| Literature DB >> 30082646 |
Shanshan Li1, Hong Chen2, Xinru Huang3, Ruyin Long4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Occupational safety and health issues are closely associated with the wellbeing and survival of every worker and family, as well as of society as a whole. It is a type of typical public issue and requires cooperative governance among different governing subjects.Entities:
Keywords: WTP; attention; identity discrepancy; occupational safety and health
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30082646 PMCID: PMC6121491 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15081667
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The roadmap of the relationship between the attention to occupational safety and health and willingness to pay (WTP) based on different subject identities.
Occupational safety and health attention questionnaire example.
| Dimensions | Items Descriptions | Degree of Attention | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connotation attention | I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and understand it to mean the conditions and factors affecting the health and safety of employees, temporary workers, visitors, and others in the workplace. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Present condition attention | I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and believe that the current situation is not very positive. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Importance attention | I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and believe that the health and safety of workers have become the core issue for China’s socialist modernization. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| System attention | I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that occupational health and safety management systems are designed to address occupational health and safety, rather than health and safety in areas such as employee fitness or health plans, product safety, loss of property or environmental impact. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Occupation illness attention | I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that occupational diseases are diseases caused by exposure to dust, radioactive substances and other toxic and harmful substances in the occupational activities. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Distribution of the WTP in terms of the bidding amounts regarding occupational safety and health WTP.
| WTP (Income Proportion/Month/per Capita) | Sample Amount | Positive WTP Frequency (%) | Positive WTP Accumulation Frequency (%) | WTP Total Frequency (%) | Accumulation Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 38 | 19.0 | 19.0 | ||
| 0.5% | 11 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 5.5 | 24.5 |
| 1% | 53 | 32.7 | 39.5 | 26.5 | 51.0 |
| 2% | 10 | 6.2 | 45.7 | 5.0 | 56.0 |
| 3% | 34 | 21.0 | 66.7 | 17.0 | 73.0 |
| 5% | 18 | 11.1 | 77.8 | 9.0 | 82.0 |
| 10% | 27 | 16.6 | 94.4 | 13.5 | 95.5 |
| 15% | 3 | 1.9 | 96.3 | 1.5 | 97.0 |
| 20% | 4 | 2.5 | 98.8 | 2.0 | 99.0 |
| 30% | 2 | 1.2 | 100.0 | 1.0 | 100.0 |
The structure of samples.
| Demographic Variables | Percentage (%) | Demographic Variables | Percentage (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 74.69 | Age | <20 | 0.34 |
| Female | 25.31 | 21–30 | 28.12 | ||
| Education | Primary school and following | 2.56 | 31–40 | 32.48 | |
| Junior middle school | 16.89 | 41–50 | 23.30 | ||
| Senior high school | 26.61 | 50–60 | 11.44 | ||
| Junior college | 25.15 | >60 | 4.32 | ||
| Bachelor degree | 19.65 | Marital status | Unmarried | 12.82 | |
| >Master degree | 9.14 | Married | 82.91 | ||
| Identity differences | Government officials | 5.00 | Divorced | 2.89 | |
| Coal mine corporate leaders | 4.86 | Bereaved | 1.38 | ||
| mine safety supervisors | 7.11 | Politics status | Communists | 27.66 | |
| Front-line mine staff | 40.71 | Democratic parties | 2.02 | ||
| Employees in third-party social institutions | 9.64 | Independent figure | 7.08 | ||
| General public | 32.68 | Masses | 63.24 | ||
Figure 2Estimations of the standardized path coefficient of the confirmatory factor model.
One-way ANOVA.
| A | CA | PCA | IA | SA | ODA | TWTP | IIWTP | IWTP | EWTP | SWTP | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identity | Sig. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gender | Sig. | 0.596 |
| 0.478 | 0.233 |
| 0.986 | 0.063 | 0.898 | 0.992 | 0.917 | 0.933 |
| Age | Sig. |
|
| 0.050 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Marital status | Sig. | 0.068 |
|
| 0.386 | 0.349 | 0.286 | 0.323 |
|
|
| 0.196 |
| Monthly salary | Sig. |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.140 |
|
|
|
|
| Residence area | Sig. |
|
|
|
|
| 0.100 | 0.664 | 0.341 | 0.305 | 0.271 | 0.158 |
| Education level | Sig. |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0.158 |
|
|
|
|
Note: The bold font represents a significant level of p < 0.05. A: attention, CA: connotation attention, PCA: present condition attention, IA: importance attention, SA: system attention, ODA: occupation disease attention, TWTP: tax WTP, IIWTP: individual income WTP, IWTP: item WTP, EWTP: event WTP, SWTP: subject WTP.
Occupational safety and health attention and WTP mean value distribution table of different subjects.
| Variable | Front-Line Mine Staff | Coal Mine Corporate Leaders | Mine Safety Supervisors | Government Officials | Employees in Third-Party Social Institutions | General Social Public | Total | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | IV % | M | IV % | M | IV % | M | IV % | M | IV % | M | IV % | M | IV % | |
| A | 2.331 | 80.50 | 2.425 | 80.02 | 2.527 | 75.48 | 2.519 | 76.15 | 2.789 | 59.05 | 2.446 | 76.12 | 2.441 | 76.55 |
| CA | 2.550 | 59.19 | 2.698 | 46.23 | 2.819 | 42.58 | 2.119 | 80.73 | 2.791 | 49.52 | 2.239 | 71.49 | 2.478 | 61.50 |
| PCA | 2.229 | 80.95 | 2.230 | 78.30 | 2.414 | 76.13 | 2.373 | 86.24 | 2.662 | 60.48 | 2.349 | 77.25 | 2.330 | 77.60 |
| IA | 2.472 | 65.39 | 2.486 | 70.75 | 2.652 | 58.71 | 2.762 | 54.13 | 2.919 | 44.76 | 2.636 | 58.43 | 2.597 | 60.35 |
| SA | 2.078 | 79.26 | 2.392 | 70.75 | 2.368 | 70.32 | 2.725 | 55.96 | 2.626 | 50.48 | 2.468 | 63.90 | 2.325 | 69.25 |
| ODA | 2.636 | 59.86 | 2.849 | 37.74 | 2.755 | 56.13 | 2.706 | 55.05 | 3.202 | 34.76 | 2.629 | 58.99 | 2.710 | 55.58 |
| TWTP | 3.612 | 20.63 | 3.962 | 10.78 | 3.787 | 6.45 | 3.752 | 18.35 | 4.048 | 6.67 | 3.782 | 8.71 | 3.746 | 13.77 |
| IIWTP | 2.505 | 67.98 | 2.813 | 43.40 | 2.576 | 66.45 | 3.025 | 46.79 | 2.767 | 52.38 | 2.361 | 74.86 | 2.529 | 66.36 |
| IWTP | 2.453 | 64.60 | 2.733 | 38.68 | 2.477 | 63.23 | 2.963 | 45.87 | 2.676 | 48.10 | 2.281 | 74.30 | 2.459 | 63.88 |
| SWTP | 2.534 | 64.49 | 2.781 | 39.62 | 2.639 | 58.06 | 3.064 | 40.37 | 2.838 | 47.14 | 2.362 | 68.96 | 2.553 | 61.40 |
| EWTP | 2.526 | 65.50 | 2.924 | 34.91 | 2.613 | 60.00 | 3.046 | 39.45 | 2.786 | 45.71 | 2.438 | 64.89 | 2.574 | 60.21 |
Note: IV: inferior value, A: attention, CA: connotation attention, PCA: present condition attention, IA: importance attention, SA: system attention, ODA: occupation disease attention, TWTP: tax WTP, IIWTP: individual income WTP, IWTP: item WTP, EWTP: event WTP, SWTP: subject WTP.
Figure 3Occupation safety and health WTP of subjects with different identity. (a) Occupation safety and health tax WTP; (b) Occupation safety and health item WTP; (c) Occupation safety and health subject WTP; (d) Occupation safety and health event WTP.
Figure 4Statistical analysis of public attention and WTP to occupational safety and health. (a) Cross statistics of attention and tax WTP; (b) Cross statistics of attention and individual income WTP.
Figure 5Analysis of attention to occupational safety and health and WTP by subjects with different identities. (a) Cross analysis of attention and tax WTP; (b) Cross analysis of attention and individual income WTP.
Figure 6Analysis of attention and WTP to public occupational safety and health connotation. (a) Cross analysis of connotation attention and tax WTP; (b) Cross analysis of connotation attention and item WTP.
Correlations between attention to occupational safety and health connotation and WTP (n = 2179).
| TWTP | IIWTP | IWTP | SWTP | EWTP | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | Pearson Correlation | 0.037 | 0.132 ** | 0.121** | 0.108 ** | 0.121 ** |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.080 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| CA | Pearson Correlation | 0.61 ** | 0.108 ** | 0.075 ** | 0.097 ** | 0.113 ** |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.005 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| PCA | Pearson Correlation | 0.026 | 0.108 ** | 0.100 ** | 0.082 ** | 0.102 ** |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.225 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| IA | Pearson Correlation | 0.035 | 0.133 ** | 0.110 ** | 0.083 ** | 0.106 ** |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.099 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| SA | Pearson Correlation | 0.025 | 0.075 ** | 0.087 ** | 0.061 ** | 0.051 * |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.239 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.004 | 0.016 | |
| ODA | Pearson Correlation | 0.033 | 0.155 ** | 0.128 ** | 0.143 ** | 0.139 ** |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.120 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Note: ** Significant correlation at p < 0.01 level, * significant correlation at p < 0.05 level. A: attention, CA: connotation attention, PCA: present condition attention, IA: importance attention, SA: system attention, ODA: occupation disease attention, TWTP: tax WTP, IIWTP: individual income WTP, IWTP: item WTP, EWTP: event WTP, SWTP: subject WTP.
Regression between attention to occupational safety and health connotation and WTP (n = 2179).
| Individual Income WTP | Item WTP | Subject WTP | Event WTP | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | Model 7 | Model 8 | |
| Identity discrepancy | 0.068 *** | 0.060 ** | 0.075 *** | 0.068 ** | 0.065 ** | 0.058 ** | 0.064 ** | 0.055 ** |
| Gender | 0.046 | 0.038 | 0.048 | 0.041 | 0.053 | 0.046 | 0.036 | 0.028 |
| Age | −0.046 *** | −0.046 *** | −0.052 *** | −0.053 *** | −0.049 ** | −0.050 *** | −0.036 * | −0.036 * |
| Marital status | −0.022 | −0.017 | −0.040 | −0.036 | −0.002 | 0.001 | −0.023 | −0.018 |
| Monthly salary | 0.104 *** | 0.092 *** | 0.119 *** | 0.106 *** | 0.122 *** | 0.111 *** | 0.072 * | 0.058 * |
| Residence area | −0.020 | −0.025 | −0.013 | −0.018 | −0.062 * | −0.066 * | 0.016 | 0.011 |
| Education level | 0.053 ** | 0.043 * | 0.084 *** | 0.074 ** | 0.028 | 0.019 | 0.047 | 0.035 |
| Attention | 0.133 *** | 0.130 *** | 0.121 *** | 0.150 *** | ||||
| F | 8.993 | 11.346 | 10.895 | 12.181 | 7.720 | 9.075 | 4.342 | 6.871 |
| R2 | 0.028 *** | 0.040 *** | 0.034 *** | 0.043 *** | 0.024 *** | 0.032 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.025 *** |
| △F | 8.993 | 27.059 | 10.895 | 20.493 | 7.720 | 18.138 | 4.342 | 24.245 |
| △R2 | 0.028 *** | 0.012 *** | 0.034 *** | 0.009 *** | 0.024 *** | 0.008 *** | 0.014 *** | 0.011 *** |
Note: *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05.
The 13 items for attention and the four items for WTP.
| Dimensions | Items Descriptions |
|---|---|
| Connotation attention | V1. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and understand it to mean the conditions and factors affecting the health and safety of employees, temporary workers, visitors, and others in the workplace. |
| Present condition attention | V2. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and believe that the current situation is not very positive. |
| V3. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that every 15 s, about 160 workers experience occupational accidents throughout the world and one worker will die due to occupational accidents or diseases. | |
| V4. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that over 16 million companies were engaged in poisonous and hazardous operations in 2011, and 200 million workers were affected by occupational diseases to varying degrees in the labor process. | |
| V5. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that industrial injury accidents and occupational diseases in China have reached to more than 200 billion RMB and account for 2.5% in GDP terms. | |
| V6. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that the occupational safety and health level in China lags behind the economic and social development. | |
| V7. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that the non-synchronized development exists between occupational safety and health governance, and specifically health governance lags behind safety governance in China. | |
| Importance attention | V8. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and believe that the health and safety of workers have become the core issue for China’s modernization. |
| V9. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that the people’s health should be placed on the priority of national development which was put forward in the National Hygiene and Health Conference held in 2016. | |
| System attention | V10. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that occupational health and safety management system (OHSMS) is a modern mode of production safety management emerging in the world in the late 1980s, which is jointly called “the management method of the post-industrialization era” together with ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 standard systems. |
| V11. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that occupational health and safety management systems are designed to address occupational health and safety, rather than health and safety in areas such as employee fitness or health plans, product safety, loss of property or environmental impact. | |
| Occupation illness attention | V12. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that occupational diseases are diseases caused by exposure to dust, radioactive substances and other toxic and harmful substances in the occupational activities. |
| V13. I pay attention to the issue of occupational safety and health and know that there are 26,000 new cases of occupational diseases in China, of which pneumoconiosis occupying 80% ranks the first place. | |
| Tax WTP | The financial expenditure budget by the central government for public safety (stability maintenance and emergencies) in 2017 is 183.855 billion RMB and the corresponding per capita budget is 133.71 RMB. If the country added occupational safety and health to the agenda of the financial expenditure budget, should the per capita public safety level be increased or reduced in your opinion. |
| Item WTP | If you were required to help country solve occupational safety and health problems with your personal income (such as setting up special occupational safety and health funds and purchasing insurance for occupational disease patients), what percentage of your income would you be willing to pay? |
| Subject WTP | If there was a donation campaign for patients with occupational diseases (i.e., pneumoconiosis), what percentage of your income would you donate to these patients with occupational diseases? |
| Event WTP | If there happened a major safety accident somewhere (i.e., Tianjin Major Fire and Explosion Accident), and a donation was needed for post-disaster reconstruction work caused by the accident, what percentage of your income would you donate to support post-disaster reconstruction work? |