The Author is the Technical Director of Global Safety, Environmental and Waste Consultants (GSEWC), and the Principal Consultant of Berthys Easy Everyday Konsult (BEEK). → See also:
The effort towards proper HSE Management in the industries within the Lagos and Ogun localities are the main reason for this project, using appropriate tools as shall be enumerated under this chapter.
According to the information posted on the website on environmental sustainability, Scientific methods established as a scientific process will be used to answer questions or solve problems.
According to the manual prepared by NISP for SHELL contractors training in 2003, Economic improvements of so many countries have been linked with Technological Innovations, especially those that aided the advancement of production activities, which has ultimately culminated to the exponentially increased economic in many countries all over the world (NISP Manual, 2003).
The alleviation of various difficult domestic and industrial activities have encouraged the global acceptance of most of these technological innovations, however, global environment degradation, have increased due to the non-adoption of Cleaner Production Technology (CPT) as well as the generation of various categories of wastes along with the varieties of Industrial useful products, plus the improper management of the by-products, some of which are either hazardous or non-hazardous.
Most economic activities depend on the environment. The manufacturing sector is a major section of the economic environment that depends and taps so much from the Environment. Undoubtedly, the industrial sector has contributed greatly to the growth of the world’s economy it has also (in the process of its development) affected the foundation that supports its existence, such that some life sustaining elements are being massively impacted negatively The impact of human activities on the Environment is alarming and causing serious concern in terms of the degradation of land, the pollution of the local and global atmosphere and the depletion of natural and manmade resources.
The plan to ameliorate the resulting impact of improperly managed waste has informed the need to put mitigation measures in place at global and local levels, to protect the working and living environment. In other to curtail further alteration of this our God given heritage; the environment, and also to protect the Health and Safety of people in their living and working environment, all the uncontrolled anthropogenic activities going-on within the environment, especially that of Industrial facilities, must be mitigated to be able to achieve Sustainable development.
Though it is unreasonable to expect a totally unpolluted environment, and to hold the view that the natural resources have unlimited capacity, the equilibrium ethic view of a balance between total development and absolute preservation should be upheld (Enger and Smith, 1992). It may not be possible to stop man from performing his different activities in an environment, the onus however lies on him to effectively control the nuisance emanating from such activities (Uchegbu, 2002).
It has also been agreed that in future, continued economic development and better living standards will depend on the production technology and processes that have incorporated proper HSE and Waste management issues into the operational procedures, which will include sound resource management, an essential part of developmental planning.
The concept of HSE was developed to alleviate the negative aspect of Technological Innovations that have been neglected in the past, especially in the Industrial Sector. The implication of adopting Technological Innovation (TI) is enormous, it has been linked to both local and global economic improvement, advancement and social development. However, TIs use and implementation, which leads to Technological Advancement, brought along the negative aspects in form of Pollution, Health, Safety, Environment andSecurity problems in different dimensions. It has been established now that HSE management in the workplace and indeed all walks of life is synonymous with business (OECD, 2008). Environmental protection as well as health and safety at work must thus be ensured at all times. Thus a compilation of workplace rules and regulations, guidelines and other control information in a management system policy are usually prepared and made available to all stakeholders especially the workers.
This section will discuss the legal and administrative framework of HSE both globally and locally.
At the Global level, the need to avert this looming catastrophe necessitated the presentation for ratification of several international agreements some of which Nigerian has become signatories to, notable amongst them are:
To achieve sustainable development in Nigeria, Nigeria has enunciated a National Policy on the Environment among the notable points are to:
The purpose of a legal framework as an integral part of a National Environmental Policy is to consolidate, strengthen and provide an extensive legislation for HSE protection and improvement in all ramifications, whilst also providing for the effective implementation and enforcement procedures.
Federal Ministry of Environment (Former FEPA) Regulations and Decrees Relating to Environmental Protection in Nigeria
In exercising of the powers conferred on FMEnv by Section 37 of the FEPA Act Cap.131 (Same as Decree 58 of 1988), FMEnv have to date made the following Regulations:
State governments have also contributed in alleviating the effect of industrialization on the workforce, workplace, environment and public health. Most of them have state legislations to do this. The Lagos state government is not left out in this. Since this report is specifically on facilities within the Lagos State metropolis, the various Lagos State Government Edicts and Laws on the Environment are enumerated.
The Lagos state government is taking a proactive lead in general public health management issues and various monitoring is being undertaken by agencies. Lagos State legislations, are primarily essential for Environmental protection and are aimed at integrating the uncoordinated regulations and bye-laws on Environmental Management and by so doing resolve decisively, issues including pollution control, hazardous waste disposal, and conservation of water resources and protection of biodiversity are considered hereunder.
The legal instruments put in place by Lagos State for Environmental protection include:
The Ogun State edict was signed into law in 1995, responsibility, functions and prohibition acts were promulgated in it in addition to penalties for flouting the various aspects of the act.
Relevant agency functions include:
To be able to carry-out this functions effectively, the edict empowers the agency to among other things;
Other relevant national regulations guiding industrial development activities in Nigeria are presented in Table 1.
Nº | Regulation | Year Adopted |
1 | Explosives Regulations, Cap 117, LFN | 1956 |
2 | Federal Environment Protection Agency Act 1988, Cap. 131, Vol. IX p.6303 | 1988 |
3 | Factory Act | 1990 |
4 | National Environmental Protection Policy (Effluent Limitation) Regulations | 1991 |
5 | National Environmental Protection Policy (Pollution and Abatement in Industries in Facilities Producing Waste) Regulations | 1991 |
6 | National Environmental Protection (Management of Solid and Hazardous Wastes) Regulations | 1991 |
7 | Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Decree No. 86) | 1992 |
8 | Guidelines and Standards for Environmental Pollution Control in Nigeria | 1991 |
9 | National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) | 2007 |
10 | National Environmental Policy | 1989 |
Some of the relevant international regulations and conventions guiding industrial development activities in Nigeria and to which Nigeria is signatory are summarized in Table 2.
Nº | Convention | Year Adopted |
1 | Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone | 1958 |
2 | African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources | 1968 |
3 | Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREG) | 1972 |
4 | Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and National Heritage (World Heritage Convention) | 1972 |
5 | Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and other Matter. Note: The Convention was amended in 1992 | 1972 |
6 | Convention for Co-operation in the Protection and Development of Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region | 1981 |
7 | Protocol Concerning Co-operation in Combating Pollution in Cases of Emergency in the West and Central African Region | 1981 |
8 | Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer | 1985 |
9 | Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer Note: The Protocol was amended for the first time on 29th June 1990 in London. A second set of amendments was adopted in Copenhagen in November 1992; these entered into force in 1994. | 1987 |
10 | Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal of 1989 (Basel Convention) | 1989 |
11 | Framework Convention on Climate Change | 1992 |
12 | Convention on Biological Diversity | 1994 |
13 | World Bank Environment Assessment Source Books | 1998 |
14 | IFC Environmental Guidelines for Borrowers | 2000 |
In addition to the Federal Ministry of Environment Laws/regulations as well as that of the State, the Federal Minister of Labour and Productivity through the Factories Act of 1990, prescribed a number of measures to be put in place with regard to the Health, Safety and general Welfare of workers in manufacturing outfits in Nigeria.
The need for HSE policy formulation and documentation is to ensure that work is being carried out in a way that will maintain healthy and safe working practices, prevent risks of injuries to the workforce. The overall responsibility for Health, Safety & Environment management rests mainly on the top management of a company, however, all individual employees have the important responsibility of ensuring that HSE issues are treated accordingly and must participate in the implementation of the company’s policy. Appropriate training, supervision and information are usually provided to encourage and enable to carryout their duties safely. Regular Inspection and monitoring of the activities is undertaken and accidents or incidents are investigated promptly so that appropriate action is taken to prevent reoccurrence.
Unsafe work practices by an individual can often lead to accidents even in safe working environment. The goal of HSE policy formulation by companies is to eliminate both unsafe working condition and unsafe work practices as well as to comply with all regulations governing HSE on site, to take expedient actions to correct or isolate unsafe conditions or work practices, to promote HSE awareness, to hold each employee accountable for their individual responsibility for HSE, to assure that employees can accomplish the safe completion of assigned tasks (Nigeria Health Policy Draft, 2005).
Prompt accident notification investigation and reporting, establishment and maintaining of appropriate working environment, protection of people, property, equipment and material from all incidents and accidents, protection of the environment by removing all hazardous wastes and by proper housekeeping, formation of an HSE committee within each working location setting and assuring standards, prevention of negligence in the matter of HSE or contribution to accident through personnel neglect, management commitment to achieving and sustaining "ZERO ACCIDENT TOLERANCE" through continues improvement practices are all issues that must be planned.
The success of the policy requires all levels of personnel, from Management and employees, to become totally supportive and to develop a thorough understanding of HSE Regulation or procedure as it pertains to their respective jobs. Responsibilities are thus assigned to accomplish the corporate objective.
HSE Representative, authority and control, Work Stoppage, Assessment Program, HSE violations, Hazard Recognition, Hazard Communication, Incident Investigation and Reporting, Unsafe Acts and Conditions, HSE Penalties, Instruction and Training, Fire Prevention & Fire Fighting Plan, Noise Control, work site clothing requirements, Personal Protective Equipment, safe, Jobsite Transportation Rules, Monthly Inspection Program, Housekeeping issues, demarcated Lunch / Break Areas, non-use or indulgence on site, Medical facilities and First AID Box availability, Security, compliance to Regulatory requirements, Emergency Appliances management, Safe Driving skill & Vehicle Check program, general Safe Operations, Performance Indicators etc. are topics that must be treated during HSE Planning (Nigeria Health Policy Draft, 2005).
According to the Center for Corporate Accountability (CCA) an International company, promoting workers and Public Safety website publication, Government’s Safety Policies was found to be “inconsistent with research”, this is based on the premise that the Central planks of the Government/Health and Safety Commission’s current health and safety strategy are "inconsistent with the national and internationally published research on the most effective strategies to improve workers and public safety”.
The report, "Making Companies Safe: What Works?" raises serious questions about the Government’s claimed commitment to pursue policies that are ‘evidence-based’.
The 120 page report was published on Wednesday, 15 September 2004, where it was reported that in year 2003, 235 workers and 95 members of the public died in premises regulated by both the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) or Local Authorities, while up to 29,500 workers suffered major injuries. The purpose of the report was to consider whether published research supported two recent significant shifts in Government/HSC policy. The report’s conclusions showed those of the selected committee on Work and Pensions, which stated that the HSE should double the number of inspectors and increase its enforcement activities.
According to the publication on their website, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimated that 345,000 workers died in workplace incidences in 2002 around the world. The publication also gave the statistical data on the numbers of deaths that the governments of each country provided to the ILO.
The numbers of deaths included employees, the self employed and sole traders (i.e. farmers) who have died on land, at sea or in the air. It included work-related transport incidents (though not work-related commuting incidents). It does not include members of the public who have died from work-related incidents.
The ILO has done household studies in different countries in different continents to assists in making estimates of countries with similarities in activities and size. These continental statistical summaries were said to be based on both statistics and other information from as many different sources as was available, which could be regarded to be as reliable as possible, in order to calculate the values of new estimation of number of work-related mortality. Statistical assumptions were also sometimes used, which could be based on studies or statistical information provided by officials of countries where employment and/or the economic structure are about similar" (ILO, 2010).
The presented ILO figures are based on latest available statistics (from those member States that have reported them properly), and is mostly for year 2001. The reason why there is often such a difference between the numbers reported by a country and the numbers of deaths estimated by the ILO is because
According to the Hazards special report published in November 2009, about Dangerous Lead (Pb), the Health and Safety Executives (HSE) knows the UK Lead exposure standard can kill but refuses to act. Thousands of UK workers are being exposed to various high levels of lead (Pb) that can cause chronic health problems. HSE, sometimes know about it and admits that the organization does not have any intension of doing anything presently about it.
Hazards.org published up to 108 different hazard incidences round the world some of the topics are presented below:
Establishing the business case for investing in stress prevention and evaluating their impacts on sickness absence levels, this case study outlines the business benefits attained by Somerset County Council from undertaking a process of stress risk assessment and intervention.
On the 27th to 31st May, 2002, a Five (5) day national Risk Assessment Survey was carried out in the Coal, Mining, Battery, Quarry and Farm/Palm-oil mill industries in Enugu, Ebonyin and Imo States.
The aim of the project included attaining reduction in morbidity and mortality rates among workers in these industrial sectors by 25%, raising HSE information awareness to a higher percentage amongst workers exposed to work related health hazards thus empowering the workforce with knowledge on how to protect themselves and demand their protection from employers, reduction in employers and employees medical bills and increased productivity, which will boost the nation’s economy generally.
The following conclusions were reached by the team:
The health status survey on respiratory disorders carried out on Miners and Quarry workers showed that many of them have low respiratory capacity than those in the administrative work, this could be attributed to accumulated effect of inhalation of respirable particles e.g. coal dusts, silica dusts etc. some of the workers with bad habits of smoking or sniffing also had low respiratory capacity. Workers in most of the companies visited were not provided with PPEs and where available the uses were not enforced thus workers were not using them. Health and safety education need to be carried out among workers. Workers in the informal sectors are exposed to more hazards due to the lack of awareness of the danger inherent in their jobs. Most facilities does not have medical, safety or welfare facilities. Health and safety of the informal sector should be considered better (Lagos State Ministry of Health, 2002).
This study adopted descriptive research method, where existing information about the physical observations within the facility, recent interview, questioning and collection of official company documents will all be presented.
Lagos and Ogun states are found within the southwestern area of Nigeria, on the West Coast of Africa, Lagos occupies an area of 3,577 square kilometer, and about 0.4% of the total land area of Nigeria. This elongated state extends to the coast of the Atlantic Ocean with over 180km along the Republic of Benin on the west and Ogun State on the east. It is on approximate latitude 6°20’ North to 6°40’ North, and from longitude 2°45’ East to 4°20’ East, while Oguns is on latitude 6°22’ North to 6°49’ North, and from longitude 3°79’ East to 7°80’ East of its total length.
Though very small, Lagos is one of the most densely populated states in the country as an estimated population of over 13million inhabitants according to the census record conducted by the Lagos state government. About 80 percent of the population lives within the metropolitan Lagos, giving the state number one status in terms of urbanization in Nigeria. Ogun State on the other hand is not so densely populated, however, due to its locational proximity to Lagos state, a spill over into so many towns and cities of Ogun state in occurring thus, increasing the urbanization and population of the state.
Companies located in various parts of the states metropolis were selected for this research work. The HSE management practices within these companies were investigated by perusing the Environmental Assessment or Environmental Audit reports of the facilities where majority of the information about HSE management of the companies were obtained. The findings will be presented in the next chapter.
This was done through simple random selection technique, without prejudice, to ensure that the data gathered represent true opinion and practices found within the facility. Using random sampling, available reports were picked to represent varieties of companies; Pharmaceutical, Plastic, Steel, Agricultural, Telecommunications, Chemicals, Foam, Textiles companies.
Primary and secondary sources were used for the data gathering. The primary data were collected through the randomly sourced existing environmental reports of these facilities and document analysis. The Secondary Data were collected using information mainly from Published Textbooks, Reports, Journals, Articles on Magazines, Newspapers, Maps, Pictures, Internet pasted information, Workshops, Summits and Conference Presentations as prescribed in Olayinka and Oriaku, 2006.
The generated data was analysed and presented using figures, tables, percentages and other parametric and non-parametric statistical tools.
The presented information are extracts from the Environmental Reports of these facilities on-the-job. With the aim and objective of giving information that will aid in correcting all forms of bad practices with the operational bases of various companies and ensuring that facility activities are geared towards sustainable development at all times. Most of the information that used are already presented to the monitoring agencies and as such is already a public document that can be referenced.
This section will elaborate the various measurements of the various HSE components data gathered from perusing the Environmental Implication Studies (EIS), Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Audit Report (EAR) of facilities and highlight the relevant evaluations and deductions from the result presented.
The following facilities’ reports were perused and analysed:
These Facilities’ Reports will be analysed using the following HSE&W Management Indicator Parameters:
The following assumptions were made:
Each considered parameter have 5 as the highest value awarded in each section and 1, 2, 3 and 4 are other values to judge the level of compliance of the facility to the listed parameters.
Table 4 shows the qualitative evaluation of the facilities in terms of levels of compliance to the itemized parameters used to determine the HSE status of the facilities. The facilities will be assigned alphabets for easy analysis and identification.
Given the fact that the maximum total should be 65, only 6 facilities (B, C, D, I & K), (which is less that half of the facilities under review) had total score above the average (62.5). Installation of Pollution abatement equipment to protect the work environment and Availability of medical facilities for workers’ health protection were two parameters that carried highest cumulative total (40), confirming that most facility managers give high priority to personnel welfare. HSE policy existence in the facilities carried the lowest cumulative total (17), meaning that most facility managers do not have within the facility a legally binding document that can be used to hold them liable in court of law or one that can be used as a defence against liability.
Out of the 13 parameters analysed within the 13 facilities under review, six did not have a cumulative total of up to half of the maximum cumulative total level (65).
Table 5 present the total analysis matrix. Charts 1 to 15 present the diagrammatic representation of the tabulated results.
Nº | Parameters | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | Total |
1 | Good House Keeping (GHK) | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 39 |
2 | Use of PPEs, Provision and Enforcement | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 35 |
3 | Waste Management | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 33 |
4 | Waste Handling | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 32 |
5 | Installation of Pollution Abatement Equipment to Protect the Work Environment | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 40 |
6 | Installation of Pollution Abatement Equipment to Protect the Immediate Facility Environment | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 22 |
7 | Availability of Medical Facilities for Workers’ Health Protection | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 40 |
8 | Availability of Contingency Plan | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 27 |
9 | Availability of Emergency Response Equipment | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 37 |
10 | HSE Policy Existence in the Facility | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 17 |
11 | Information Dissemination and Posters Provision | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 24 |
12 | Conducting Training for Workers | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 20 |
13 | Other Environmental Issues | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 28 |
Total | 31 | 34 | 36 | 39 | 34 | 20 | 29 | 30 | 34 | 26 | 33 | 26 | 21 | 390 |
Nº | Parameters | Facilities’ Compliance Level | Complied Facilities |
1 | Good House Keeping (GHK) | 11 | A,B,C,E,G, H,I,J,K,L,M |
2 | Use, Provision and Enforcement of PPEs | 8 | A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K |
3 | Waste management | 9 | A,B,C,D,E,G,H,I,K |
4 | Waste handling | 7 | A,C,D,E,G,H,I |
5 | Installation of Pollution abatement equipment to protect the workforce and preserve the work environment. | 11 | A,B,C,D,E,G,I,J,K,L,M |
6 | Installation of Pollution abatement equipment to protect the immediate facility environment. | 2 | C,I |
7 | Availability of medical facilities for workers’ health protection | 10 | A,B,C,D,E,G,H,I,J,K |
8 | Availability of Contingency plan | 1 | D |
9 | Availability of emergency response equipment | 11 | A,B,C,D,E,G,H,I,J,K,L |
10 | HSE policy existence in the facility | 1 | H |
11 | Information dissemination and posters provision | 4 | B,C,D,K |
12 | Conducting Training for workers | 3 | B,D,I |
13 | Others environmental issues | 5 | B,C,D,I,K |
The cumulative total of the parameters showed that parameter x (HSE Policy existence in facility) had the lowest cumulative value, while parameters v and vii (Installation of Pollution Abatement Equipment to Protect the Work Environment and Availability of Medical Facilities for Workers’ Health Protection) had the same value, which is the highest cumulative value.
From Chart 1, highest compliance values were recorded for parameters 1, 5 and 9, while lowest were recorded for parameters 8 and 10.
HSE management is a serious issue that must be properly addressed using series of management instruments that will help to alleviate the inherent havoc that the various hazardous compound and conditions exposure are causing or are capable of causing. These impacts can be dangerous to man, animals, plants, monuments and the environment. It usually spread to other nations (trans-boundary locations) to cause all forms of havocs. The prompt mitigation measures put in-place will alleviate most of the negative impact of anthropogenic activities.
In this report, the Environmental Reports of various facilities, chosen at random were assessed, using thirteen (13) existing facilities found within the Lagos and Ogun States metropolis. Thirteen (13) parameters were listed by which these facilities were judged. In addition, some of the pictures taken in the facilities were also presented.
Major benefits from proper management of HSE issues within a facility include; uninterrupted operational activities, optimal gain, eventual reduction of operational costs at the long run, avoidance of facility sanctions by government agencies and better corporate image perception of the company.
Benefits to the nation include; easy domestication of various ratified international treaties, better placement of the nation in the international terrain with reference to implementation of Global HSE issues, improved health of the workforce, workplace and the collective living and working environment within the country.
Using simple random sampling technique for choosing the thirteen (13) environmental assessment reports of the companies, the reports were perused and reviewed. Estimation and descriptive statistics were employed in analysing the data collated from the reports’ review.
Findings showed that using the maximum total score of 65, only 6 facilities (UNTL.(B), Cybele Cosmetics (C), EPPlc. (D), SVNL (E), DCC Telecoms (I) & Purechem (K)), (which is less that half of the facilities under review) had total scores above the average (32.5). Installation of pollution abatement equipment to protect the work environment and availability of medical facilities for workers’ health protection were two parameters that carried highest cumulative total fourty (40), when all the values for the facilities were added. HSE policy existence in the facilities carried the lowest cumulative total seventeen (17). Out of the 13 parameters analysed within the 13 facilities under review, six did not have a cumulative total of up to half of the maximum cumulative total level (65).
All these scenarios predicts a possible epidemic in the nearest future which can be promptly and conveniently averted using all the available mitigation measures as have been discussed in chapters one and two of this report as well as recommendations that will be suggested in this chapter. Answers were sought to many questions asked at the beginning of the research.
In conclusion therefore, the following points are enumerated to aid in answering the questions and the objectives of this report.
Due to lack of standard inventory, proper statistical analysis of collated data was difficult.
It can be inferred that most facility managers give high priority to personnel welfare, however, they do not enforce the use of PPEs properly and some facilities do not provide enough PPEs and adequate PPES.
It can be inferred that facility managers do not have a legally binding document within the facility, a legally binding document that can be used to hold them liable in court of law or one that can be used as a defence against liability.
List of further research work that can be undertaken include:
***
Copyright © 2011, ECO Services International