Micro–level of theoretical framework

The Micro-level for the purpose of this study is defined as the farm as a workplace which is controlled by a farmer’s actions. Research in Ireland by Phelan et al., (2007) indicated a dynamic and reciprocal relationship related to OSH adoption occurred between farmers and their interaction with both the farm workplace environment and farm technology deployed. Put simply the farm reflects the farmer.

Accident causation theory reviewed in Chapter 2, (Section 2.2.) while indicating that multiple causes occur including physical ones involving technology and workplace

127

environmental ones and human factors, however it strongly indicates that human factors are strongly linked to accident causation (Cooper and Germain,1974;Dunne,2000; Reason 2000; 2003; Taylor et al.,2004; Wigglesworth, 1972).

Thus at the centre of the model at the micro-level are farmer’s characteristics related to adoption. These have been strongly indentified in the literature as the prime personal internal drivers of implementation of OSH change. These characteristics include: having an accurately informed risk perception (Hale and Glendon, 1987; Rich,1999; Sjőberg 2000; Slovic,1987; Stave et al., 2005; Wilde,1994), propensity to take risks (Adams ,1995;Hedlund,2000), adequate knowledge (Röling, 1988; Schrader and Lawless, 2004; Valente et al.,1998; Van den Ban and Hawkins, 1996), possessing the behavioural determinants attitude and behaviour to motivate OSH adoption (Aherin et al., 1993;Ajzen and Fishbein, 1977; Ajzen, 1991; Geller, 2002; Green, 1999; Lee at al.,1997; Petrea 1996) and managerial capacity to implement adoption (Suutarinen,1992,1997,2004). These internal drivers for OSH change have thus been strongly identified in the literature as superior to external ones, especially in the context of occupations where self-management occurs, such as farming, which involves voluntariness of action (Sandman et al., 1987). However, adopting the external approach of focusing on gaining behaviour change in the first instance has also shown merit (Geller, 2002). Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1977) indicates that people’s behaviour can be influenced by their environment, particularly their interaction with other people and organisations.

Regarding knowledge gain, the work by Valente et al., (1998) strongly indicates that this can lead to attitude change and then to practice adoption with the so called KAP approach. Valente et al., (1998) regarded this approach as the most advantageous approach to gain technology/ practice adoption in comparison to other sequences of the KAP. Further more recent research by Ghosh et al., (2004) and Land and Water Australia (2006) provided support for this proposition. Thus adequate knowledge gain requires prioritisation in programmes to lead to OSH adoption. This, for instance, could lead to altered perception of risk and its acceptance. It also has that potential to highlight

in the farmers mind the key issues causing accidents and ill health as mis-perception of actual risks has been highlighted in the literature as a key human shortcoming as regards accident causation (Knowles, 2002; Slovic, 1987).

Colémont and Van den Broucke (2006), however, pointed to the disappointing results of initiatives to improve agricultural OSH based on just increasing knowledge and suggested that greater use be made of the influencers of the determinants of behaviour. This suggests that strategies to facilitate OSH change should combine knowledge gain approaches with ones having the potential to cause attitude change which in turn leads to ‘behavioural intention’ and then to ‘action taking’ as outlined in the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1977).

Thus it is hypothesized that gaining beneficial change in OSH is likely to occur by following the KAP approach used in conjunction with strategies which positively motivate behaviour change. . However, various theories and frameworks including the Stages of Change framework (Prochaska and Di Clemente, 1983) and the TPB (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1977), along with research on the ‘knowledge-gap’ (Tichenor et al., 1970) and a KAP-gap (Westoff, 1988) indicated that uniform uptake of change may not occur with the KAP and consequently variability within a population can occur. It has been shown that action taking is likely to vary among individuals due to such factors as personality (Caspi et al., 2005) and managerial capacity (Nuthall, 2006). The latter capacity which is an alterable characteristic over time while the former can occur more slowly, suggesting that within a population uptake is likely to vary but that sustained programmes may lead to progress across the population over-time.

Developing the adoption characteristics of farmers is a pre-requisite to change at farm level as regards OSH. Theory reviewed indicates that change can be motivated by influential persons or organisations. These include the ‘social norm’ dimension of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1977) and the Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1977) which strongly indicated that people’s behaviour can be influenced by their environment, particularly their interaction with other people and

129

organisations or both (chapter 3). In the context of this study the adoption sought is specified in the RAD, whose design draws inspiration from reports of use of farm audit documents in the USA and Denmark (Chapman et al., 1996; Landsittel et al., 2001; Rasmussen et al., 2003; Wilkinson et al., 1994) which have been associated with positive OSH adoption.

The training approach used in this study in conjunction with RAD completion is designed to facilitate individual farmers to reflect on their own farms and work practices. This approach is in harmony with the Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb, 1984) which proposed that the learning cycle incorporates concrete experience, observations and reflections, then forming conceptualisations and testing these in new situations. Rogers (2002) further added to this theory that decision-making is needed to progress and learn, suggesting that knowledge uptake must be followed by adoption. Literature reviewed related to farmer management styles indicated a reliance mainly on straightforward experiential approaches which feed-forward into future change and learning (Malcolm, 1990; Öhlmér et al., 1998). Improving managerial capacity has been identified as important to reduce accident rates (Suutarinen, 1992, 1997, 2004). Thus the approach of farmer RAD completion in association with short training followed by implementation of the RAD requirements at individual farm level is supported generally by learning theory, as it draws on an individual farmer’s knowledge and experience. The short training approach used in the Danish West Jutland Study in association with an advisory audit reported a significant reduction in accident levels (Rasmussen et al., 2003) which also suggested potential for the training approach adopted in this Study. Further support for provision of training to improve OSH is provided by Stallones (1989) who found that ‘education’ could prevent 58% of machinery accidents and the work of McCallum et al., (2005) which indicated that attending training increases knowledge and alters behaviours related to machinery use. Hemsworth and Coleman (1998) found that farmer’s attitudes and behaviours towards animal handling could be altered through training, with potential positive benefits for MAR and farmer safety. Work by Grunningham (2002) supported ‘self-audit and assessment approaches’ delivered by trusted sources in a face-to-face fashion. Finnegan and Phelan (2003)

however reported limited implementation of control measures at farm level in Ireland. Rich (1999) considered that ‘the desire to undertake action to create a safe working environment and work practices’ which he termed ‘outrage’ is the missing stimulus in making progress with farm OSH. In essence, these studies describe the meso- level for the current study whereby a self-audit and training attendance was encouraged by policy as an alternative to being inspected in the pilot phase of the project.

Irish farming is extremely heterogeneous in both farmer and farm workplace and technology use variables (chapter 1). The efficacy of use of the RAD and training in relation to OSH adoption and accident levels could possibly vary with both farmer and farm variables. The literature review (Chapter 2, Section 2.5.4) indicated that farm accidents can be related to farmer variables most notably gender, age and health status. For farm variables, accident levels are most notably related to systems with livestock and number of machines on the farm.

In summary, the theoretical framework indicates that OSH change among farmers is related to farmer adoption characteristics located in the micro-environment. Such change is subject to variation within the farming population based on diversity of farms in Ireland and its study is desirable to gauge the effect of OSH interventions. Overall the micro-level of the theoretical framework represents the domain in which farmer practice adoption related to use of the Code of Practice RAD and training takes place and can be assessed.