Systematic Risk Analysis in Forestry Operations: L Type Matrix and Target-Oriented Evaluation: The Case of Sivas
Öz
Anahtar Kelimeler
Occupational health and safety, risk analysis, Sivas, L-Type 5x5 matrix, risk.
Kaynakça
- Acar, H. H., & Eker, M. (2001). Orman fidanlık ve depo işçilerinde ergonomik açıdan antropometrik özelliklerin araştırılması. In Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi 8. ergonomi kongresi bildiriler kitabı (pp. 229–238).
- Adeoye, M. A., & Adong, C. (2023). The power of precision: Why your research focus should be SMART? Journal of Education Action Research, 7(4), 569–577. https://doi.org/10.23887/jear.v7i4.69757
- Akbulut Özpay, G. (2020). Fiziki coğrafya. In Sivas atlası (pp. 43–50). SVS Yayınları.
- Akçın, N. (2001). İş kazalarının nedenleri ve önlenmesi. In İş sağlığı- iş güvenliği kongresi program bildirileri / İSİG – 22 (pp. 237–245). Zonguldak Karaelmas Üniversitesi.
- Araibi, A. S., Dalef, H. H., Hussein, H. K., Ishak, M. S. A., & Rahim, M. R. (2024). Enhancing risk management: Leveraging the likelihood/severity matrix for effective risk assessment and mitigation in the electrical and electronic sector. Al-Khwarizmi Engineering Journal, 20(3), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.22153/kej.2024.07.003
- Aslan, B., & Şimşek, S. (2021). Ormancılık sektöründe risk analizi değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Technical and Applied Sciences, 1(3), 1–16.
- Bailey, R. R. (2019). Goal setting and action planning for health behavior change. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 13, 615–618. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827617729634
- Bell, J. L. (2002). Changes in logging injury rates associated with use of feller-bunchers in West Virginia. Journal of Safety Research, 33, 463–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4375(02)00048-8
- Bilici, E., & Ünver., S. (2024). A comparison of the risk analyses for harvesting activities under different conditions. Šumarski List, 7–8, CXLVIII (2024), 363–373. https://doi.org/10.31298/sl.148.7-8.4
- Bjerke, M. B., & Renger, R. (2017). Being smart about writing SMART objectives. Evaluation and Program Planning, 61, 125–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprog plan.2016.12.009