Safety

Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs) play a critical regulatory role within municipal health services, yet their occupational health and safety (OHS) risks remain poorly characterised in the literature. This narrative review synthesises evidence on the physical, biological, chemical, ergonomic, and psychosocial hazards encountered by EHPs during routine municipal inspection and enforcement activities. A structured literature search across major databases was conducted, and findings were synthesised using a risk characterisation framework to examine hazard types, exposure pathways, and associated health outcomes. The review demonstrates that EHPs are exposed to simultaneous and interacting hazards through multiple routes, including inhalation, dermal contact, ingestion, traumatic incidents, and psychosocial strain. Where available, quantitative indicators of exposure magnitude from inspection-relevant environments were identified, highlighting both potential risk severity and significant gaps in direct exposure measurement. Importantly, the findings indicate that occupational risks faced by EHPs are largely systemic, shaped by organisational constraints, resource limitations, enforcement contexts, and broader governance conditions rather than isolated individual behaviours. This review contributes to safety science by providing an integrated conceptual model of EHP occupational exposure pathways and by highlighting the need for system-level OHS interventions within municipal health services. Strengthening PPE provision, organisational support, and exposure monitoring is essential to improving EHPs safety and the effectiveness of environmental health regulation.

Safety science has developed extensive taxonomies for categorizing human performance failures but lacks equivalent vocabulary for describing successful work performance, leaving practitioners without adequate language to discuss adaptive practices that enable successful work under varying conditions. This study developed a worker-centered framework for categorizing procedural adaptations through empirical research at a petrochemical facility. The research employed three-phase convergent validation: Phase 1 captured behavioral data through video observation of 1422 procedural steps; Phase 2 documented differences between Work-As-Imagined and Work-As-Done using the Skip-Order-Action Framework with subject matter expert interpretation; Phase 3 evaluated emerging patterns through worker interviews. Analysis revealed that 32.9% of procedural steps showed adaptations, yet all tasks were completed successfully. Three distinct categories emerged from convergent evidence: routine adaptations represent normalized workplace practices; efficiency adaptations optimize workflow while maintaining safety standards; and safety adaptations exceed prescribed requirements through additional verification. The resulting Routine-Efficiency-Safety (RES) framework provides practical vocabulary for Safety-II implementation, enabling organizations to distinguish between different types of procedural adaptations and their functions, moving beyond binary compliance assessments toward learning-focused conversations about successful work practices.

Platform-mediated work (PMW) represents a highly unregulated and individualized segment of the labor market, with significant implications for psychosocial work environment and limited occupational health and safety (OHS) management efforts. The use of algorithmic management (AM) by digital platforms extensively directs and disciplines remote workers in PMW, and may exacerbate risks. This study employs the affordance concept initially introduced into safety science by Vicente and Rasmussen in 1992 and later applied in social media studies. Adopting a platform-sensitive approach, this study examines how digital mediation facilitates encounters between platform workers and customers across three types of PMW, and in turn affects harassment among platform workers. The analysis draws on 22 qualitative interviews with young platform workers supplemented by three workshops involving 13 stakeholder participants, informed by the Canadian Knowledge Transfer–Exchange approach. The findings identify three high-level affordances that significantly shape risks of harassment: (1) platforms’ ability to transcend physical space; (2) a digital blurring of private–professional boundaries; and (3) the amplification of asymmetric power relations among platform workers’ customers and platforms, relations that are gendered, classed, and racialized. The type and severity of harassment differ across the three types of platforms explored.