Work-Related Accident Prevention in Norwegian Road and Maritime Transport: Examining the Influence of Different Sector Rules
2. Theoretical Approach and Previous Research
2.1. The Rules Governing Safety and SMS in the Road and Maritime Sector
2.2. Safety Outcomes of SMS
2.3. Mechanisms through Which SMS May Influence Safety Outcomes
2.4. Potential Barriers to SMS Implementaion
- Background information about the interviewees’ work;
- Registration and overview of work-related accidents in the sector of the interviewee;
- Registration and overview of work-related risk factors in the sector of the interviewee;
- Views on responsibilities related to the occurrence and prevention of work-related accidents;
- Current, past (and potential future) measures aiming to prevent work-related accidents;
- Views on efforts to prevent work-related accidents in companies.
3.2.1. Recruitment of Respondents and Sample Characteristics
3.2.2. Survey Themes
- Background questions, e.g., sector, type of organization, position;
- Views on risk factors related to work-related accidents;
- Questions on why the number of work-related accidents has been reduced in recent years, whether respondents have a good overview of the occurrence of work-related accidents and causes, sources of information, and whether companies report all accidents;
- Questions on the responsibility for the prevention of work-related accidents and whether responsibility is clearly defined in current legislations;
- Rating of respondents’ organizations efforts to prevent work-related accidents, views on the safety rules in the sectors, and questions about the significance of framework conditions for safety.
3.2.3. Quantitative Analysis
4.1. Is Responsibility for Accident Prevention Is Clearly Defined?
“The company has an overall duty to see to that the construction and operation of the ship is in accordance with the rules laid down in or pursuant to this Act, including that the master and other persons working on board comply with the legislation”.(§6)
4.2. Respondents’ Assessment of the Quality of Their Sectors’ Efforts
4.2.1. Ratings of the Sector’s Efforts to Prevent Work-Related Accidents
4.2.2. Respondents’ Rating of the Safety Level and Framework Conditions
4.2.3. Respondents’ Ratings of Factors Influencing the Safety Level in Their Sector
“It is the ISM safety management systems that have been introduced. We think they work, based on the decline in work accident rates, but the background is a bit unclear. But I believe that the [SMS] requirements have led to a certain enlightenment in the shipping companies about how to implement measures, an increased focus.”
4.3. Multivariate Analyses
4.3.1. Which Factors Influence Respondents’ Perception That Responsibility for the Prevention of Work-Related Accidents Is Clearly Defined in Their Sector?
4.3.2. Which Factors Influence Respondents’ Ratings of Their Organizations’ Efforts to Prevent Work-Related Accidents?
5. Concluding Discussion
5.1. Is the Responsibility to Prevent Work-Related Accidents Clearly Defined?
5.2. The Quality of Efforts to Prevent Work-Related Accidents
5.3. The Perceived Importance of SMS for Safety in the Maritime Sector
5.4. Methodological Weaknesses and Issues for Future Research
5.5. Policy Implications
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
- Nævestad, T.-O.; Phillips, R.O.; Elvebakk, B. Traffic accidents triggered by drivers at work–A survey and analysis of contributing factors. Transportation. Res. Part. F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2015, 34, 94–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Nævestad, T.O.; Phillips, R.; Elvebakk, B.; Bye, R.J.; Antonsen, S. Work-Related Accidents in Norwegian Road, Sea and Air Transport: Prevalence and Risk Factors; TØI Report 1428/2015; Transportøkonomisk Institutt: Oslo, Norway, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Thomas, M.J.W. A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Safety Management Systems (No. AR-2011-148); Australian Transport Safety Bureau: Canberra, Australia, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Bernard, B. Safety culture oversight: An intangible concept for tangible issues within nuclear installations. Saf. Sci. 2018, 4, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- ICAO. ICAO Annex 19, Safety Management. Available online: https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/ICAO_Annex_19,_Safety_Management (accessed on 14 March 2021).
- IATA. Creating a Positive Safety Culture. Best Practices to Align with Annex 19′s New Recommendations. Available online: https://go.updates.iata.org/safetyculture?_ga=2.26439165.1941341082.1571071913-370565390.1570852392 (accessed on 14 March 2021).
- Kringen, J. Culture and Control: Regulation of Risk in the Norwegian Petroleum Industry. Ph.D. Thesis, Center for Technology, Innovation and Culture, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Nævestad, T.-O. Culture, Crises and Campaigns: Examining the Role of Safety Culture in the Management of Hazards in a Highrisk Industry. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- IMO. 2018: ISM Code. International Safety Management Code with Guidelines for Its Implementation; IMO: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- European Rail Agency. Available online: https://www.era.europa.eu/activities/safety-management-system_en (accessed on 14 March 2021).
- Nævestad, T.-O.; Hesjevoll, I.S.; Ranestad, K.; Antonsen, S. Strategies regulatory authorities can use to influence safety culture in organizations: Lessons based on experiences from three sectors. Saf. Sci. 2019, 118, 409–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adjekum, D.K.; Tous, M.F. Assessing the relationship between organizational management factors and a resilient safety culture in a collegiate aviation program with Safety Management Systems (SMS). Saf. Sci. 2020, 131, 104909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lappalainen, F.J.; Kuronen, J.; Tapaninen, U. Evaluation of the ISM Code in the Finnish shipping companies. J. Marit. Res. 2012, 9, 23–32. [Google Scholar]
- Amtrak. Safety and Security: Opportunities Exist to Improve the Safe-2-Safer Program, Audit Report OIG-A-2015-007; Amtrak: Washington, DC, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Zuschlag, M.; Ranney, J.M.; Coplen, M. Evaluation of a safety culture intervention for Union Pacific shows improved safety and safety culture. Saf. Sci. 2016, 83, 59–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phillips, R.O.; Nævestad, T.-O.; Jordbakke, G. Increasing the Implementation of Traffic Safety Management Systems by Organisations, TØI Report 1664/2018; TØI: Oslo, Norway, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Naveh, E.; Katz-Navon, T. A longitudinal study of an intervention to improve road safety climate: Climate as an organizational boundary spanner. J. Appl. Psychol. 2015, 100, 216–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Murray, W.; Ison, S.; Gallemore, P.; Nijjar, H.S. Effective occupational road safety programs a case study of Wolseley. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 2009, 2096, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murray, W.; White, J.; Ison, S. Work-related road safety: A case study of Roche Australia. Saf. Sci. 2012, 50, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wallington, D.; Murray, W.; Darby, P.; Raeside, R.; Ison, S. Work-related road safety: Case study of British telecommunications (BT). Transp. Policy 2014, 32, 194–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elvik, R.; Vaa, T.; Erke, A.; Sorensen, M. The Handbook of Road Safety Measures; Emerald Group: Oslo, Norway, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- ITF. Safety Management Systems. Summary Report of rountable meeting held at OECD headquarters on 23–24 March 2017. In ITF/TRC (2017)21; ITF: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Nævestad, T.-O.; Phillips, R.O. Trafikkulykker ved Kjøring i Arbeid—En Kartlegging og Analyse av Medvirkende Faktorer, TØI Rapport 1269/2013; Transportøkonomisk Institutt: Oslo, Norway, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Newnam, S.; Watson, B. Work-related driving safety in light vehicle fleets: A review of past research and the development of an intervention framework. Saf. Sci. 2011, 49, 369–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- NOU 1999: 30—Regjeringen. No. Available online: https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/nou-1999-30/id142198/?ch=15 (accessed on 14 March 2021).
- Størkersen, K.V.; Thorvaldsen, T. Traps and Tricks of Safety Management at Sea. Saf. Sci. 2021, 134, 105081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SSA. Norwegian Ship Safety Act. Available online: https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2007-02-16-9 (accessed on 14 March 2021).
- Elvebakk, B. Between Control. and Collaboration: Transport. Safety Inspectorates in Norway, TØI Report 1404/2015; Institute of Transport Economics: Oslo, Norway, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Bjørnskau, T.; Longva, F. Sikkerhetskultur i Transport; TØI Rapport 1012/2009; Transportøkonomisk Institutt: Oslo, Norway, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Nævestad, T.-O.; Phillips, R.O. The Relevance of Safety Culture as a Regulatory Concept and Management Strategy in Professional Transport.: Comparing the Experiences of Regulators and Companies from Four Sectors; TØI Rapport 1668/2018; Transportøkonomisk Institutt: Oslo, Norway, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Hudson, P. Applying the lessons of high risk industries to health care. BMJ Qual. Saf. 2003, 12, i7–i12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Patankar, M.S. Chapter 13—Maintenance Resource Management for Technical Operations. In Crew Resource Management, 3rd ed.; Kanki, B.G., Anca, J., Chidester, T.R., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 357–405. [Google Scholar]
- Antonsen, S. The relationship between culture and safety on offshore supply vessels. Saf. Sci. 2009, 47, 1118–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bye, R.J.; Aalberg, A.L. Why do they violate the procedures?—An exploratory study within the maritime transportation industry. Saf. Sci. 2020, 123, 104538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nævestad, T.-O.; Phillips, R.; Levlin, G.M.; Hovi, I.B. Internationalisation in Road Transport of Goods in Norway: Safety Outcomes, Risk Factors and Policy Implications. Safety 2017, 3, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Mooren, L.; Grzebieta, R.; Williamson, A.; Olivier, J.; Friswell, R. Safety management for heavy vehicle transport: A review of the literature. Saf. Sci. 2014, 62, 79–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reason, J. Managing the Risk of Organisational Accidents; Ashgate: Aldershot, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- RTA. Norwegian Road Traffic Act. Available online: https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/1965-06-18-4 (accessed on 14 February 2021).
- WEA. Norwegian Working Environment Act. Available online: https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2005-06-17-62 (accessed on 14 March 2021).
- Gregersen, N.P.; Brehmer, B.; Morén, B. Road safety improvement in large companies. An experimental comparison of different measures Accident Analysis. Prevention 1996, 28, 297–306. [Google Scholar]
- Nævestad, T.-O.; Phillips, R.O.; Hovi, I.B.; Elvik, G.N.J. Miniscenario: Sikkerhetsstigen. In Innføre tiltak for Sikkerhetsstyring i Godstransportbedrifter. TØI Rapport 1620/2018; Transportøkonomisk Institutt: Oslo, Norway, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Nævestad, T.O.; Phillips, R.O.; Elvebakk, B. The safety ladder: Developing an evidence-based safety management strategy for small road transport companies. Transp. Rev. 2018, 38, 372–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elvebakk, B.; Nævestad, T.-O.; Ranestad, K. Work-Related Accidents in Norwegian Road, Sea and Air Transport. Roles and Responsibilities; TØI Report 1567/2017; TØI: Oslo, Norway, 2017. [Google Scholar]
|Sector||Directorate||Inspectorate||Investigation Board||Transport Company||Other||Total|
|Variable||Mod. 1||Mod. 2||Mod. 3|
|Type of org. (Company = 0, Other = 1)||−1.147 ***||−1.419 ***||−1.616 ***|
|Sector (Maritime = 0, Road = 1,)||2.044 ***||1.791 ***|
|Scope of safety regulations||−0.267 **|
|Variable||Mod. 1||Mod. 2||Mod. 3||Mod. 4||Mod. 5||Mod. 6||Mod. 7|
|Type of org. (Oth. = 1, Company = 2)||0.170 *||0.171 *||0.076||0.163||0.141||0.145||0.138|
|Sector (Road = 1, Maritime = 2)||0.239 **||0.189 **||0.106||0.040||0.036||0.050|
|Companies report all incidents||0.246 **||0.187 *||0.143||0.141||0.126|
|Responsibility is clearly defined (Yes = 1, No/don’t know = 2)||−0.232 **||−0.166||−0.171||−0.152|
|Scope of safety regulations||0.307 ***||0.300 ***||0.289 ***|
|Heavy competition between comp.||−0.026||−0.029|
|Safety more important than price||0.083|
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nævestad, T.-O.; Elvebakk, B.; Ranestad, K. Work-Related Accident Prevention in Norwegian Road and Maritime Transport: Examining the Influence of Different Sector Rules. Infrastructures 2021, 6, 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6050072
Nævestad T-O, Elvebakk B, Ranestad K. Work-Related Accident Prevention in Norwegian Road and Maritime Transport: Examining the Influence of Different Sector Rules. Infrastructures. 2021; 6(5):72. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6050072Chicago/Turabian Style
Nævestad, Tor-Olav, Beate Elvebakk, and Karen Ranestad. 2021. "Work-Related Accident Prevention in Norwegian Road and Maritime Transport: Examining the Influence of Different Sector Rules" Infrastructures 6, no. 5: 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6050072