A leading voice in environmental health and safety is urging the construction and design industries to rethink when and how they approach safety on projects.

Professor Georgi Popov, a longtime advocate for prevention through design, believes risk assessment should begin not during construction or operation, but from the earliest design stages. “Safety professionals spend 90% of the time in the operational phase where we do program management compliance audits, incident investigations, employee training, loss analysis,” said Popov. “So we spend 90% of the time in an operational base and only 10% of the time in pre-operational. That’s shifting.”

Popov, who teaches in the Occupational Risk and Safety Sciences Department at the University of Central Missouri, was recently honored by the American Society of Safety Professionals (ASSP) with the 2025 Thomas F. Bresnahan Standards Medal. The award, announced May 17, recognizes his efforts in helping develop national voluntary standards that promote safety integration throughout a building’s lifecycle.

Originally from Bulgaria, Popov began his safety career as an environmental health and safety (EHS) officer with the country’s military, including a deployment with a United Nations mission in Cambodia. After relocating to the U.S. in 2000, he joined Kingston Environmental Services in Kansas City, Missouri. Since then, his work has spanned military, industrial, and academic realms, culminating in national recognition.

In an interview with Construction Dive, Popov reflected on how safety thinking has changed over the past two decades — and where it’s headed next.

From Compliance to Risk-Based Thinking

“I think the profession found me,” Popov said about his career path. “From a chemical officer [in the Bulgarian army] to an environmental company, that was an easy transition. We dealt with all kinds of environmental health and safety issues in the military. And then we dealt with civilian environmental health and safety issues like asbestos, lead-based paint, mold.”

His journey in the U.S. academic field began unexpectedly. “When the university needed somebody on an emergency basis — at that time I had joined the American Industrial Hygiene Association as my professional organization — I was encouraged to look at the American Society of Safety Engineers, the ASSP’s name back then. So now I have to go to two different conferences,” he joked.

Popov said he started developing new university courses that integrated environmental safety with industrial hygiene and general workplace safety. “We established a technical advisory group in the United States, and I started developing different methods of modifying and combining risk management, which is what I do mainly. That’s what we teach,” he said.

The field itself has moved away from a rigid, compliance-driven mindset, he added. “We went from a compliance-based approach way back when, when I started in 2001, to more of a risk-based approach these days.”

Designing Safety From the Start

One of Popov’s most influential contributions has been to prevention through design, a safety philosophy that calls for identifying and eliminating hazards at the planning and design stage — long before they can manifest on job sites.

“Our goal is to manage risk throughout the life cycle of a system or building, starting with the design concept,” Popov explained.

“Imagine, for example, if we can substitute with less toxic materials. We’re going to deal with fewer risks in the operational phase. And of course reduced cost for decommissioning and end of service. So, that’s the core of the prevention through design standard. We want to be involved early in the design phase and design out the occupational health and safety risks.”

That early involvement hasn’t always come easily. Popov acknowledged some resistance from traditional design teams.

“So here’s how sometimes we have — I wouldn’t call them conflicts — but sometimes misunderstandings with the designers and engineers. ‘You don’t belong here. Let us design it. And then you guys come in with your safety vests and hard hats and steel-toed boots.’ And I would ask them, ‘What if you don’t design it very well?’ Of course they say, ‘We always do,’” he recounted.

To bridge the gap, Popov learned to speak the engineers’ language. “They use risk assessment methods like failure, mode and effect analysis, but we use the same methods. So, if they tell you ‘You don’t understand what we do in engineering,’ you ask them, ‘Well can you show me your failure mode and effect analysis?’”

Once safety professionals show that they can engage with the same methodologies, he said, they gain credibility. And increasingly, the results speak for themselves. “Many organizations realize that it’s a lot cheaper to involve safety professionals early in the design phase to avoid risks. And I think that’s improving quite a bit.”

He cited an early survey that showed only 10% of safety professionals were involved in the pre-operational phase of projects. “That 90-10 figure that I showed was the survey from 2011-2012. So during the last 10-12 years, things have improved. And based on my observation, that number could be around 80-20 now. But imagine if we bring that to 90% of the time where our safety managers will be involved early in the design phase.”

Safety as a Strategic Asset

Popov emphasized that modern organizations are starting to realize safety is more than a regulatory requirement — it’s essential to their entire business model.

“When OSHA started promulgating standards in the United States, we didn’t have existing standards. But then after 2000, more organizations realized that safety is integrated with quality, profitability and the reputation of the organization,” he said.

“We’re looking at so-called enterprise risk management. There we have four quadrants. We have the hazard risks or occupational risks, then we have the operational risk, financial risks and the strategic risks.”

Popov noted that workplace injuries and illnesses aren’t isolated problems. “If we have injuries and illnesses, we’re going to have operational delays. That means we have financial losses. That means our reputation will suffer. When you put all that together, it’s not that difficult to explain to upper-level management.”

Looking Ahead

Popov’s work has helped reframe safety not just as a compliance issue, but as a proactive, strategic concern that touches every part of an organization. And while progress has been made, he sees more room for safety professionals to be empowered early in project development.

“Yes. The answer is yes, yes, yes,” he said when asked if he sees the risk-based approach continuing to grow. And with tools, training, and a growing consensus in the industry, it’s clear the safety profession is not just reacting to danger — it's helping design it out entirely.

Originally reported by Zachary Phillips in Construction Dive.