FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / Stakeholder Views on the Potential Benefits and Feasibility ...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2024; 14(23); 3450; doi: 10.3390/ani14233450

Stakeholder Views on the Potential Benefits and Feasibility of an Equestrian Industry-Specific Health, Safety and Welfare Management System.

Abstract: With the growth of the equestrian industry, risk exposure and the obligation to maintain the health, safety, and welfare of humans and horses remain front and centre. As there has been no apparent reduction in non-fatal human horse-related injuries, we asked industry stakeholders to discuss their current management and risk mitigation practices and highlight potential barriers to improving these processes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 stakeholders from Australian equestrian work- ( = 9) and non-work- ( = 11) related organisations to determine the potential benefits and feasibility of adopting an industry-specific health, safety, and welfare (HSW) management system. The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 45001:2018 Occupational Health and Safety Management framework, often used by high-risk industries, guided deductive data coding. Most participants preferred formal HSW management systems and supported improvements in their current HSW practices. Industry gaps included (1) lack of training, education material, and competency; (2) social licence to operate (SLO) regarding horse welfare; and (3) management of and resistance to change. Industry barriers included (1) lack of good governance and (2) poor safety culture related to tradition and human behaviours. Most stakeholders sought further collaboration, HSW guidance materials, and national industry representation opportunities, with supporting the concept of an adaptable industry-specific HSW management system. Further multi-sector equestrian stakeholder engagement is recommended to determine the feasibility of adopting and modifying (ISO) 45001:2018 as a suitable equestrian industry-specific HSW management system.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2024-11-28 PubMed ID: 39682412PubMed Central: PMC11640081DOI: 10.3390/ani14233450Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

Overview

  • This study explored the perspectives of stakeholders in the Australian equestrian industry regarding the benefits and practicality of implementing a health, safety, and welfare (HSW) management system tailored specifically for the equestrian sector.
  • The research identifies current gaps, barriers, and opportunities for improving health and safety practices for both humans and horses through an industry-specific system.

Background and Context

  • The equestrian industry is growing, which increases the exposure to risks for both people and horses involved in the sector.
  • Non-fatal injuries related to horses remain frequent, signaling a persistent safety issue that needs addressing.
  • Current management and risk mitigation practices within the industry vary and may not adequately reduce injury rates.
  • The study focuses on both work-related and non-work-related equestrian organizations in Australia.

Research Methodology

  • Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 stakeholders representing various Australian equestrian organizations.
  • The participants included 9 stakeholders from work-related equestrian sectors and 11 from non-work-related organizations.
  • The data analysis was guided by the ISO 45001:2018 framework for Occupational Health and Safety Management, a standard used in other high-risk industries.
  • This framework provided a deductive coding approach to analyze the interview data around health, safety, and welfare management concepts.

Key Findings: Industry Gaps

  • Lack of Training and Competency: Insufficient education materials and formal training exist to develop the necessary skills and competencies in health and safety practices.
  • Social Licence to Operate (SLO) Regarding Horse Welfare: There is a concern about maintaining public trust and meeting societal expectations for animal welfare in the industry.
  • Resistance to Change and Management Challenges: Some traditional practices and attitudes hinder the adoption of improved safety measures.

Key Findings: Industry Barriers

  • Poor Governance: Lack of clear, strong leadership and structured governance within the industry weakens coordinated health and safety efforts.
  • Safety Culture Influenced by Tradition and Human Behavior: Long-standing norms and behaviors negatively impact the adoption of safety measures and risk reduction strategies.

Stakeholders’ Perspectives on Health, Safety, and Welfare Systems

  • Most stakeholders favored formalized HSW management systems tailored specifically to the equestrian industry.
  • There was support for enhancing existing practices to better protect humans and horses involved in equestrian activities.
  • Stakeholders expressed interest in further collaboration across the sector to develop resources and guidance materials.
  • There was a desire for stronger national industry representation to support unified efforts and improve governance.
  • The concept of adapting the ISO 45001:2018 standard for equestrian use received positive consideration as a feasible approach to creating an industry-specific HSW system.

Recommendations and Future Directions

  • The study recommends engaging a wider range of equestrian stakeholders to explore the feasibility and design of a customized health, safety, and welfare management system.
  • This will include considering modifications to the ISO 45001:2018 framework to make it relevant and practical for the unique risks and contexts of equestrian activities.
  • By addressing training needs, governance issues, and cultural barriers, the industry can better mitigate risks and improve outcomes for people and horses.
  • Future work should focus on building consensus and developing tailored tools to support safety culture change and governance improvements across the equestrian sector.

Cite This Article

APA
Chapman M, Fenner K, Thomas MJW, Thompson K. (2024). Stakeholder Views on the Potential Benefits and Feasibility of an Equestrian Industry-Specific Health, Safety and Welfare Management System. Animals (Basel), 14(23), 3450. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14233450

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 14
Issue: 23
PII: 3450

Researcher Affiliations

Chapman, Meredith
  • School of Health, Medical and Applied Science, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD 4701, Australia.
Fenner, Kate
  • School of Agriculture and Food Sustainability, The University of Queensland, Gatton, QLD 4343, Australia.
Thomas, Matthew J W
  • Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, 44 Greenhill Road, Wayville, SA 5034, Australia.
Thompson, Kirrilly
  • Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia.
  • School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

This article includes 97 references
  1. Chapman M, Thompson K. Preventing and investigating horse-related human injury and fatality in work and non-work equestrian environments: A consideration of the workplace health and safety framework.. Animals 2016;6:33.
    doi: 10.3390/ani6050033pmc: PMC4880850pubmed: 27164148google scholar: lookup
  2. Guyton K, Houchen-Wise E, Peck E, Mayberry J. Equestrian injury is costly, disabling, and frequently preventable: The imperative for improved safety awareness.. Am. Surg. 2013;79:76–83.
    doi: 10.1177/000313481307900134pubmed: 23317616google scholar: lookup
  3. Gombeski W Jr, Camargo FC, Wiemers H, Jehlik C, Barger PH, Mead J. Preventing horse-related injuries by watching out for other humans.. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour. 2017;19:11–16.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jort.2017.05.003google scholar: lookup
  4. Cripps R. Horse-related injury in Australia.. Australian Injury Prevention Bulletin AIHW National Injury Surveillance Unit Flinders University; Adelaide, Australia: 2000.
  5. Dyson S. The ridden horse pain ethogram.. Equine Vet. Educ. 2022;34:372–380.
    doi: 10.1111/eve.13468google scholar: lookup
  6. Fenner K, Dashper K, Serpell J, McLean A, Wilkins C, Klinck M, Wilson B, McGreevy P. The development of a novel questionnaire approach to the investigation of horse training, management, and behaviour.. Animals 2020;10:1960.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10111960pmc: PMC7693391pubmed: 33114408google scholar: lookup
  7. Mutore K, Lim J, Fofana D, Torres-Reveron A, Skubic J. Hearing hoofbeats? Think head and neck trauma: A 10-year NTDB analysis of equestrian-related trauma in the USA.. Trauma Surg. Acute Care Open. 2021;6:e000728.
    doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2021-000728pmc: PMC8442081pubmed: 34595353google scholar: lookup
  8. Chapman M, Thomas M, Thompson K. What people really think about safety around horses: The relationship between risk perception, values and safety behaviours.. Animals 2020;10:2222.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10122222pmc: PMC7761269pubmed: 33256171google scholar: lookup
  9. Thompson K, McGreevy PD, McManus P. A Critical Review of Horse-Related Risk: A Research Agenda for Safer Mounts, Riders and Equestrian cultures.. Animals 2015;5:561–575.
    doi: 10.3390/ani5030372pmc: PMC4598694pubmed: 26479374google scholar: lookup
  10. Donovan S, Salmon P, Lenné M, Horberry T. Safety leadership and systems thinking: Application and evaluation of a Risk Management Framework in the mining industry.. Ergonomics 2017;60:1336–1350.
    doi: 10.1080/00140139.2017.1308562pubmed: 28317449google scholar: lookup
  11. Loud J. Major risk: Moving from symptoms to systems thinking.. Prof. Saf. 2016;61:50–56.
  12. Hudson P. Applying the lessons of high risk industries to health care.. BMJ Qual. Saf. 2003;12((Suppl. S1)):i7–i12.
    doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.suppl_1.i7pmc: PMC1765769pubmed: 14645741google scholar: lookup
  13. Tupa J, Simota J, Steiner F. Aspects of risk management implementation for Industry 4.0.. Procedia Manuf. 2017;11:1223–1230.
    doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.248google scholar: lookup
  14. White D. Application of systems thinking to Risk Management: A review ofthe literature.. Manag. Decis. 1995;33:35–45.
    doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000003918google scholar: lookup
  15. Catino M. A review of literature: Individual blame vs. organizational function logics in accident analysis.. J. Contingencies Crisis Manag. 2008;16:53–62.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5973.2008.00533.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  16. Winfield J. An exploratory investigation into perceptions of risk management in equestrian sports coaching from a practitioner and governing body perspective, leading to the creation of a bowtie model. 2021; p. 434.
  17. Lay A, Saunders R, Lifshen M, Breslin F, LaMontagne A, Tompa E, Smith P. The relationship between occupational health and safety vulnerability and workplace injury. Saf. Sci. 2017;94:85–93.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.12.021google scholar: lookup
  18. Abdalla S, Apramian S, Cantley L, Cullen M. Occupation and Risk for Injuries. Injury Prevention and Environmental Health 3rd ed. 2017.
    pubmed: 30212110
  19. Andersson K, Lehtola M. Regulating the new equine industry in Finland. Wicked problems, governance models and gendered power structures. Sociol. Rural. 2011;51:387–403.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2011.00545.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  20. Collins J, Hanlon A, More S, Duggan V. The structure and regulation of the Irish equine industries: Links to considerations of equine welfare. Ir. Vet. J. 2008;61:746.
    doi: 10.1186/2046-0481-61-11-746pmc: PMC3113872pubmed: 21851704google scholar: lookup
  21. Leppälä J, Kolstrup C.L., Pinzke S, Lunner S, Rautiainen R, Saastamoinen M, Särkijärvi S. Development of a safety management web tool for horse stables. Animals 2015;5:1136–1146.
    doi: 10.3390/ani5040402pmc: PMC4693206pubmed: 26569319google scholar: lookup
  22. Meredith L, Ekman R, Brolin K. Epidemiology of equestrian accidents: A literature review. Internet J. Allied Health Sci. Pract. 2019;17:9.
    doi: 10.46743/1540-580X/2019.1795google scholar: lookup
  23. Näther M, Müller J, Theuvsen L. Risk management in equestrian farm businesses-status quo and needs for improvement. J. Austrian Soc. Agric. Econ. 2012;22:183–192.
  24. Checchi A, Casazza S, Di Piede C, Vivaldi L, Sabatini M. Guidelines for the optimization of safety in the equestrian sector. Proceedings of the 12th Congress “New Findings in Equine Practice”; Turin, Italy. 11–13 November 2010; Torino, Italy: Università degli studi di Torino; 2010.
  25. Thompson K, Leighton M, Riley C. Helping hands, hurting hooves: Towards a multidisciplinary paradigm of large animal rescue. Aust. J. Emerg. Manag. 2015;30:53–58.
  26. Hawson L. Science of horse training: Implications for rider safety and animal welfare. In: McGreevy P., McLean A., editors. Faculty of Veterinary Science. The University of Sydney; Sydney, Australia: 2010.
  27. Luke K, McAdie T, Smith B, Warren-Smith A. New insights into ridden horse behaviour, horse welfare and horse-related safety. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2021;246:105539.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105539google scholar: lookup
  28. Williams J, Marlin D. Foreword–Emerging issues in equestrian practice. Comp. Exerc. Physiol. 2020;16:1–4.
    doi: 10.3920/CEP20x001google scholar: lookup
  29. Busetto L, Wick W, Gumbinger C. How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurol. Res. Pract. 2020;2:14.
    doi: 10.1186/s42466-020-00059-zpmc: PMC7650082pubmed: 33324920google scholar: lookup
  30. Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative Methods for Health Research. Sage Publications; Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: 2018. p. 440. E-Book.
  31. Minhat H. An overview on the methods of interviews in qualitative research. Int. J. Public Health Clin. Sci. 2015;2:210–214.
  32. Green J, Willis K, Hughes E, Small R, Welch N, Gibbs L, Daly J. Generating best evidence from qualitative research: The role of data analysis. Aust. N. Z. J. Public Health. 2007;31:545–550.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2007.00141.xpubmed: 18081575google scholar: lookup
  33. . ISO 45001 Occupational Health and Safety Management System. [(accessed on 16 March 2024)].
  34. Douglas J, Owers R, Campbell M.L.. Social licence to operate: What can equestrian sports learn from other industries?. Animals 2022;12:1987.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12151987pmc: PMC9367437pubmed: 35953977google scholar: lookup
  35. Aksorn T, Hadikusumo B.H.W. Gap analysis approach for construction safety program improvement. J. Constr. Dev. Ctries. 2007;12:77–97.
  36. Yahya R, Handayani N.U., Purwanggono B. Analysis of OHSAS 18001: 2007 standard renewal towards ISO 45001: 2018 at PT. Power Plant Indonesia by using gap analysis method. SHS Web of Conferences EDP Sciences; Les Ulis, France: 2018.
  37. Pramono S.N., Ulkhaq M.M., Rahario R, Ardi F. A Gap Analysis on Implementation of Safety Management System in Airport: A Case Study. Proceedings of the 2018 4th International Conference on Science and Technology (ICST); Yogyakarta, Indonesia. 7–8 August 2018; Piscataway Township, NJ, USA: IEEE; 2018.
  38. Donaldson B, Shah B, Daher E. Comprehensive Gap Assessment of Complete Safety Management Systems with Systematic Analysis and Recommendations-A Successful Case Study. Proceedings of the SPE Latin American and Caribbean Health, Safety, Environment, and Sustainability Symposium; Bogota, Columbia. 7–8 July 2015; Bangkok, Thailand: SPE; 2015.
  39. Lucas J, Bulbul T, Anumba C. Gap analysis on the ability of guidelines and standards to support the performance of healthcare facilities. J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 2013;27:748–755.
    doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000364google scholar: lookup
  40. Zwieback D. Beyond Blame: Learning from Failure and Success. O’Reilly Media, Inc.; Sebastopol, CA, USA: 2015. p. 92.
  41. Walton M. Creating a “no blame” culture: Have we got the balance right?. Qual. Saf. 2004;13:163–164.
    doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.010959pmc: PMC1743838pubmed: 15175480google scholar: lookup
  42. Whittingham R. The Blame Machine: Why Human Error Causes Accidents. Routledge; London, UK: 2004. p. 288.
    doi: 10.4324/9780080472126google scholar: lookup
  43. CASA Civil Aviation Safety Authority. [(accessed on 11 May 2024)];2024 Available online: https://www.casa.gov.au/
  44. RISSB Rain Industry Safety and Standards Board. [(accessed on 11 May 2024)]. Available online: https://www.rissb.com.au/about/our-role-in-industry/
  45. Adelman M, Thompson K. Introduction to equestrian cultures in global and local contexts. Equest. Cult. Glob. Local Contexts 2017:1–14.
    doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-55886-8_1google scholar: lookup
  46. Turbeville P. Leadership for the Equestrian Professional. United States Sports Academy; Daphne, AL, USA: 2021; p. 24.
  47. Gilbert M. Young equestrians: The horse stable as a cultural space. Routledge; New York, NY, USA: 2013; pp. 233–250.
    doi: 10.4324/9780203763407google scholar: lookup
  48. Watson N, Thompson N.J., Jooste J. Why the long face? Experiences and observations of bullying behaviour at equestrian centres in Great Britain. Eur. J. Sport Soc. 2024;21:374–392.
    doi: 10.1080/16138171.2024.2335737google scholar: lookup
  49. Kargas A, Varoutas D. On the relation between organizational culture and leadership: An empirical analysis. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2015;2:1055953.
    doi: 10.1080/23311975.2015.1055953google scholar: lookup
  50. Noh J, Lee S, Cho H.C. The impact of corporate culture on industrial accidents in high-risk industries: A cross-sectional survey. Ind. Health. 2022;61:102–111.
    doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2021-0252pmc: PMC10079504pubmed: 35387946google scholar: lookup
  51. Hopkins A. Beyond compliance monitoring: New strategies for safety regulators. Law Policy. 2007;29:210–225.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9930.2007.00253.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  52. Hemsworth L, Jongman E, Coleman G. The Human–Horse Relationship: Identifying the Antecedents of Horse Owner Attitudes towards Horse Husbandry and Management Behaviour. Animals 2021;11:278.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11020278pmc: PMC7911803pubmed: 33499202google scholar: lookup
  53. BARTA Global Solutions to Tackle Local Issues Creating a Community of Practice. Conference Programme External 2024. [(accessed on 8 August 2024)]. Available online: https://www.bartacic.org/conference/invitation-and-agenda/
  54. AHA Animal Health Australia. 2024. [(accessed on 8 August 2024)]. Available online: https://animalhealthaustralia.com.au/about/
  55. FEI Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission. [(accessed on 8 August 2024)]. Available online: https://equinewellbeing.fei.org/
  56. ISES International Society for Equitation Science. [(accessed on 8 August 2024)]. Available online: https://www.equitationscience.com/
  57. Hausberger M, Roche H, Henry S, Visser K. A review of the human–horse relationship. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008;109:1–24.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.015google scholar: lookup
  58. Hawson L, McGreevy P, McLean A. The roles of equine ethology and applied learning theory in horse-related human injuries. J. Vet. Behav. 2010;5:324–338.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2010.06.001google scholar: lookup
  59. McGreevy P, McLean A. Roles of learning theory and ethology in equitation. J. Vet. Behav. 2007;2:108–118.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2007.05.003google scholar: lookup
  60. Chapman M, Fenner K, Thomas M. Development of a Human Factors Approach to Equine-Related Human Accident Analysis, and Preliminary Evaluation with Simulated Incidents. Safety 2022;8:72.
    doi: 10.3390/safety8040072google scholar: lookup
  61. Carter E. Welfare of working equids. Anim. Welf. 2016;25:512–513.
    doi: 10.1017/S0962728600007892google scholar: lookup
  62. Stringer A. Infectious diseases of working equids. Vet. Clin. Equine Pract. 2014;30:695–718.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2014.09.001pubmed: 25441116google scholar: lookup
  63. Holmes T, Brown A. Champing at the bit for improvements: A review of equine welfare in equestrian sports in the United Kingdom. Animals 2022;12:1186.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12091186pmc: PMC9100173pubmed: 35565612google scholar: lookup
  64. Furtado T, Preshaw L, Hockenhull J, Wathan J, Douglas J, Horseman S, Smith R, Pollard D, Pinchbeck G, Rogers J. How happy are equine athletes? Stakeholder perceptions of equine welfare issues associated with equestrian sport. Animals 2021;11:3228.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11113228pmc: PMC8614509pubmed: 34827960google scholar: lookup
  65. Luna D, Tadich T. Why should human-animal interactions be included in research of working equids’ welfare?. Animals 2019;9:42.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9020042pmc: PMC6406816pubmed: 30704022google scholar: lookup
  66. Greene A.N.. Horses at Work: Harnessing Power in Industrial America. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, MA, USA: London, UK: 2008.
    doi: 10.4159/9780674037908google scholar: lookup
  67. McShane C., Tarr J.. Animals, History, Culture. JHU Press; Baltimore, MD, USA: 2007. The horse in the city: Living machines in the nineteenth century.
    doi: 10.1353/book.3324google scholar: lookup
  68. Duncan I.J.. The changing concept of animal sentience. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2006;100:11–19.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.011google scholar: lookup
  69. Raw Z., Collins J.A., Burden F.A.. What Is a Working Equid? Analysis of Current Terminology and a Suggested Definition. Animals 2024;14:2026.
    doi: 10.3390/ani14142026pmc: PMC11274063pubmed: 39061488google scholar: lookup
  70. Thompson K., Matthews C.. Inroads into equestrian safety: Rider-reported factors contributing to horse-related accidents and near misses on australian roads. Animals 2015;5:592–609.
    doi: 10.3390/ani5030374pmc: PMC4598696pubmed: 26479376google scholar: lookup
  71. Browning H., Birch J.. Animal sentience. Philos. Compass. 2022;17:e12822.
    doi: 10.1111/phc3.12822pmc: PMC9285591pubmed: 35859762google scholar: lookup
  72. Wadham H., Monterrubio C., Dashper K.. London’s runaway horses remind us that animals are workers too. The Conversation The Conversation Media Group Ltd.; Melbourne, Australia: 2024.
  73. Mekuria S., Mulachew M., Abebe R.. Management practices and welfare problems encountered on working equids in Hawassa town, Southern Ethiopia. J. Vet. Med. Anim. Health 2013;5:243–250.
  74. Pritchard J., Lindberg A., Main D., Whay H.. Assessment of the welfare of working horses, mules and donkeys, using health and behaviour parameters. Prev. Vet. Med. 2005;69:265–283.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2005.02.002pubmed: 15907574google scholar: lookup
  75. Singh A., Pal Y., Kumar R., Kumar S., Rani K., Prasad J.. Working equids: Their conditions, invisible earning and challenges-a review. Asian J. Agric. Ext. Econ. Sociol. 2021;39:357–364.
    doi: 10.9734/ajaees/2021/v39i1130761google scholar: lookup
  76. Haddy E., Brown J., Burden F., Raw Z., Kaminski J., Proops L.. “What can we do to actually reach all these animals?” Evaluating approaches to improving working equid welfare. PLoS ONE 2022;17:e0273972.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273972pmc: PMC9462723pubmed: 36084063google scholar: lookup
  77. Reed K.. Welfare of working animals. Proceedings of the 5th Pan Commonwealth Veterinary Conference; Accra, Ghana. 21–25 March 2011.
  78. Grace D., Diall O., Saville K., Warboys D., Ward P., Wild I., Perry B.D.. The global contributions of working equids to sustainable agriculture and livelihoods in agenda 2030. EcoHealth 2022;19:342–353.
    doi: 10.1007/s10393-022-01613-8pmc: PMC9434516pubmed: 36048298google scholar: lookup
  79. Sturgeon B.. One Welfare in Practice. CRC Press; Boca Raton, FL, USA: 2021. Working Animals–One Health, One Welfare; pp. 279–317.
  80. Swuste P., Van Gulijk C., Zwaard W., Lemkowitz S., Oostendorp Y., Groeneweg J.. Developments in the safety science domain, in the fields of general and safety management between 1970 and 1979, the year of the near disaster on Three Mile Island, a literature review. Saf. Sci. 2016;86:10–26.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.01.022google scholar: lookup
  81. Robson L., Clarke J., Cullen K., Bielecky A., Severin C.. The effectiveness of occupational health and safety management system interventions: A systematic review. Saf. Sci. 2007;45:329–353.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2006.07.003google scholar: lookup
  82. Redinger C.F., Levine S.P.. Development and evaluation of the Michigan Occupational Health and Safety Management System Assessment Instrument: A universal OHSMS performance measurement tool. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 1998;59:572–581.
    doi: 10.1080/15428119891010758google scholar: lookup
  83. SW-NSW. How to Manage Work Health and Safety Risks. In: NSW Code of Practice. SafeWork NSW, editor. SafeWork NSW: NSW Government; Gosford, Australia: 2014. p. 28.
  84. SW-NSW. Working Safely with Horses. In: SafeWork NSW, editor. SafeWork NSW: NSW Government; Gosford, Australia: 2018. p. 6.
  85. SW-NSW. Working with horses safety alert. In: SafeWork NSW, editor. Safety Alerts. NSW Government; Gosford, Australia: 2018.
  86. . Guidebook Horse Stables and Track Riding Safety. 2018.
  87. . Accreditation with HSA. 1992.
  88. Connect J.. A Guide to Understanding and Complying with Work Health and Safety Laws. Community Organisations and WHS Laws. 2023.
  89. Furci J., Sunindijo R.. Impacts of the WHS Act 2011 on safety management in small and medium construction companies. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2020;20:196–206.
    doi: 10.1080/15623599.2018.1484844google scholar: lookup
  90. . Managing Risks. 2022.
  91. SWA. A Guide to Work Health and Safety for Volunteer Organisations. SafeWork Australia; Canberra, Australia: 2020.
  92. OOC. Risk Management for Not-for-Profit Organisations. NSW Government, Office of Communities; Canberra, Australia: 2023.
  93. . Tapp v Australian Bushman’s Campdraft & Rodeo Association Limited. High Court Australia: Sydney, Australia. 2021.
  94. . WorkCover (Inspector Calvez) v TAFE Commission). NSW District Court: Sydney, Australia. 2014.
  95. Lindahl C., Bergman Bruhn Å., Andersson I.. Occupational Safety Climate in the Swedish Equine Sector. Animals 2022;12:438.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12040438pmc: PMC8868110pubmed: 35203148google scholar: lookup
  96. Koo J., Kim S., Kim H., Kim Y., Yoon E.. A systematic approach towards accident analysis and prevention. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2009;26:1476–1483.
    doi: 10.1007/s11814-009-0262-zgoogle scholar: lookup
  97. Murphy G., Efthymiou M.. Aviation safety regulation in the multi-stakeholder environment of an airport. J. Air Transp. Stud. 2017;8:1–26.
    doi: 10.38008/jats.v8i2.30google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,005 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.