A NEW report by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work shows that while EU member-states stress the importance of "ethical considerations" in the formulation of occupational and safety policy, they are becoming increasingly aware of the need to determine the cost and benefits of measures taken.
The report found that "the way economic assessment influences decision-making varies from one member-state to another" but cost-benefit analyses (CBA) tended to "influence the solutions adopted", although several member-states stressed that CBA were "not the major factor in decision-making".
In seeking to assess the economic impact of occupational safety and health policy, the report notes that in most member-states, "no efficiency assessment instruments for the occupational safety and health system are available".
Avoided costs of illness is often used in estimating costs, while the reduction of healthcare costs and the costs of rehabilitation are estimated to a lesser extent, says the report.
In most member-states, statistics on the number of working days lost and the number of occupational injury-related disability pensions are published. Although these statistics are unlikely to identify all work-related injury costs, "they are often used as a basis for estimating the costs of work-related illness as a percentage of Gross National Product".
Member-states which do estimate the cost of work-related illness as a percentage of Gross National Product report percentages ranging from 2.6 to 3.8 but due to differences in calculation methods "comparisons and bench marking between member-states is not possible at this moment".
Financial incentives such as subsidies, financial penalties, administrative fines and incentives in social insurance schemes can encourage businesses to take action to prevent workplace accidents and ill health, says the report. It found that "little use is made so far of tax-based measures" but positive incentives exist in the member-states to encourage "the development, sale or purchase of safe and healthy products, production methods [and] work organisation". However, the effects of financial incentives "are evaluated in only a few" member-states.
The report found that financial penalties imposed by courts and administrative fines charged by inspectorates were another incentive to encourage businesses to adopt occupational safety and health measures. .
Some member-states indicated that financial sanctions were too low to act as deterrents and steps were in train to increase financial penalties. There was also "an increasing interest in the imposition of administrative fines by administrations themselves instead of, or in addition to, bringing offences to court".
The report found that insurance schemes could play an important role in promoting better occupational safety and health "as they have a direct interest in bringing down the number of occupational diseases and accidents".
It identified a new approach to promoting occupational safety and health whereby public organisations selected contractors or suppliers based on their performance in occupational safety and health. For instance, a public enterprise could be prohibited from awarding contracts to companies found guilty of safety and health violations. "Public organisations may even ask for OSH (occupational safety and health) standards that go beyond the minimum levels set by regulations or demand that specific initiatives are undertaken that support the practical implementation of safety and health at the workplace (for example training programmes or campaigns)."
Asked to what extent results of cost-benefit analyses affect the final decision to introduce legislation or other initiatives, the EU Agency reports that in the Republic cost-benefit analysis is not formally part of the decision-making process "although the economic impact of measures does influence policy formulation to some extent".
The complete replies from the EU member-states to the survey can be found on the European Agency's website (http://www.eu-osha.es).
