary of unchecked threats and are pushing for better risk management and targeted regulation enforcement. And they’re not alone.

As 50- and 100-year weather events become the new norm, the entire sector must adapt with novel approaches to the construction of assets to withstand these types of severe weather conditions and environments.

Risk is a part of life, something we all intuitively assess every day. From the moment we roll out of bed and decide if we’re well enough to face the day, we constantly weigh threats and vulnerabilities. Yet in construction, where the stakes are highest, this intuition is often abandoned. The way many in construction approach risk is broken, and the cost of inaction could be catastrophic.

Put a framework in place

A threat is anything with the potential to cause harm. Vulnerability is our susceptibility to that harm. Risk is the intersection and outcome of the two – the resulting damage and picking up the pieces afterward.

Risk is often used as a catch-all phrase. But in construction, a game lodge and an office building face different types of threats while both ultimately being the same underlying asset – property. Marauding elephants may be a risk for the former but not the latter. Nuance matters.

Real estate investors and speculators understand this. They conduct rigorous risk assessments for every deal, knowing that without them, they won’t survive. But this mindset often doesn’t extend to the actual building process. Many in the construction industry consider risk assessments a burden, a grudge purchase.

Worse, they leave our biggest assets in the hands of the lowest-paid workers with the least training. This must change.

A good idea is to use models and international standards for risk management. It’s an accessible, affordable, and comprehensive framework designed into deployable commercial frameworks that increase the likelihood of organisations achieving objectives, identifying opportunities and threats, and effectively allocating resources to deter catastrophes or manage them better. It’s a model that can be used by any organisation, regardless of size or sector.

Successful organisations and entities operating in challenging environments all deploy risk engineering. It’s about using the least cost to achieve the greatest benefit. No one wants to spend R50 to save R1, but it’s worth spending R100 to save R1 million. This principle is at the heart of smart risk management.

Be prepared

Exposure analysis takes risk assessment a step further, using environmental and historical data to anticipate potential disasters. In an age of big data, there’s never been more information available to learn from past mistakes and make informed decisions.

Preparedness is about proactive measures to prevent hazards and prepare for the worst. For example, just as you would expect from a completed building, a construction site should be prepared by having space for evacuation and responders.

On the other hand, it’s not about having an emergency response plan gathering dust. If you don’t know who your crisis team is and can’t gather them in 10 minutes, you’re not prepared. If your plan isn’t integrated with your insurance, you’re leaving yourself exposed and potentially ignoring a variety of tools to support you either via expertise or service provision.

Response plans must be swift, coherent, and considerate. It’s about communication, both with those impacted and with partners like insurers and vendors. Noncompliance is a ticking time bomb.

The trajectory of construction’s approach to risk is unsustainable. If things don’t change, insurance costs will skyrocket, making development prohibitively expensive. This will stall projects and prevent much-needed construction. The community will suffer, as will the industry itself.

The status quo isn’t an option anymore. The time for the entire construction industry to get serious about risk is now.

So, what more can we do to ensure safer construction? Insisting on well-trained workers and artisans reduces construction risk. Embracing new, safer technologies, materials, and equipment, where training and education are part and parcel of their use, can also make sites safer.

Then, building management systems in the design and construction of buildings, particularly for air quality control, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), and fire, should be a prerequisite and certified. HVAC and its ongoing importance in ensuring building integrity, occupant health, and safety cannot be overstated.

Text | Jason Griessel

Photography | SaiArLawKa2

Jason Griessel is Head of Cushman & Wakefield | BROLL Strategic Risk Services. For more information, go to cwbroll.com.