Tarımsal üretimde çalışan traktör operatörlerinin sağlık ve güvenlik işaretleri bilgi seviyeleri

Year 2023, Volume: 60 Issue: 4 - Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University Volume: 60 Issue: 4, 581 - 593, 05.01.2024

Ümit Alkan , Celal Güngör

https://doi.org/10.20289/zfdergi.1349654

Abstract

Amaç: Sağlık ve güvenlik işaretleri, potansiyel tehlikeler, güvenli uygulamalar, acil durum prosedürleri ve yasal talimatlar konusunda iletişim kurmada kritik role sahiptirler. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye tarım sektöründeki traktör operatörlerinin işaretleri anlama seviyelerini araştırmaktır. Araştırma, operatörlerin iş sağlığı ve güvenliği işaretleri, trafik işaretleri ve traktör güvenlik işaretleri hakkındaki bilgi düzeyini belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır.
Materyal ve Yöntem: İzmir’in iki ilçesinden (Menemen ve Foça) toplam 118 traktör operatörü anket ile incelenmiştir. Anket, demografik bilgiler, iş sağlığı ve güvenliği işaretleri (ISO 7010), trafik işaretleri (Karayolu Trafik İşaretleri Standartları) ve traktör güvenlik işaretlerini (ISO 11684) içermektedir. Verilerin analizi için tanımlayıcı ve çıkarımsal istatistikler kullanılmıştır.
Araştırma Bulguları: Ortalama doğru cevaplanma oranı on dört iş sağlığı ve güvenliği işareti için %37.2, yedi trafik işareti için %34.9 ve on traktör güvenlik işareti için %28.0 olarak bulunmuştur. Tüm işaretler için ortalama doğru cevaplanma oranı %33.7 olarak hesaplanmıştır.
Sonuç: Bu çalışma, traktör operatörlerinin sağlık ve güvenlik işaretlerini tanıma seviyesinin düşük olduğunu göstermektedir. İşaretleri tanıma seviyesini artırmak için eğitim verilmesini de içeren yönetimsel ve mühendislik kontrol önlemleri dikkate alınmalıdır. Ayrıca, anlaması zor olan işaretlerin amaçlanan mesajları etkili bir şekilde iletebilmesi için tasarımlarının tekrar gözden geçirilmesi gerekmektedir.

Keywords

İşaretler, iş sağlığı ve güvenliği, tarım, traktör operatörü

Health and safety sign knowledge levels of tractor operators in agricultural production

Abstract

Objective: Health and safety signs are critical in communicating messages about potential hazards, safe practices, emergency procedures, and regulatory guidelines. The objective of this study was to investigate the understanding of safety sign comprehension among tractor operators in Türkiye's agricultural sector. It seeks to determine operators' knowledge of occupational safety and health signs, traffic signs, and tractor safety signs.
Materials and Methods: A total of 118 tractor operators from Izmir’s two districts (Menemen and Foça) were surveyed using a questionnaire. The questionnaire included demographic information, occupational safety and health signs (ISO 7010), traffic signs (Turkish Standards for Road Traffic Signage) and tractor safety signs (ISO 11684). Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data.
Results: The mean comprehension score was 37.2% for fourteen occupational safety and health signs, 34.9% for seven traffic signs, and 28.0% for ten tractor safety signs. The mean comprehension score for all signs was 33.7%
Conclusion: This study shows that tractor operators poorly understand these signs. Engineering and administrative control measures, including training, should be considered to improve sign comprehension. In addition, the poorly understood signs should be revised to effectively convey the intended messages.

Keywords

Signs, occupational safety and health, agriculture, tractor operators

References

• Akkaya, G., 2007. Avrupa Birliği ve Türk Mevzuatı Açısından Sağlık Kuruluşlarında İş Sağlığı, İş Güvenliği, Meslek Hastalıkları ve Bir Araştırma. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul Üniversitesi, (Unpublished) PhD Thesis, İstanbul, Türkiye, 171 pp.
• Alara, S.A., I.I. Inuwa & N. Gambo, 2019. “Application of semiotics for health and safety signs comprehension on construction sites in Yola metropolis, Nigeria, 1-8”. 7th International Conference on Euro Asia Civil Engineering Forum (30 September - 2 October 2019, Stuttgart, Germany), IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 615 (1), 012028.
• Anger, W.K., J. Stupfel, T. Ammerman, A. Tamulinas, T. Bodner & D.S. Rohlman, 2006. The suitability of computer-based training for workers with limited formal education: A case study from the US agricultural sector. International Journal of Training and Development, 10 (4): 269-284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2006.00260.x
• ANSI Z535.3., 2022. Criteria for Safety Symbols. American National Standard Institute. Arphorn, S., N. Augsornpeug, S. Srisorrachatr & V. Pruktharathikul, 2003. Comprehension of safety signs for construction workers: Comparison of existing and newly designed signs. Journal of Human Ergology, 32 (2): 87-94.
• Baesso, M.M., G.A. Martins, R.C.E. Baesso, C. Fischer & J.C. Silvestrini, 2014. Noise and Vibration of Tractors: An Ergonomic Evaluation. International Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 4 (4): 46-54.
• Bagagiolo, G., F. Caffaro, L. Vigoroso, A. Giustetto, E. Cavallo & M.M. Cremasco, 2018. “Interpretability of Surround Shapes Around Safety Symbols: Cross-Cultural Differences Among Migrant Farmworkers, 1663-1672”. In: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (Eds. S. Bagnara, R. Tartaglia, S. Albolino, T. Alexander & Y. Fujita. Springer, Cham, 2365 pp.
• Bagagiolo, G., L. Vigoroso, F. Caffaro, M. Micheletti Cremasco & E. Cavallo, 2019. Conveying safety messages on agricultural machinery: The comprehension of safety pictorials in a group of migrant farmworkers in Italy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16 (21): 4180: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214180
• Belmont Report, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1987. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. 692 pp.
• Blake Huer, M., 2000. Examining perceptions of graphic symbols across cultures: Preliminary study of the impact of culture/ethnicity. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16 (3): 180-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610012331279034
• Brelsford, J.W., M.S. Wogalter & J.A. Scoggins, 1994. Enhancing comprehension and retention of safety-related pictorials. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 38 (14): 836-840. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193129403801408
• Caffaro, F., A. Mirisola & E. Cavallo, 2017. Safety signs on agricultural machinery: Pictorials do not always successfully convey their messages to target users. Applied Ergonomics, 58 (January 2017): 156-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.06.003
• Caffaro, F., S. Schmidt, D.J. Murphy & E. Cavallo, 2018. Comprehension rates of safety pictorials affixed to agricultural machinery among Pennsylvania rural population. Safety Science, 103 (March 2018): 162-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.11.021
• Cavalcanti, J. & M. Soares, 2012. Ergonomic analysis of safety signs: A focus of informational and cultural ergonomics. Work, 41 (Suppl 1): 3427-3432. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-2012-0619-3427
• Chan, A.H.S., S.H. Han, A.W.Y. Ng & W. Park, 2009. Hong Kong Chinese and Korean comprehension of American security safety symbols. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39 (5): 835-850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2009.02.009
• Chan, A.H.S. & A.W.Y. Ng, 2010a. Investigation of guessability of industrial safety signs: Effects of prospective-user factors and cognitive sign features. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40 (6): 689-697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.05.002
• Chan, A.H.S. & A.W.Y. Ng, 2010b. Effects of sign characteristics and training methods on safety sign training effectiveness. Ergonomics, 53 (11): 1325-1346. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2010.524251
• Davoudian Talab, A. & G.R. Azari, 2017. Safety signs perception and adoption with the ISO and ANSI standards. Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences, 9 (4): e12911: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5812/jjhs.12911
• Davoudian Talab, A., M. Meshkani, C. Mofidi & M. Mollakazemiha, 2013. Evaluation of the perception of workplace safety signs and effective factors. International Journal of Occupational Hygiene, 5 (3): 117-122.
• Declaration of Helsinki, The World Medical Association (WMA), 1964. Declaration of Helsinki-Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects (The 18. WMA General Assembly). Helsinki, Finland. 6 pp.
• Easterby, R. S. & S.R. Hakiel, 1981. Field testing of consumer safety signs: The comprehension of pictorially presented messages. Applied Ergonomics, 12 (3): 143-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870 (81)90003-X
• Eldeş, Z., 2022. İş Sağlığı ve Güvenliği Açısından Mevsimlik Tarım İşçilerinde Görülen İş Kazaları ve Meslek Hastalıkları. Lisasnsüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Tarsus Üniversitesi, (Unpublished) Master Thesis, Mersin, Türkiye, 72 pp.
• Gölbaşı, M., 2002. Tarım Alet-Makine ve Traktörlerin Kullanımından Kaynaklanan İş Kazaları Nedenlerinin ve Tahmini Kaza Maliyetleri İndeksinin Belirlenmesi. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara Üniversitesi, (Unpublished) PhD Thesis, Ankara, Türkiye, 235 pp.
• Görücü Keskin, S., M. Keskin & Y. Sosyal, 2012. Assessing farm tractor incidents and awareness levels of operators for tractor safety issues in the Hatay province of Turkey. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 18 (2): 113-128.
• Güngör, C., 2023. Safety sign comprehension of fiberboard industry employees. Heliyon, 9 (6): e16744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16744
• Güven, R., 2012. İş sağlığı ve güvenlik kanun tasarısı ve tarım çalışanları. Gıda Tarım ve Hayvancılık Bakanlığı Türk Tarım Dergisi, 2012 (205): 66-67.
• Hancock, H.E., W.A. Rogers, D. Schroeder & A.D. Fisk, 2004. Safety symbol comprehension: Effects of symbol type, familiarity, and age. Human Factors, 46 (2): 183-195. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.2.183.37344
• ILO, 2023. Agriculture: A hazardous work. (Website: https://www.ilo.org/safework/areasofwork/hazardous-work/WCMS_110188/lang--en/index.htm) (Accessed: July 2023).
• ISO 3864-1., 2011. Graphical Symbols-Safety Colours and Safety Signs-Part 1: Design Principles for Safety Signs and Safety Markings. ISO (the International Organization for Standardization).
• ISO 3864-3., 2012. Graphical Symbols-Safety Colours and Safety Signs-Part 3: Design Principles for Graphical Symbols for Use in Safety Signs. ISO (the International Organization for Standardization).
• ISO 7010., 2019. Graphical Symbols-Safety Colours and Safety Signs-Registered Safety Signs. ISO (the International Organization for Standardization).
• ISO 11684., 2023. Tractors, Machinery for Agriculture and Forestry, Powered Lawn and Garden Equipment-Safety Labels-General Principles. ISO (the International Organization for Standardization).
• KGM, 2020. Karayolu Trafik İşaretleri Standartları 1. Karayolları Genel Müdürlüğü.
• Karimi, K. & A. Faghri, 2021. Farm vehicle crashes on U.S. public roads: A review paper. Open Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 11 (2): 34-54. https://doi: 10.4236/ojsst.2021.112004.
• Kayhan, İ.E., M.F. Baran & Y.B. Öztekin, 2019. Tarım makinalarının kullanımında meydana gelen iş kazalarının tespiti ve değerlendirilmesi (Kırklareli ili örneği). Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, 15 (1): 19-34.
• Keskin, M., Y.E. Şekerli & A. Arslan, 2016. Analysis of on-road farm tractor accidents in Hatay province of Turkey from 2000 to 2015. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Uludag University, 30 (Special Issue): 325-333.
• Lesch, M.F., 2003. Comprehension and memory for warning symbols: Age-related differences and impact of training. Journal of Safety Research, 34 (5): 495-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2003.05.003
• Lesch, M.F., W.J. Horrey, M.S. Wogalter & W.R. Powell, 2011. Age-related differences in warning symbol comprehension and training effectiveness: Effects of familiarity, complexity, and comprehensibility. Ergonomics, 54 (10): 879-890. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2011.606924
• Lesch, M.F., P-L.P. Rau, Z. Zhao & C. Liu, 2009. A cross-cultural comparison of perceived hazard in response to warning components and configurations: US vs. China. Applied Ergonomics, 40 (5): 953-961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.02.004
• Liu, L., U. Hölscher & T. Gruchmann, 2005. “Symbol comprehension in different countries: Experience gained from medical device area, 81-87”. Workshop-Proceedings der 5. Fachübergreifenden Konferenz (4-7 September 2005, Linz, Austria). Oesterreichische Computer Gesellschaft.
• Liu, Y.-C. & C.-H. Ho, 2012. The effects of age on symbol comprehension in central rail hubs in Taiwan. Applied Ergonomics, 43 (6): 1016-1025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2012.02.004
• Ng, A.W.Y., H.W.C. Lo & A.H.S. Chan, 2011. “Measuring the usability of safety signs: A use of system usability scale (SUS), 1296-1301”. International Multi Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2011 (16-18 March 2011, Kowloon, Hong Kong). International Association of Engineers, 1580 pp.
• Nuremberg Code, 1949. Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law (No. 10, Vol. 2; pp. 181-182). U.S. Government Printing Office.
• Öz, E., 2005. Ege Bölgesi’nde meydana gelen traktör kazalarının tarımsal iş güvenliği açısından değerlendirilmesi. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 42 (2): 191-202.
• Pate, M.L., R.G. Lawver, S.W. Smalley, D.K. Perry, L. Stallones & A. Shultz, 2019. Agricultural safety education: Formative assessment of a curriculum integration strategy. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health, 25 (2): 63-76. https://doi.org/10.13031/jash.13113
• Pessina, D. & D. Facchinetti, 2017. A survey on fatal accidents for overturning of agricultural tractors in Italy. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 58: 79-84. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1758014
• Piamonte, D.P., J. Abeysekera & K. Ohlsson, 2001. Understanding small graphical symbols: A cross-cultural study. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 27 (6): 399-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-8141 (01)00007-5
• Reynolds, S.J. & W. Groves, 2000. Effectiveness of roll-over protective structures in reducing farm tractor fatalities. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 18 (4-Supplement 1): 63-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-3797 (00)00142-2
• SGK, 2021. SGK İstatistik Yıllıkları. (Website: https://www.sgk.gov.tr/Istatistik/Yillik/fcd5e59b-6af9-4d90-a451-ee7500eb1cb4/) (Accessed: July 2023).
• Shinar, D., R. Dewar, H. Summala & L. Zakowska, 2003. Traffic sign symbol comprehension: A cross-cultural study. Ergonomics, 46 (15): 1549-1565. https://doi.org/10.1080/0014013032000121615
• Smith-Jackson, T.L. & A. Essuman-Johnson, 2002. Cultural ergonomics in Ghana, West Africa: A descriptive survey of industry and trade workers’ interpretations of safety symbols. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 8 (1): 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2002.11076513
• TÜİK, 2023. İşgücü İstatistikleri, 2022 (Haber Bülteni 2023: 49390). (Website: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Isgucu-Istatistikleri-2022-49390.23) (Accessed: July 2023).
• UN, 2022. The Sustainable Develepment Goals Report 2022. (Website: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2022/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2022.pdf) (Accessed: July 2023).
• Vigoroso, L., F. Caffaro & E. Cavallo, 2019. Warning against critical slopes in agriculture: Comprehension of targeted safety signs in a group of machinery operators in Italy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16 (4): 611 (1-11). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16040611
• Vigoroso, L., F. Caffaro & E. Cavallo, 2020. Occupational safety and visual communication: User-centred design of safety training material for migrant farmworkers in Italy. Safety Science, 121 (January 2020): 562-572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.10.029
• Vigoroso, L., F. Caffaro, M. Micheletti Cremasco, G. Bagagiolo & E. Cavallo, 2020. Comprehension of safety pictograms affixed to agricultural machinery among Pakistani migrant farmworkers in Italy. Journal of Agromedicine, 25 (3): 265-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2019.1673269
• Wogalter, M.S., R.J. Sojourner & J.W. Brelsford, 1997. Comprehension and retention of safety pictorials. Ergonomics, 40 (5): 531-542. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401397188017
• Xu, Z. & N. Zheng, 2021. Incorporating virtual reality technology in safety training solution for construction site of urban cities. Sustainability, 13 (1): 243: 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010243
• Yazdani, M., R. Kazemi & A.H. Davudian Talab, 2017. Evaluation of perception of hospital signs and its relationship with demographic factors. International Journal of Hospital Research, 6 (2): 66-71.
• Yurtlu, Y. B., K. Demiryürek, M. Bozoğlu & V. Ceyhan, 2012. Çiftçilerin tarım makineleri kullanımına ilişkin risk algıları. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 49 (1): 93-101.
• Zamanian, Z., A. Afshin, A.H. Davoudian Talab & H. Hashemi, 2013. Comprehension of workplace safety signs: A case study in Shiraz industrial park. Journal of Occupational Health and Epidemiology, 2 (1&2): 37-43. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.johe.2.1.2.37