Advances in Health, Safety, and Environment System Management Models in the Oil and Gas Industry: A Systematic Review

The oil and gas industry operates within environments characterized by inherent high-consequence risks, complex operational systems, and significant environmental impacts that necessitate robust health, safety, and environment (HSE) management frameworks [1, 2]. As global energy demands continue alongside increasing regulatory scrutiny and environmental consciousness, sophisticated HSE risk management systems have become critical not only for accident prevention but also for operational sustainability and social license to operate. While historical catastrophic incidents such as Piper Alpha (1988, 167 fatalities) and Deepwater Horizon (2010, 11 fatalities) established the foundational imperative for HSE advancement, recent events demonstrate that catastrophic risks persist despite decades of system evolution. The Pemex E-Ku-A2 platform fire in the Gulf of Mexico (August 2021, 5 fatalities, 421,000 bpd production loss) [3], Freeport LNG explosion in Texas (June 2022, major facility damage) [4], and the Keystone Pipeline rupture in Kansas (December 2022, over 500,000 gallons spilled) [5] underscore that even with advanced technologies and regulatory frameworks, HSE failures continue to threaten worker safety, environmental integrity, and operational continuity, reinforcing the imperative for continuous innovation in risk assessment methodologies [6, 7].

Traditional risk assessment approaches such as failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and hazard and operability study (HAZOP), while foundational to industrial safety practices, face mounting challenges in addressing the dynamic complexity of modern petroleum operations spanning upstream exploration, midstream transportation, downstream refining, and offshore environments [8-10]. Recent research demonstrates growing adoption of hybrid methodologies combining advanced computational techniques with conventional tools to enhance risk prioritization accuracy under uncertainty [11-13]. These innovations respond to industry recognition that petroleum operations involve complex socio-technical systems where human factors, organizational culture, technological capabilities, and regulatory contexts interact in ways that linear risk models inadequately capture [14, 15].

Despite extensive HSE implementation globally and proliferating research on industrial safety management, significant knowledge gaps persist regarding the effectiveness of different risk management models specifically tailored to oil and gas operational contexts. The offshore sector continues presenting unique HSE challenges due to harsh environmental conditions, remote locations, and catastrophic failure potential [1, 16]. Furthermore, the industry's digital transformation-incorporating Internet of Things (IoT) sensors, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems, and artificial intelligence applications-introduces both opportunities and complexities for HSE management that existing literature has yet to comprehensively synthesize [17, 18].

Several critical factors create urgency for systematic review of recent HSE advancements in the petroleum sector. First, no recent systematic review has synthesized HSE risk management models specifically for this industry in the post-2020 era [12, 13, 17]. Second, the COVID-19 pandemic fundamentally altered HSE practices and revealed system vulnerabilities, necessitating reassessment of risk management frameworks [19, 20]. Third, the global energy transition toward net-zero emissions introduces unprecedented HSE challenges [2, 21]. Fourth, geographical concentration of HSE research raises questions about model transferability across diverse regulatory environments [22, 23]. Finally, economic implications of HSE investments require evidence-based justification [24]. This systematic review addresses these knowledge gaps by synthesizing advances in HSE risk management models for the oil and gas industry published between 2020 and 2025, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines [25].

The reason for the need for a literature review is mandatory, here is the list of the research questions (RQ) of this paper:

RQ1: "What geographical and sectorial patterns characterize the distribution of HSE research, and what gaps does this reveal?"

RQ2: "What methodological approaches and risk assessment tools characterize HSE management model development in the oil and gas industry from 2020 to 2025?"

RQ3: "What thematic gaps exist in current HSE management model research, particularly regarding safety culture, economic analysis, regulatory effectiveness, and digital transformation?"

RQ4: "What integrated framework can be proposed to guide future HSE risk management practice in the oil and gas sector?"

The review provides several significant contributions: to the best of the authors’ knowledge, it offers one of the more focused syntheses of hybrid risk assessment methodologies within the post-2020 Scopus-indexed literature [11, 12, 13, 26], addresses critical literature gaps by mapping geographical research distribution patterns [22, 23, 27], enables evidence-based decisions by practitioners [18, 24, 28], and proposes an Integrated Oil and Gas HSE Risk Model Framework [16, 17, 29].

The following presents detailed tables and graphs showing the findings obtained from the selected studies, in accordance with the basis and strategy mentioned earlier. This display includes information about the year of publication, the country where each study was conducted, and the methods used. In addition, a narrative analysis is provided to enable a deeper understanding of the trends and patterns identified in the included studies. This combination of tables, graphs, and narratives facilitates a clear and detailed representation of the results obtained in the research.

Furthermore, a co-occurrence analysis of keywords (Figure 2) from the studies found in the database was performed using the VOS viewer tool, which identified the most frequently used terms relevant to this research topic: HSE, HSE system, Risk Management, Oil and Gas industry.

Figure 2. Keyword co-occurrence map

3.1 Descriptive analysis

The final sample of 17 studies reflects the cumulative effect of multiple methodological constraints: the narrow eligibility intersection created by combining post-2020, Scopus-only, English-language, and oil and gas-specific filters; the five-year time window limiting cumulative publication volume; and the structural characteristic of this research domain whereby a substantial proportion of HSE research is conducted internally by major operators and disseminated as proprietary reports outside academic databases. This sample size should therefore be understood as a predictable and transparent outcome of the methodological design. All 17 included studies met stringent quality criteria with a mean AMSTAR 2 score of 11.3/14, ensuring findings reflect a coherent and high-quality evidence base. Given the small final sample (n = 17), all percentages reported in the following sections should be interpreted as descriptive proportions rather than statistically robust estimates. Each study accounts for approximately 5.88% of the total, and readers are advised to consider this when interpreting the distributional patterns.

3.1.1 Publication trends

Temporal distribution of the 17 oil and gas HSE studies shows non-linear publication patterns (Figure 3). The temporal distribution demonstrates a peak in 2023 (35.29%, n = 6). The year 2020 showed 17.65% (n = 3), decreasing to its lowest in 2021 (5.88%, n = 1), then increasing in 2022 (11.76%, n = 2), peaking in 2023, followed by a decline in 2024 (11.76%, n = 2), and rebounding in 2025 to 17.65% (n = 3), suggesting sustained research momentum with post-COVID-19 recovery as a driver.

Figure 3. Annual publication distribution

3.1.2 Geographical distribution

Research origins show pronounced geographical concentration (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Geographical distribution of studies

Iran dominates with 64.71% (n = 11) of all oil and gas HSE studies, raising important questions about generalizability and cross-cultural validity. Several factors may explain this concentration. First, Iran holds the world’s fourth-largest proven oil reserves and operates major facilities such as South Pars Gas Complex, creating strong domestic research incentives and access to industrial data. Second, Iranian academic institutions have established active HSE research programs supported by national funding priorities. Third, database bias is likely: Scopus indexes a higher proportion of Iranian HSE journals relative to similarly active research communities in Arabic-speaking countries or Sub-Saharan Africa. Fourth, proprietary research conducted by major Western and Gulf operators (e.g., Saudi Aramco, ExxonMobil, Equinor) rarely enters peer-reviewed academic literature. Fifth, linguistic barriers may systematically exclude non-English research from regions such as Russia, China, or Latin America. These structural factors, rather than Iran’s unique operational conditions alone, explain the observed concentration. The remaining six countries each contribute single studies (5.88%): United Kingdom, Indonesia, South Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, and Ukraine [1, 2, 16, 18, 22, 26, 29]. Within Iranian research, South Pars Gas Complex appears in multiple studies [9, 27, 30-32], alongside Marun Oil Field [8], North-Azadegan Oil Field [10], and various gas refineries and pipeline operations [13, 33, 34].

3.1.3 Research methodology distribution

The 17 studies employed diverse methodological approaches (Figure 5).

Quantitative methods predominate (47.06%, n = 8), with mixed methods constituting the second largest proportion (35.29%, n = 6). Qualitative methods represent a smaller proportion (17.65%, n = 3), utilizing systematic review and case study approaches.

Figure 5. Methodological approaches

3.2 Operational sub-sector focus

Studies were categorized by primary operational focus within the oil and gas value chain (Table 2).

Downstream refining and gas processing operations receive the greatest research attention (35.29%), addressing refinery chemical exposure, hydrocarbon-rich sludge management, process safety, and environmental risks. Midstream pipeline operations and upstream exploration/production each constitute 23.53%. Midstream studies focus on pipeline excavation accidents, safety-conscious work environments, and sustainable safety practices. Upstream research examines workplace risk factors, field operations, economic aspects of HSE investment, and safety culture maturity. Offshore operations show modest representation (11.76%,), limited to UK Continental Shelf regulatory analysis and Korean offshore wind systems engineering. One study (5.88%) provides general hazard identification and risk assessment methods applicable across the oil and gas industry.

Table 2. Operational sub-sector distribution

3.3 HSE risk assessment methods and tools

Studies employed diverse analytical methods and tools (Table 3).

FMEA emerged as the most frequently employed method (35.29% of studies), applied in refinery sludge management, field operations, and hybrid model integration. To ensure consistent classification, methods in Table 3 are organized by analytical function rather than tool name alone. Specific techniques (e.g., FMEA, Fuzzy AHP) are nested under broader methodological categories (e.g., Failure Analysis, Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making), while broader approaches such as "Statistical Analysis" encompass multiple statistical tools applied for descriptive or inferential purposes. This structure distinguishes between individual techniques and overarching analytical paradigms, improving replicability of the classification.

Table 3. Risk assessment methods employed

The most analytically significant finding from Table 3 is the methodological transition away from traditional deterministic tools toward hybrid intelligent models. FMEA, while still the most frequently employed method (35.29%), is increasingly integrated with fuzzy logic extensions rather than applied in its classical form-reflecting growing recognition that crisp Risk Priority Numbers inadequately capture the epistemic uncertainty inherent in petroleum operations. Fuzzy MCDM techniques (23.53%) represent the clearest expression of this shift, with Fuzzy AHP, Fuzzy BWM, Fuzzy TOPSIS, and Fuzzy DEMATEL all appearing as components of hybrid frameworks. Notably, however, a critical gap remains: despite substantial Industry 4.0 investments in petroleum operations, advanced data analytics, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and digital twin technologies remain conspicuously absent from the HSE risk assessment methods identified in this review.

Beyond the dominant FMEA-to-Fuzzy MCDM transition, Table 3 also documents a range of specialized techniques each appearing in only one or two studies: Bayesian Networks for pipeline accident causation modeling, Bow-Tie and Tripod Beta for barrier analysis, AERMOD combined with SQRA for respiratory exposure assessment, HARPI for workplace risk prioritization, and PMBOK frameworks integrated with FMEA for project-level risk management. Statistical analysis methods and economic cost-benefit evaluation each appeared in a small number of studies. While this diversity indicates methodological breadth, the limited replication of each approach prevents robust comparison of their relative effectiveness.

3.4 Key variables and research themes

Analysis identified recurring variables and conceptual themes (Table 4).

Table 4. Key variables in oil and gas health, safety, and environment (HSE) research

Table 4 reveals a striking imbalance in research priorities. Risk Management Effectiveness dominates (52.94%), reflecting the field's primary orientation toward technical hazard control. However, the most analytically important finding is not what is studied most, but what is studied least. Economic Factors appear in only one study (5.88%), and Human Factors similarly in only one study (5.88%)-a significant gap given that human error is widely recognized as a primary contributor to major petroleum accidents and that economic justification is increasingly required for HSE investment decisions. Safety Culture, despite its established role in organizational safety performance, appears in only two studies (11.76%). Together, these absences suggest that current HSE research in oil and gas remains predominantly tool-focused while neglecting the organizational and economic dimensions that determine whether those tools are actually adopted and sustained in practice.

3.5 Sector-specific risk themes

The quality assessment revealed that all 17 included studies demonstrated high to moderate methodological quality. Eleven studies (64.71%) achieved high quality ratings (12-14 points) and six studies (35.29%) achieved moderate quality ratings (10-11 points). All studies demonstrated clear research objectives (100%), with 88.24% employing appropriately matched study designs, and 70.59% providing explicit discussion of study limitations.

This systematic review of 17 oil and gas HSE studies (2020-2025) reveals significant methodological advances alongside critical knowledge gaps constraining global HSE optimization. Four principal findings emerge from the evidence synthesis.

First, a paradigmatic shift is occurring from traditional deterministic tools (FMEA, HAZOP) toward hybrid intelligent models integrating fuzzy logic, multi-criteria decision-making, and probabilistic reasoning. Second, extreme geographical concentration in Iran creates knowledge transferability challenges, reflecting structural factors rather than universal industry characteristics. Third, research distribution misaligns risk severity, particularly offshore operations' critical under-representation despite generating catastrophic historical accidents. Fourth, critical thematic gaps persist in safety culture, economic analysis, regulatory effectiveness, and energy transition implications.

For future research, the following priorities are recommended: (1) Offshore Operations Research Expansion-deepwater operations, harsh environment operations, floating production systems; (2) Cross-Cultural and International Model Validation-regulatory effectiveness comparisons, cultural dimensions influencing safety behaviors; (3) Safety Culture Measurement and Development-culture assessment methodologies, development interventions; (4) Economic Analysis and Investment Optimization-cost-effectiveness analysis across interventions, risk-based budgeting frameworks; (5) Energy Transition HSE Implications-hydrogen production hazards, CO₂ capture and geological storage safety.

The proposed Integrated HSE Risk Management Framework translates into operational practice through a phased 5-to-7-year implementation approach: initial phase (Years 1–2) focusing on organizational readiness assessment; intermediate phase (Years 3–4) emphasizing digital technology integration; and maturation phase (Years 5–7) establishing continuous improvement cycles. Success metrics include measurable reductions in incident rates, improved risk prediction accuracy, enhanced regulatory compliance scores, and quantifiable ROI from HSE investments.