Making occupational health and safety training relevant for farmers: Evaluation of an introductory course in occupational health and safety in Norway
Introduction
Agriculture is a hazardous industry, with a high frequency of injuries (Jadhav et al., 2015, Jadhav et al., 2016). Thus, efforts to reduce injuries are needed. In the European Union (EU), agriculture mostly consists of small enterprises or family farms, where 77% of the agricultural labor force in 2013 consisted of sole holders or other family members (Eurostat, 2016). In the US, 88% of all farms in 2012 were small family farms (USDA, 2015). In Norway, with 41,800 registered agricultural holdings in 2015, the labor input was estimated at 45,900 man years (64% farmers and spouses, 10% family members, 4% independent companies, and 22% employees or temporary hired help) (Statistics Norway, 2016). Contextual factors make occupational health and safety (OHS) interventions generally difficult to implement within small businesses, because they are difficult to reach and they lack resources and competence (Hasle and Limborg, 2006). In Norway, only minimal efforts have been specifically targeted towards small businesses to reduce accidents and injuries. However, the agricultural sector offers farmers an introductory, practical OHS course, provided by the Norwegian Agricultural Health, Environment and Safety Service (Landbrukets HMS-tjeneste, or LHMS1). This course fulfils the legal requirements set by the Norwegian Working Environment Act (WEA2) for managers. Despite the course being the main effort for promotion of OHS, it has never been evaluated. As part of the larger research project “Accidents in Norwegian Agriculture” (hereafter termed the AINA project), our study aimed to evaluate this introductory OHS course for farmers.
Section snippets
Occupational health and safety within agriculture
The high frequency of injuries within agriculture points to a great need for preventive efforts. Systematic reviews of interventions within agriculture have been performed (DeRoo and Rautiainen, 2000, Rautiainen et al., 2008). DeRoo and Rautiainen (2000) examined published safety interventions and found multi-factorial farm-safety interventions as the most promising means for prevention of injuries. More recently, Rautiainen et al. (2008) systematically reviewed interventions with more
Design
The study is designed as a prospective exploratory case study evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, p. 87), using qualitative methods. The design was inspired by realist evaluation. Realist evaluation is a theory-driven research approach (Marchal et al., 2012). Pawson and Tilley (1997) describe realist evaluation as testing of theories or initial hypotheses on how interventions should work (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, p. 88). But, in addition they point to exploratory case study evaluation as very
Results
Five courses were included in the study. Two courses were held in the southwestern part of Norway: One in a region with flat topography and dairy and beef as the main productions; and the other in a region with several sheep farms. Three courses were held in mid-Norway and reflected differences in operating conditions: A mountainous area; a flat area with large amounts of vegetable production; and a third area that was topographically somewhere between the other two, with mixed production, but
Discussion
The overall finding is that the practical OHS course does not reach its goal of increased systematic understanding and use of OHS systems. We do find that the course leads to short-term, increased awareness of risk and minor, system-related, efforts to reduce risk. Moreover, the analysis reveals that the course uptake is a matter of complex dynamics between contextual factors, mechanisms, and course design. In the following section, we will first discuss contextual factors and mechanisms,
Conclusion
The course aim was to increase system understanding and use. However, farmers saw their occupation as practical. They easily absorbed the practical part of the course, and solutions and ideas for practical risk prevention. Active use of systems adjusted to farm characteristics requires practical external involvement, face-to-face at the farm. This finding argues for reconsidering the course design to become more in line with suggestions in the literature on workplace learning, e.g. through
Acknowledgements
The Research Council of Norway and the Research Funding for Agriculture and the Food Industry financed this study and the larger AINA project (grant numbers 208053/I10 and 208053/E40). Thanks to Kari Kjestveit and Brit Logstein, who contributed to gathering the data, and to Oddveig Storstad for helping plan the study. Additional thanks to Reidar Almås, Oddfrid Aas, and Bjørn Hilt for valuable comments. Moreover, the constructive comments of the anonymous reviewers were very helpful to improve
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest in this study.
References (41)
- et al.
A dialogical approach to skill development: the case of safety skills
Human Resource Management Review
(2007) - et al.
Application of a model for delivering occupational safety and health to smaller businesses: case studies from the US
Saf. Sci.
(2015) - et al.
A systematic review of farm safety interventions
Am. J. Prev. Med.
(2000) - et al.
Small enterprises – accountants as occupational health and safety intermediaries
Saf. Sci.
(2010) - et al.
A model for design of tailored working environment intervention programmes for small enterprises
Saf. Health Work
(2012) - et al.
Making work environment auditable – a ‘critical case’ study of certified occupational health and safety management systems in Denmark
Saf. Sci.
(2011) The ambiguity of contents and results in the Norwegian internal control of safety, health and environment reform
Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
(1998)- et al.
Why are occupational health and safety training approaches not effective? Understanding young worker learning processes using an ergonomic lens
Saf. Sci.
(2014) - et al.
The FarmSafe Programme in New Zealand: process evaluation of year one (2003)
Saf. Sci.
(2006) - et al.
The role of intermediaries in delivering an occupational health and safety programme designed for small businesses - a case study of an insurance incentive programme in the agriculture sector
Saf. Sci.
(2015)