Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: 10.1186/s12995-015-0060-y
Title: The legislative backgrounds of workplace health promotion in three European countries : A comparative analysis
Authors: Šidagyte, Rasa
Eglite, Maija
Salmi, Anne
Šoryte, Dovile
Vanadziņš, Ivars
Hopsu, Leila
Lerssi-Uskelin, Jaana
Bulotaite, Laima
Kozlova, Lasma
Lakiša, Svetlana
Vičaite, Sigita
Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Institute of Occupational Safety and Environmental Health
Keywords: Enterprise;Legislation;Occupational health;Workplace health promotion;3.3 Health sciences;3.1 Basic medicine;1.1. Scientific article indexed in Web of Science and/or Scopus database;Toxicology;Safety Research;Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health;SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
Issue Date: 10-May-2015
Citation: Šidagyte , R , Eglite , M , Salmi , A , Šoryte , D , Vanadziņš , I , Hopsu , L , Lerssi-Uskelin , J , Bulotaite , L , Kozlova , L , Lakiša , S & Vičaite , S 2015 , ' The legislative backgrounds of workplace health promotion in three European countries : A comparative analysis ' , Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology , vol. 10 , no. 1 , 18 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-015-0060-y
Abstract: Background: This article investigates the legal database and theoretical basis of workplace health promotion (WHP) in three European countries: Finland, Latvia and Lithuania, and aims to find insights into effective WHP implementation. Methods: In November 2013, a stakeholders' survey was carried out. The questionnaire included questions about legal documents and non-legislative measures relevant to WHP, institutions and other bodies/organizations working in the field, WHP conception/definition, and implementation of WHP activities according to the enterprises' size. Results: Only Finland has adopted a specific law on occupational health care (separate from occupational safety). ILO conventions No. 161 (Occupational Health Services Convention) and No. 187 (Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention) are ratified only in Finland. In Finland, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health acts as one ministry, while two Baltic countries have two separate ministries (one for health and another for social affairs). None of the countries has legally approved a definition of WHP. Latvia and Lithuania tend to separate WHP from other activities, whereas Finland integrates WHP into other occupational health and safety elements. Conclusions: Finland has a more extensive legislative and organizational background to WHP than Latvia and Lithuania. In defining WHP, all the countries refer to the Luxembourg Declaration on Workplace Health Promotion in the European Union. Finland's practice of integrating WHP into other occupational health and safety elements is important.
Description: Publisher Copyright: © 2015 Šidagytė et al.; licensee BioMed Central.
DOI: 10.1186/s12995-015-0060-y
ISSN: 1745-6673
Appears in Collections:Research outputs from Pure / Zinātniskās darbības rezultāti no ZDIS Pure



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.