Εμφάνιση απλής εγγραφής

dc.creatorMorris N.B., Levi M., Morabito M., Messeri A., Ioannou L.G., Flouris A.D., Samoutis G., Pogačar T., Bogataj L.K., Piil J.F., Nybo L.en
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-31T09:01:19Z
dc.date.available2023-01-31T09:01:19Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier10.1080/23328940.2020.1852049
dc.identifier.issn23328940
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11615/76747
dc.description.abstractSuccessful implementation of cooling strategies obviously depends on identifying effective interventions, but in industrial settings, it is equally important to consider feasibility and economic viability. Many cooling interventions are available, but the decision processes affecting adoption by end-users are not well elucidated. We therefore arranged two series of meetings with stakeholders to identify knowledge gaps, receive feedback on proposed cooling interventions, and discuss factors affecting implementation of heat-health interventions. This included four meetings attended by employers, employees, and health and safety officers (n = 41), and three meetings attended primarily by policy makers (n = 74), with feedback obtained via qualitative and quantitative questionnaires and focus group discussions. On a 10-point scale, both employers and employees valued worker safety (9.1 ± 1.8; mean±SD) and health (8.5 ± 1.9) as more important than protecting company profits (6.3 ± 2.3). Of the respondents, 41% were unaware of any cooling strategies at their company and of those who were aware, only 30% thought the interventions were effective. Following presentation of proposed interventions, the respondents rated “facilitated hydration”, “optimization of clothing/protective equipment”, and “rescheduling of work tasks” as the top-three preferred solutions. The main barriers for adopting cooling interventions were cost, feasibility, employer perceptions, and legislation. In conclusion, preventing negative health and safety effects was deemed to be more important than preventing productivity loss. Regardless of work sector or occupation, both health and wealth were emphasized as important parameters and considered as somewhat interrelated. However, a large fraction of the European worker force lacks information on effective measures to mitigate occupational heat stress. List of abbreviations: OH-Stress: Occupational heat stress; WBGT: Wet Bulb Globe Temperature. © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.sourceTemperatureen
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85097560012&doi=10.1080%2f23328940.2020.1852049&partnerID=40&md5=1447a0e1654aa4bb21f226cb37e03b5f
dc.subjectArticleen
dc.subjectclimate changeen
dc.subjectdecision makingen
dc.subjectemployeren
dc.subjectfatigueen
dc.subjectfeasibility studyen
dc.subjectheat stressen
dc.subjecthydrationen
dc.subjectinformation disseminationen
dc.subjectnanotechnologyen
dc.subjectoccupational medicineen
dc.subjectphysiological stressen
dc.subjectqualitative researchen
dc.subjectquestionnaireen
dc.subjectradiation exposureen
dc.subjectsolar radiationen
dc.subjecttask performanceen
dc.subjecttrainingen
dc.subjectRoutledgeen
dc.titleHealth vs. wealth: Employer, employee and policy-maker perspectives on occupational heat stress across multiple European industriesen
dc.typejournalArticleen


Αρχεία σε αυτό το τεκμήριο

ΑρχείαΜέγεθοςΤύποςΠροβολή

Δεν υπάρχουν αρχεία που να σχετίζονται με αυτό το τεκμήριο.

Αυτό το τεκμήριο εμφανίζεται στις ακόλουθες συλλογές

Εμφάνιση απλής εγγραφής