Acronym NA
Category
Aquaculture
Title Ro, ro til fiskeskjær. Systematisk HMS-arbeid i fiskeri og havbruk - Systematic HSE work in fisheries and aquaculture Programme National Programme
Instrument (FP6)
Contact Type (FP7)
Strand (Interreg)
NA
Theme (FP7)
Activity Area (FP6)
Regional Area (Interreg)
Action (COST)
NA
Specific Programme (FP7)
NA
Funding source National Coordinator Preben Lindøe Coordinator email preben.h.lindoe@uis.no
Coordinator institution
IRIS - International Research Institute of Stavanger (Norway)
Institutions involved
NA
Start year 2003 End year 2004 Funding (€) € NA Website https://www.fhf.no/prosjekter/prosjektbasen/321032/ Summary "The purpose of this study has been to map the systematic health, environment, and safety work in the fishing fleet and in the aquaculture industry.
The main basis for the project is a questionnaire survey directed at a selection of fishing vessels and at a selection of Norwegian fish farming facilities, conducted from December 2003 to February 2004.
The analytical framework underlying the discussion consists of three levels of safety management. The highest level represents the regulatory level with legislation and management/supervision of health, environment, and safety. The next level is the companies' own ""HSE management"" to meet the requirements of the Internal Control Regulations for onshore activities. The third level is the specific HSE requirements found in laws and regulations or standards that the industry has chosen to adhere to voluntarily. The main focus of the discussion is on the systematic HSE work of the companies.
Results on fishing fleet:
Laws and regulations are largely complied with on the vessels, although as many as eight out of ten vessels find it difficult to get an overview of the current regulations. The type of regulatory oversight varies greatly with vessel size, but vessels that undergo a lot of oversight also have a good relationship with regulatory authorities.
Regarding the companies' own systematic HSE work, there are significant differences depending on the size of the vessel. There are several safety aspects that increase with increasing vessel size, including the prevalence of contingency plans and emergency drills, the amount of safety equipment on the vessel, and the use of checklists. On the other hand, it is worth noting that individuals working on vessels alone generally report using personal protective equipment to a greater extent than individuals working on vessels with multiple employees.
Overall, we can draw the conclusion that the professionalization of fishing through larger vessels, modernization, fixed organization, and year-round operation has led to increased technical safety and therefore greater personal safety for workers. There is a significant difference in safety between small-scale fishermen engaged in local fishing, smaller vessels with multiple employees, and large vessels that are often part of a shipping company organization. The difference between these vessels requires a differentiated adaptation of measures for safety control.
Results on Aquaculture industry:
A large majority of the facilities have established goals for their health, safety, and environmental (HSE) work. Most record and report accidents, but the data generated from accident reporting should be more extensively utilized in proactive HSE efforts. In order for information from accidents and near misses to be used to prevent or mitigate future incidents, the information must be processed to be incorporated into an action plan. Around half of the facilities have implemented risk assessments and action plans.
Safety equipment on the facilities is widespread, but there is potential for improvement in safety equipment on vessels used in connection with operations at the aquaculture facility. Even though more than two-thirds state that they are part of a larger entity or group, only just over a third simultaneously have workplace safety committees at the facility or within the organization. This may indicate that the organizations are smaller than what is suggested by the information in the survey, or that the requirement in the Working Environment Act for workplace safety committees has not been met.
Crushing injuries, cuts, and injuries due to falls are the risks that respondents perceive to have the highest probability. This aligns well with accident statistics where fall accidents dominate.
In conclusion, the results of this survey do not confirm the impression of the aquaculture industry as particularly poor in ensuring the safety of employees. It appears that the facilities have made good progress in systematic HSE work on the premises. Many of the requirements in the Internal Control Regulations are in place, but implementation in practice falls short in some areas. The facilities could benefit from being more proactive in their approach to HSE work, meaning they should more extensively utilize action planning in their efforts to achieve established HSE goals. With regard to high accident rates in general, it is also desirable for facilities to assess the risk of various activities both before and after an incident, and better leverage the information provided by near misses."
Keywords
Aquaculture management;
Fishing fleets;
Fisheries management;
Human health;
Marine Region
76
Not associated to marine areas
0
Marine Region Map
