Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
sions to child labor hazardous orders. But there has been little regulatory activity
in agriculture safety and health.”
Legislative actions have eliminated or repealed regulations that could signifi-
cantly reduce and prevent workplace injuries and illnesses in the workplace. The
committee finds that congressional interventions, such as its repeal of the ergonom-
ics standard adopted by OSHA (OMB Watch, 2001), appear to have been based
on controversial political considerations and to have ignored compelling scientific
assessments and evidence of probable adverse long-term safety and health effects
on the labor force. By ignoring the best scientific advice (NRC, 1998b, 1999; NRC
and IOM, 2001), such ill-advised maneuvers have resulted in missed opportunities
to reduce important occupational musculoskeletal risk factors. Despite the fact that
musculoskeletal injuries and illnesses are the leading cause of work limitations
(Liberty Mutual, 2006), it may take years to resurrect the ergonomics standard. To
further complicate matters, the repealed OSHA ergonomics standard had already
excluded agriculture.
Fourth, some scientists publish research findings but fail to follow through
with the same urgency to seek needed improvements that their research suggested.
Moreover, research scientists may lack the necessary communication skills to en-
gage affected communities effectively.
It is useful in this context to consider how private sector and state agency
partnerships can undertake activities that are not subject to federal constraints.
Private foundations, non-government organizations, industry trade groups, and
others can join state agencies in undertaking initiatives to address workplace safety
and health in the AFF sector, and there are numerous examples of the support of
research activities by the private sector.
PROGRAM EVALUATION INITIATIVES
NIOSH established an Operational Logic Model with the mission β€œTo provide
national and world leadership to prevent work-related illness and injuries.” As part
of this model, the goal of the AFF Program is prevention through effective research,
transfer, and evaluation. Evaluation has been defined as systematic investigation
of the merit, worth, or significance of the object (CDC, 1999b). This section of
the report comments on the AFF Program's evaluation initiatives as presented in
the evidence package (NIOSH, 2006a) and other evaluation activities discovered
during the program review.
Program evaluation is extremely important for determining whether NIOSH
activity has had a favorable impact on safety and health. To maximize the impact,
the evaluation needs to include an analysis of the quality of the research or pro-
gram. The evidence package includes a variety of evaluation activities. The research
Search WWH ::




Custom Search