Views
3 years ago

evaluation of the european strategy on safety and health at work ...

evaluation of the european strategy on safety and health at work ...

EVALUATION OF THE

EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY ON SAFETY AND HEALTH AT WORK 2007-201215Executive summaryThe Evaluation ong>ofong> ong>theong> European ong>strategyong> on Safety and Health at Work 2007-2012was commissioned by ong>theong> European Commission's Directorate General forEmployment, Social Affairs & Inclusion and carried out by COWI (fromDenmark), Milieu (from Belgium) and ong>theong> Institute ong>ofong> Occupational Medicine(IOM - from Great Britain).Purpose and scopeong>ofong> ong>theong> ong>evaluationong>The overall objective ong>ofong> ong>theong> ong>evaluationong> was to provide a sound and evidence-basedong>evaluationong> ong>ofong> ong>theong> 2007-2012 EU ong>strategyong> on safety and health at work and toprovide reasoned recommendations for ong>theong> development ong>ofong> future EU policyinstruments in this area (e.g. a new post-2012 ong>strategyong>).The ong>evaluationong> focused on assessing ong>theong> ong>strategyong>'s overall goal ong>ofong> an on-going,sustainable and uniform reduction in accidents at work and occupational illnessesas well as ong>theong> six underlying objectives ong>ofong> ong>theong> ong>strategyong>: 1) A modern and effectivelegislative framework, 2) Development and implementation ong>ofong> national strategies,3) promoting changes in behaviour, 4) Confronting new and increasing risks, 5)Assessment ong>ofong> progress made, and 6) International cooperation.Evaluation criteriaand questionsThe ong>evaluationong> assessed ong>theong>se according to seven main ong>evaluationong> criteria:› Relevance; focusing on ong>theong> extent to which ong>theong> objectives ong>ofong> ong>theong> ong>strategyong> werechosen adequately, and ong>theong> extent to which ong>theong>y are still relevant for futurepolicy instruments - and how ong>theong>y should be revised;› Effectiveness; i.e. assessment ong>ofong> outputs achieved and extent to which ong>theong>objectives have been addressed and ong>theong> main lessons learned;› Coherence; considering ong>theong> extent to which ong>theong> actions promoted by ong>theong>ong>strategyong> are coherent and correspond to a non-contradictory intervention logic;› Ownership; focusing on ong>theong> degree ong>ofong> acceptance ong>ofong> and involvement in ong>theong>ong>strategyong> by ong>theong> stakeholders, in particular ong>theong> social partners;› Impact; examining ong>theong> effects which were generated from ong>theong> actions taken byMember States and at ong>theong> EU level as a result ong>ofong> ong>theong> ong>strategyong>;› Consistency; focusing on ong>theong> extent to which ong>theong> different elements ong>ofong> ong>theong>ong>strategyong> have been included or actively promoted into employment/ publichealth/ education / environmental policies at ong>theong> EU and national levels;http://projects.cowiportal.com/ps/A019055/Documents/3 Project documents/Interim and final report/Final report October 2012/OSH ong>evaluationong>-report_Final_submitted 14 March2013.docx

16 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY ON SAFETY AND HEALTH AT WORK 2007-201216› Community added value; i.e. assessment ong>ofong> ong>theong> extent to which ong>theong> ong>strategyong>contributed to achieve broad policy goals, comparing EU action to actionconducted at national level.Data sourcesFor ong>theong> purpose ong>ofong> ong>theong> ong>evaluationong>, 130 interviews at Member State and EU levelhave been conducted. One internet-based survey has been carried out concerningnational trends on accidents and occupational illnesses.The desk review comprised a review ong>ofong> safety and health documentation at bothEU and Member State level. This included ong>theong> national strategies; EU regulationsand related documents and studies; EU strategies and policies and reviews ong>theong>reong>ofong>;ong>theong> Scoreboard 2009 outcomes; togeong>theong>r with documents from ong>theong> ACSH, ong>theong> EU-OSHA, ong>theong> SLIC and Eurong>ofong>ound.The current ong>strategyong>has been relevantand has generatedEuropean addedvalueMost actions havebeen implementedbut ong>theong>re areimportant gapsThe main conclusion in respect to ong>theong> relevance ong>ofong> ong>theong> current ong>strategyong> is that it hasbeen relevant and its merit has lied especially in providing a clear policy basis andframework for coordination, and a common sense ong>ofong> direction for many ong>ofong> ong>theong>actors involved in ong>theong> OSH policy area. The ong>strategyong> served as an important policysignal and driver for national action on OSH and also facilitated usefulcoordination in respect to public health initiatives. However, ong>theong>re remains roomfor improvement in ong>theong> integration and coordination between OSH and oong>theong>r policyareas and between ong>theong> various actors involved at ong>theong> EU level. In particular,coordination with environmental policy and ong>theong> important area ong>ofong> ong>theong> REACHregulation on chemicals and ong>theong>ir safe use has been inadequate. Also, ong>theong>articulation between ong>theong> ong>strategyong> implementation and ong>theong> European social dialoguehas been limited and European social partners have felt a limited degree ong>ofong>ownership towards ong>theong> ong>strategyong> and have mainly implemented those parts ong>ofong> ong>theong>ong>strategyong> which ong>theong>y would have implemented in any case.The ong>strategyong> focused on six objectives (or priority areas): Improvement and betterimplementation ong>ofong> OSH legislation, national OSH strategies, promotion ong>ofong> apreventive culture, confronting new and increasing risks, monitoring/assessment ong>ofong>progress made, and international cooperation.Objective 1: Legislation: Almost all planned actions have been implemented andong>theong> Commission, ong>theong> ACSH and SLIC have been active with drafting supportingguidance; ong>theong> exchange ong>ofong> best practices; and preparing ong>theong> development orrevision ong>ofong> legislation. However, ong>theong> guidance produced has not been sufficientlydisseminated and is not sufficiently targeted at SMEs. In addition, in terms ong>ofong> ong>theong>updating and simplification ong>ofong> ong>theong> regulatory framework, little substantive progresshas been made, and two outstanding gaps remain in relation to ong>theong> issues ong>ofong>subcontracting and preventive services.Objective 2: National strategies: Almost all Member States now have a nationalong>strategyong> or a similar instrument and this area has reached a stage ong>ofong> maturity.Member States are generally actively working in ong>theong> area and implementing ong>theong>irstrategies. However, implementation is progressing at a slow pace in somecountries and this indicates that future activities at ong>theong> EU level in this area shouldnot focus on establishment ong>ofong> strategies, but raong>theong>r ong>theong>ir implementation. Thepriorities emphasised in ong>theong> European ong>strategyong> are generally reflected in ong>theong>http://projects.cowiportal.com/ps/A019055/Documents/3 Project documents/Interim and final report/Final report October 2012/OSH ong>evaluationong>report_Final_submitted14 March 2013.docx

  • Page 1 and 2: MARCH 2013DG EMPLOYMENT, SOCIAL AFF
  • Page 3 and 4: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 5 and 6: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 7 and 8: 10 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 9 and 10: 12 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 11: 14 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 15 and 16: 18 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 17 and 18: 20 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 19 and 20: 22 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 21 and 22: 24 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 23 and 24: 26 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 25 and 26: 28 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 27 and 28: 30 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 29 and 30: 32 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 31 and 32: 34 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 33: 36 EVALUATION OF THE EUREVALUATION
  • Page 36 and 37: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 38 and 39: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 40 and 41: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 42 and 43: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 44 and 45: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 46 and 47: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 48 and 49: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 50 and 51: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 52 and 53: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 54 and 55: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 56 and 57: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 58 and 59: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 60 and 61: EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY
  • Page 62 and 63:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 64 and 65:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 66 and 67:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 68 and 69:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 70 and 71:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 72 and 73:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 74 and 75:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 76 and 77:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 78 and 79:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 80 and 81:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 82 and 83:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 84 and 85:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 86 and 87:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 88 and 89:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 90 and 91:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 92 and 93:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 94 and 95:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 96 and 97:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 98 and 99:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 100 and 101:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 102 and 103:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 104 and 105:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 106 and 107:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 108 and 109:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 110 and 111:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 112 and 113:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 114 and 115:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 116 and 117:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 118 and 119:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 120 and 121:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 122 and 123:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 124 and 125:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 126 and 127:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 128 and 129:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 130 and 131:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 132 and 133:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 134 and 135:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 136 and 137:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 138 and 139:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 140 and 141:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 142 and 143:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 144 and 145:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 146 and 147:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 148 and 149:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 150 and 151:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 152 and 153:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 154 and 155:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 156 and 157:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 158 and 159:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 160 and 161:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 162 and 163:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 164 and 165:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 166 and 167:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 168 and 169:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 170 and 171:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 172 and 173:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 174 and 175:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 176 and 177:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 178 and 179:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 180 and 181:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 182 and 183:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 184 and 185:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 186 and 187:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 188 and 189:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 190 and 191:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 192 and 193:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 194 and 195:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 196 and 197:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 198 and 199:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 200 and 201:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 202 and 203:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 204 and 205:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 206 and 207:

    2/8 Lige titelNo Question Answer Co

  • Page 208 and 209:

    4/8 Lige titel23. Does the<

  • Page 210 and 211:

    6/8 Lige titelNo Question Answer Co

  • Page 212 and 213:

    8/8 Lige titelNo Question Answer Co

  • Page 214 and 215:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 216 and 217:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 218 and 219:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 220 and 221:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 222 and 223:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 224 and 225:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 226 and 227:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 228 and 229:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

  • Page 230 and 231:

    EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN STRATEGY

Luxembourg - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work ...
Hungary - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
Cyprus - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
Latvia - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
Austria - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
France - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
Working on stress - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work ...
Campaign Guide - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work ...
Poland - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
National Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012 – 2022 - Safe Work ...
Lifting postures - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work ...
preventing - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
Austria - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
Lifting postures - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work ...
European Clinical Evaluation - Safety Syringes, Inc.
Improving occupational safety and health in SMEs - European ...
Workplace Health and Safety Strategy - Department of Labour
Its time for a European OSH strategy - European Trade Union ...
Task 3 - European Agency for Safety and Health at Work - Europa
working environment information - European Agency for Safety and ...
Safety and Health Tools - Safequarry.com
Independent evaluation of the ILO's strategy to promote decent work ...
Annual Report 2011 - European Agency for Safety and Health at ...
Promoting health and safety in European Small and Medium-sized ...
52 - Working on Safety 2010
Guide to the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work (General Application)
Guide to the Work Health and Safety (National ... - NT WorkSafe
OSH in figures: stress at work — facts and figures - European ...
The changing world of work The changing world of work - European ...
Regional health and safety presentation