| Literature DB >> 33012995 |
Abstract
As the spread of COVID-19 has continued since December 2019, stay at home orders around the globe have changed how we live our lives, mostly from physical to virtual interactions, such as going to college and doing our jobs; however, some activities are basically impossible to perform virtually, such as construction activities. Thus, the construction sector has been highly disrupted by the current pandemic. The construction sector represents a key component of countries' economies-it is approximately 13% of global GDP-as such, having the availability to perform construction activities with a minimum spread of COVID-19 may help to the financial response to the pandemic. Given this context, this study aims to understand the potential impact of COVID-19 on construction workers using an agent-based modeling approach. Activities are classified as being of low-medium-high risk for workers, and the spread of COVID-19 is simulated among construction workers in a project. This study found that the workforce from a construction project may be reduced by 30% to 90% due to the spread of COVID-19. Understanding how COVID-19 may spread among construction workers may assist construction project managers in creating adequate conditions for workers to perform their job, minimizing the chances of getting infected with COVID-19.Entities:
Keywords: Agent-based modeling; COVID-19; Construction
Year: 2020 PMID: 33012995 PMCID: PMC7522627 DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105022
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saf Sci ISSN: 0925-7535 Impact factor: 4.877
Fig. 1Abstraction of Problem.
Object class and associated parameters, variables, and rules.
| Object Class | Function | Parameters and Variables | Examples of decision rules and formulas |
|---|---|---|---|
| Construction workers | Simulation of individual behavior of workers during a construction project regarding the spread of COVID-19 | Time of arrival to work Time to leave work Level of risk activities performed by workers Percentage of workers sick rate of contagion among construction workers | Level of contagion among construction workers based on the level of risk of the activities that a worker agent is performing in the project |
Model’s parameters and variables used in the case study.
| Parameter/Variables | Value Range | Justification/References |
|---|---|---|
| Population of worker agents | 100 | A common setting to understand construction workers behaviors during a construction project ( |
| Percentage of activities classified as low risk | 40–70% | As limited information exists regarding the spread of COVID-19 among construction workers a range of values is used to model workers contagion rate ( A range of values for these parameters are used to represent a wide variety of potential cases ( |
| Percentage of activities classified as medium risk | 30–40% | |
| Percentage of activities classified as high risk | 0–20% | |
| Rate of infection during construction activities | 0–40% | As limited information exists regarding the spread of COVID-19 among construction workers a range of values is used to model workers contagion rate ( |
| Arrival time to work | 7–8 am | Assumption of the arrival from construction workers based on a 45 work-hours week, a longer work-hours week may have detrimental effects on construction workers ( |
| Leaving time from work | 5–6 pm | |
| Quarantine duration | Two weeks/14 days | Duration of the quarantine if infected with COVID-19 ( |
Parameters’ values for the scenarios developed with the model.
| Description | Case a | Case b | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scenario | Distribution of activities (L/M/H risk) | Contagion rate (L/M/H) risk activities | Distribution of activities (L/M/H risk) | Contagion rate (L/M/H) risk activities |
| 1 | 50%/35%/15% | 0%/10%/20% | 50%/35%/15% | 0%/20%/40% |
| 2 | 70%/30%/0% | 70%/30%/0% | ||
| 3 | 60%/30%/10% | 60%/30%/10% | ||
| 4 | 40%/40%/20% | 40%/40%/20% | ||
Note: L: low risk; M: medium risk; H: high risk.
Fig. 2Models’ results for scenarios 1a, 2a, 3a, and 4a.
Fig. 3Models’ results for scenarios 1b, 2b, 3b, and 4b.
Fig. 4Models’ results for scenarios 1a and 1b.
Fig. 5Models’ results for scenarios 2a and 2b.
Fig. 6Models’ results for scenarios 3a and 3b.
Fig. 7Models’ results for scenarios 4a and 4b.