澳大利亚监管心理社会风险的工作健康和安全政策:主要信息提供者的观点

R. Potter, Valerie O’Keeffe, S. Leka, M. Dollard
{"title":"澳大利亚监管心理社会风险的工作健康和安全政策:主要信息提供者的观点","authors":"R. Potter, Valerie O’Keeffe, S. Leka, M. Dollard","doi":"10.1080/14773996.2019.1590765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The regulation of psychosocial hazards and risks, for the protection of psychological health, is a highly debated issue within work health and safety (WHS). Increasing work-related psychological illness and injury, alongside growing academic evidence and community awareness, has fuelled the need to better prevent and regulate psychosocial hazards and risks. Research must clarify challenges and improvements to policy and practice from stakeholder perspectives. We conduct a qualitative interview-based investigation with 25 informed participants on the effectiveness of Australian WHS policies for psychosocial risk regulation. Participants are active in diverse roles including policy development, program implementation, industry advice, and psychosocial risk inspection. Inductive analysis revealed divergent viewpoints that are categorized into three broad themes: (1) scant specificity in the current regulatory WHS policy framework, (2) compliance complexities and (3) the role of regulators in action. Tension points also emerged between these themes and subthemes, including: (a) how psychosocial risks should be addressed in legislation, (b) how to establish compliance, and (c) the role of the regulator in evaluating compliance, and facilitating education and better practice. Future research must continue to disseminate knowledge from WHS informants to guide better practice. Also, researchers should investigate organizational barriers that hinder WHS psychosocial risk regulation.","PeriodicalId":43946,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2019.1590765","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Australian work health and safety policy for the regulation of psychosocial risks: perspectives from key informants\",\"authors\":\"R. Potter, Valerie O’Keeffe, S. Leka, M. Dollard\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14773996.2019.1590765\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The regulation of psychosocial hazards and risks, for the protection of psychological health, is a highly debated issue within work health and safety (WHS). Increasing work-related psychological illness and injury, alongside growing academic evidence and community awareness, has fuelled the need to better prevent and regulate psychosocial hazards and risks. Research must clarify challenges and improvements to policy and practice from stakeholder perspectives. We conduct a qualitative interview-based investigation with 25 informed participants on the effectiveness of Australian WHS policies for psychosocial risk regulation. Participants are active in diverse roles including policy development, program implementation, industry advice, and psychosocial risk inspection. Inductive analysis revealed divergent viewpoints that are categorized into three broad themes: (1) scant specificity in the current regulatory WHS policy framework, (2) compliance complexities and (3) the role of regulators in action. Tension points also emerged between these themes and subthemes, including: (a) how psychosocial risks should be addressed in legislation, (b) how to establish compliance, and (c) the role of the regulator in evaluating compliance, and facilitating education and better practice. Future research must continue to disseminate knowledge from WHS informants to guide better practice. Also, researchers should investigate organizational barriers that hinder WHS psychosocial risk regulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43946,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14773996.2019.1590765\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2019.1590765\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Practice in Health and Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2019.1590765","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

摘要为了保护心理健康,对心理社会危害和风险的监管是工作健康与安全(WHS)中一个备受争议的问题。与工作相关的心理疾病和伤害的增加,加上学术证据和社区意识的提高,推动了更好地预防和管理心理社会危害和风险的必要性。研究必须从利益相关者的角度阐明政策和实践面临的挑战和改进。我们对25名知情参与者进行了一项基于定性访谈的调查,了解澳大利亚WHS政策对心理社会风险监管的有效性。参与者积极参与各种角色,包括政策制定、项目实施、行业咨询和心理社会风险检查。归纳分析揭示了不同的观点,可分为三大主题:(1)当前监管WHS政策框架缺乏专门性,(2)合规复杂性和(3)监管机构在行动中的作用。这些主题和次主题之间也出现了紧张点,包括:(a)应如何在立法中解决心理社会风险,(b)如何建立合规性,以及(c)监管机构在评估合规性、促进教育和更好实践方面的作用。未来的研究必须继续传播世界卫生组织线人的知识,以指导更好的实践。此外,研究人员应该调查阻碍WHS心理社会风险调节的组织障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Australian work health and safety policy for the regulation of psychosocial risks: perspectives from key informants
Abstract The regulation of psychosocial hazards and risks, for the protection of psychological health, is a highly debated issue within work health and safety (WHS). Increasing work-related psychological illness and injury, alongside growing academic evidence and community awareness, has fuelled the need to better prevent and regulate psychosocial hazards and risks. Research must clarify challenges and improvements to policy and practice from stakeholder perspectives. We conduct a qualitative interview-based investigation with 25 informed participants on the effectiveness of Australian WHS policies for psychosocial risk regulation. Participants are active in diverse roles including policy development, program implementation, industry advice, and psychosocial risk inspection. Inductive analysis revealed divergent viewpoints that are categorized into three broad themes: (1) scant specificity in the current regulatory WHS policy framework, (2) compliance complexities and (3) the role of regulators in action. Tension points also emerged between these themes and subthemes, including: (a) how psychosocial risks should be addressed in legislation, (b) how to establish compliance, and (c) the role of the regulator in evaluating compliance, and facilitating education and better practice. Future research must continue to disseminate knowledge from WHS informants to guide better practice. Also, researchers should investigate organizational barriers that hinder WHS psychosocial risk regulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Policy and Practice in Health and Safety
Policy and Practice in Health and Safety PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Safety risk factors in two different types of routine outsourced work: a systematic literature review Multimodal virtual environments: an opportunity to improve fire safety training? Road traffic collisions leading to human casualties in Riyadh: a retrospective study Addressing essential skills gaps among participants in an OHS training program: a pilot study Farewell from the editor
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1