Fatal and permanently disabling accidents form only one per I cent of all occupational accidents but in many branches of industry they account for more than half the accident costs. Furthermore the human suffering of the victim and his family is greater in severe accidents than in slight ones. For both human and economic reasons the severe accident risks should be identified befor injuries occur. It is for this purpose that different safety analysis methods have been developed .

This study shows two new possible approaches to the problem.. The first is the hypothesis that it is possible to estimate the potential severity of accidents independent of the actual severity. The second is the hypothesis that when workers are also asked to report near accidents, they are particularly prone to report potentially severe near accidents on the basis of their own subjective risk assessment.

A field study was carried out in a steel factory. The results supported both the hypotheses. The reliability and the validity of post incident estimates of an accident's potential severity were reasonable. About 10 % of accidents were estimated to be potentially critical; they could have led to death or very severe permanent disability. Reported near accidents were significantly more severe, about 60 $ of them were estimated to be critical. Furthermore the validity of workers subjective risk assessment, manifested in the near accident reports, proved to be reasonable.

The studied new methods require further development and testing. They could be used both in routine usage in work places and in research for identifying and setting the priorities of accident risks.