The Meso-level contains variables which may influence OSH adoption indirectly through changes in the overall environment influencing farms. These may include: changes in the factors of production; technology changes related to OSH; farmer culture related to OSH adoption and programmes of OSH promotion and enforcement and promotion along with education and extension leading to human capital development. Meso-level variables can in turn be influenced by the macro-level where legislation and associated policies for both OSH and agricultural production are located. On-going
131
changes in the structure of Irish Agriculture and the overall approach to promotion of OSH in Irish Agriculture were outlined in Chapter 1 and a summary of meso-level variables of particular relevance to OSH are now provided.
Regarding the influence of factors of production on OSH standards, notably the international literature does not provide evidence for an association between accident levels and farm size (McCurdy and Carroll, 2000) or economic size (McCurdy et al., 2004; Sprince et al., 2003a; Lewis et al., 1998; Pickett et al., 1996). However, working full-time on farms (Sprince et al., 2002; McCurdy and Carroll, 2000; Lewis et al., 1998) and working long hours (Ferguson-Carlson et al., 2005; Sprince et al., 2002, 2003a) has been associated with increased accidents. In Ireland, McNamara and Reidy (1997) showed an association between accident rates with larger farm size and with specialist dairying and tillage farms. This research justifies including factor of production variables as meso–level variables of the Theoretical Framework.
Evidence of the impact of farm technology on OSH standards is provided as follows: use of tractor ROPS (Springfelt,1996; Thelin1998) and use of tractor seatbelts (Myers et al.,2006), improving visibility by design (Barron et al., 2005); improved design of machine power driveshaft covers (French Powershaft Guards Survey 2000-2001); specification of improved livestock handling facilities (Stroud and Walsh,1997); improved livestock breeding for docility (Boissy et al., 2005 ; Gauly et al., 2001; Golden et al., 2000; Boissy et al., 2005 Le Neindre et al., 1995) and technology for preventing falls from heights (Brunette, 2004).
Direct legislative enforcement is located in the meso-level of the Theoretical Framework. O’Sullivan and Kennedy, (1998) pointed out that having law is ineffective without its implementation including enforcement as necessary The literature indicates that legislation has most utility by facilitating ‘enforced self-regulation’ which requires synergy between ‘persuasion’ and ‘punishment’ to allow it to be successful (Ayres and Brathwaite, 1992; Gormley, 1978; Hutter, 1989; Reiss, 1984; Shover et al., 1986). Setting the balance between ‘persuasion’ and ‘punishment’ is a matter principally for the
regulator who liaises or negotiates with the regulated sector, which in this case is the farming community. Wilde (1994), however, considered that for OSH law is ineffective as a tool to motivate change of risk-taking behaviours. Rich (1999) considered that adoption of risk management is mainly dependent on farmer acceptance of the importance of safe work practices and to undertake self-regulated actions.
Regarding promotion of OSH among farmers in Ireland, programmes in this area have been described in Appendix 1. These have been conducted principally by state agencies most notably the H.S.A. and Teagasc with considerable support from farmer organisations. Regarding farm organisation and farmer engagement with OSH, the work of Bogue (2001) generally indicated that such a balanced approach as with ‘enforced self-regulation’, is likely to gain support from farmer leaders and farmers generally who negotiate to avoid policies and measures they consider as undesirable (e.g. Restrictive regulation and controls) and to gain measures they consider as desirable e.g. incentives. In contrast, alternative strategies such as ‘command and control’ type enforcement may lead to a counterproductive reaction to OSH regulation, as reported by Kelsey (1994) which led to suspension of OSH legislation for the majority of farmers in the USA. OSH promotion at a meso-level is indicated by the following studies. Conroy (1994) considered it is imperative to communicate clear and consistent messages to succeed with health promotion. Work by Sandall and Reeve (1997) indicated that perception of risk by farmers correlated directly with their willingness to take preventative action. Thus seeking intention to act through correctly informing farmers of OSH risk is a crucial dimension to OSH promotion.
The Meso-level also includes cultural change related to OSH Glendon and Staunton (2000) stated that safety culture refers to the underlying beliefs and convictions, including OSH, while climate is a more superficial term reflecting the current position. Thu (1999) warned that change cannot be imposed on any group and advised that understanding the cultural matrix of a group is paramount to achieve adoption. This author suggested that change can be facilitated culturally, but must be communicated and be behaviourally acceptable to the group. Work by Neal et al., (2000) within
133
organisations indicated that safety climate influences safety performance through their effects on knowledge and motivation. Among farmers in Ireland, a positive ‘climate’ towards safety was indicated by the findings of market research on the advertising described in Appendix 1 ( H.S.A., 2004b check ), which indicated that 76% of the sample were encouraged to take action following viewing of a T.V. advertisement. McNamara and Reidy (1997) and Knowles (2002) reported farmers as an occupation group are in the main positively disposed to OSH.
Regarding developing human capital at a meso-level, a study by Oh and Shin (2003) indicated that general education has a major role to play in reducing accident levels. Numerous studies (outlined in Chapter 2.5.4.1.) indicated that for fatal farm work- related accidents that age beginning between ages 50 and 60 years increases risk. Meso- level approaches to dealing with this issue include farmer retirement through state or voluntary schemes or by communication activities aimed at changing the culture related to work activities at advanced age.
Overall, it is evident that many variables as outlined in the Theoretical Framework at the meso-level have potential to influence farm OSH. Also the current study is being undertaken against a background of considerable meso –level activity in Ireland related to farm OSH which provides a positive context for the Study.