Safety and Health at Work

  • 제12권1호
  • /
  • Pages.28-34
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 2093-7911(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2093-7997(eISSN)
산업안전보건연구원 (Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Safety Management in Norwegian Fish Farming: Current Status, Challenges, and Further Improvements

  • 투고 : 2020.04.23
  • 심사 : 2020.08.17
  • 발행 : 2021.03.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Background: Safety management is required to ensure health and safety of personnel in Norwegian fish farming. However, few studies have addressed the status and practical relevance of this risk-reducing measure. Methods: This article provides new knowledge through interviews with 35 employees at different company levels, addressing perceptions of various safety management activities according to managers and operational personnel. Results: The interviews show that managers and operational personnel at fish farms agree that the quantity of measures aimed to improve safety has increased in recent years. However, some activities are perceived to have higher practical relevance than others. In general, measures that fit well with the practical reality are well received by the employees at the fish farms. Conclusion: Suggested improvements include involving operational personnel in the design of procedures, considering all risk dimensions that may affect occupational health and safety, and challenging the value of specific safety activities based on a detailed knowledge of the distinctive characteristics of work practice in fish farming.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Norwegian Labour and Inspection Agency. Prioritised measures 2020. Available from: https://www.arbeidstilsynet.no/om-oss/prioriterte-aktiviteter/aktiviteter-2020/akvakultur/ 2020; 2020.
  2. Holen SM, Utne IB, Holmen IM, Aasjord H. Occupational safety in aquaculture - Part 1: injuries in Norway. Mar Policy 2018;96:184-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.08.009
  3. Holen SM, Utne IB, Holmen IM, Aasjord H. Occupational safety in aquaculture - Part 2: fatalities in Norway 1982-2015. Mar Policy 2018;96:193-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.08.005
  4. Ngajilo D, Jeebhay MF. Occupational injuries and diseases in aquaculture - a review of literature. Aquaculture 2019;507:40-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2019.03.053
  5. Cavalli L, Jeebhay MF, Marques F, Mitchell R, Neis B, Ngajilo D, et al. Scoping global aquaculture occupational safety and health. J Agromedicine 2019.
  6. Johansen U, Bull-Berg H, Vik LH, Stokka AM, Richardsen R, Winther U. The Norwegian seafoodindustrye importance for the national economy.Mar Policy 2019.
  7. Directorate of Fisheries. Statistics for Norwegian aquaculture. Available from: https://www.fiskeridir.no/English/Aquaculture/Statistics 2019; 2019.
  8. Thorvaldsen T, Kongsvik T, Holmen IM, Storkersen K, Salomonsen C, SandsundM, et al. Occupational health, safety and work environments in Norwegian fish farming - employee perspective. Aquaculture 2020;524:735238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2020.735238
  9. Holmen IM, Utne IB, Haugen S. Risk assessments in the Norwegian aquaculture industry: status and improved practice. Aquacult Eng 2018;83:65-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2018.09.002
  10. Holen SM, Utne IB, Yang X. Risk dimensions of fish farming operations and conflicting objectives. In: Haugen S, Barros A, van Gulijk C, Kongsvik T, Vinnem JE, editors. Safety and reliabilityesafe societies in a changing world. CRC Press; 2018.
  11. Osmundsen TC, Olsen MS, Thorvaldsen T. The making of a louse - constructing governmental technology for sustainable aquaculture. Environ Sci Policy 2020;104:121-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.12.002
  12. Thorvaldsen T, Frank K, Sunde LM. Practices to obtain lice counts at Norwegian salmon farms: status and possible implications for representativity. Aquac Environ Interact 2019;11:393-404. https://doi.org/10.3354/aei00323
  13. Thorvaldsen T, Holmen IM, Moe HK. The escape of fish from Norwegian fish farms: causes, risks and the influence of organisational aspects. Mar Policy 2015;55:33-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.01.008
  14. Holmen IM, Utne IB, Haugen S. Organisational safety indicators in aquaculture - a preliminary study. Risk, reliability and safety: innovating theory and practice. In: Proceedings of ESREL 2016 (Glasgow, Scotland, 25-29 September 2016). CRC Press; 2017. p. 1809-16.
  15. Regulation on systematic health, safety and environment work in enterprises (Internal control regulation); 1996.
  16. Baldwin R, Cave M, Lodge M. Understanding regulation. Theory, strategy, and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.
  17. Wiig S, Tharaldsen JE. In regulation we trust. Work 2012;41(Suppl. 1):3043-50. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2012-0562-3043
  18. Antonsen S, Nilsen M, Almklov PG. Regulating the intangible. Searching for safety culture in the Norwegian petroleum industry. Saf Sci 2017;92:232-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.10.013
  19. Fenstad J, Osmundsen TC, Storkersen KV. Danger on the netpen? Need for changed safety work at Norwegian fish farms. Trondheim, Norway: NTNU Samfunnsforskning 2009;II:62.
  20. Storkersen K, Thorvaldsen T, Kongsvik T, Dekker S. How deregulation can become overregulation: an empirical study into the growth of internal bureaucracy when governments take a step back. Saf Sci 2020;128:104772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104772
  21. Power M. Organized uncertainty: designing a world of risk management, vol. XVIII. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007. 248 p.
  22. Hollnagel E. Safety-II in practice. London: Routledge; 2018.
  23. Hollnagel E. Safety I and Safety II: the past and future of safety management. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2014.
  24. Knudsen F. Paperwork at the service of safety? Workers' reluctance against written procedures exemplified by the concept of 'seamanship'. Saf Sci 2009;47(2):295-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2008.04.004
  25. Grote G. Safety management in different high-risk domains: all the same? Saf Sci 2012;50(10):1983-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.07.017
  26. Thorvaldsen T. The importance of common sense: how Norwegian coastal fishermen deal with occupational risk. Mar Policy 2013.
  27. Antonsen S, Almklov PG, Fenstad J. Reducing the gap between procedures and practice: lessons from a successful safety intervention. Saf Sci Monit 2008;12(1): 2-XX.
  28. Wahl A, Kongsvik T, Antonsen S. Balancing Safety I and Safety II: learning to manage performance variability at sea using simulator-based training. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2020;195:106698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2019.106698
  29. Bye RJ, Aalberg AL. Why do they violate the procedures? - an exploratory study within the maritime transportation industry. Saf Sci 2020;123:104538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.104538
  30. Morel G, Amalberti R, Chauvin C. Articulating the differences between safety and resilience: the decision-making process of professional sea-fishing skippers. Hum Factors 2008;50(1):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X250683
  31. Almklov PG, Rosness R, Storkersen K. When safety science meets the practitioners: does safety science contribute to marginalization of practical knowledge? Saf Sci 2014;67:25-36. 0. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.025
  32. B C, B M. Trapping safety into rules: how desirable or avoidable is proceduralization. Farnnham, United Kingdom: Ashgate; 2013.
  33. Storkersen KV. Bureaucracy overload calling for audit implosion: a sociological study of how the International Safety Management Code affects Norwegian coastal transport. Trondheim, Norway. Norwegian University of Science and Technology.; 2018.
  34. Hale AR, Borys D. Working to rule, or working safely. In: Bieder C, Bourrier M, editors. Trapping safety into rules How desirable or avoidable is proceduralization Farnham. United Kingdom: Ashgate; 2013. p. 43-68.
  35. Grote G. Promoting safety by increasing uncertainty: implications for risk management. Saf Sci 2015;71:71-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.010
  36. Dekker S. The safety anarchist: relying on human expertise and innovation, reducing bureaucracy and compliance. London, United Kingdom: Routledge; 2017.
  37. Rae AJ, Provan DJ, Weber DE, Dekker SWA. Safety clutter: the accumulation and persistence of 'safety' work that does not contribute to operational safety. Policy Pract Health Saf 2018;16(2):194-211. https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2018.1491147
  38. Kongsvik T, Thorvaldsen T, Holmen IM, Storkersen KV. Safety climate and compliance in the Norwegian aquaculture industry - employees' perceptions at different company levels. In: He al, editor. Safety and reliability - safe societies in a changing world. Trondheim Taylor & Francis Group; 2018.
  39. Storkersen KV, Antonsen S, Kongsvik TO. One size fits all? Safety management regulation of ship accidents and personal injuries. J Risk Res 2017;20(9): 1154-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2016.1147487
  40. Osmundsen TC, Almklov P, Tveteras R. Fish farmers and regulators coping with the wickedness of aquaculture. Aquacult Econ Manage 2017;21(1):163-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13657305.2017.1262476
  41. Storkersen KV. Fish first: sharp end decision-making at Norwegian fish farms. Saf Sci 2012;50(10):2028-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.004
  42. Grytnes R, Tutt DE, Andersen LPS. Developing safety cooperation in construction: between facilitating independence and tightening the grip. Constr Manag Econ 2020:1-16.