Measuring what Didn’t Happen

Mike Sullivan – President – Utility Safety Partners

Imagine for a moment our world without damage prevention governance; without the call/click before you dig services. Pre-work planning would require diligent ground disturbers to go to site and scan the area for the presence of buried or overhead utilities, search land titles to determine the presence of rights of way, submit a locate request to each utility owner, request a review of the proposed ground disturbance project, and secure individual crossing, or proximity agreements if necessary.

The process would be cumbersome, bordering on chaotic.

There are so many elements and conveniences we simply take for granted – but someone, somewhere had to come up with the idea, convince interested parties to agree with it and see it through to fruition. But what if the idea didn’t happen? 

Measuring what didn't happen, also known as measuring the impact of prevention or the absence of an event, is challenging but not impossible. For instance, we can look to other places on the globe that do things differently to gauge the effectiveness of what we are, or are not, doing. Environmental management and governance is a prime example. In Canada, we are governed by strict environmental requirements; however, that isn’t the case in other parts of the world, allowing us to easily visualize the impact of what could happen without it.

Another approach to measuring the effectiveness of prevention efforts is using counterfactual analysis. This involves comparing the actual outcomes with a hypothetical scenario in which the prevention measures were not in place. By analyzing data and trends before and after the implementation of prevention measures, researchers can estimate the potential harm that was prevented or avoided. This can be done through statistical modeling, simulation, or other analytical methods to quantify the impact of prevention efforts.

Using the damage prevention process as an example, it isn’t difficult to determine what could have happened if a buried utility had been struck, and unfortunately, there are too many of those examples out there. Diving into the root cause analysis, though, is where the true value lies. 

The Canadian Common Ground Alliance’s most recent DIRT Report (Damage Information Reporting Tool) identifies No Locate Request Made to One-Call Centre as the leading cause of damage across Canada in 2022. How frustrating is that? Without a locate request, the damage prevention process never got a chance to begin! Unfortunately, the CCGA report doesn’t go any deeper; it doesn’t ask why a locate request wasn’t made. Was it a lack of awareness? Was it apathy toward the damage prevention process? Was it due to a lack of legislation and consequence? Answers would benefit the damage prevention process and improve overall governance.

While measuring what didn't happen may not be as straightforward as measuring tangible outcomes, it is still possible to assess the effectiveness of prevention measures by examining the trends, patterns, and data that indicate the absence of negative events or outcomes.