Risk assessment of health, safety and environmental (HSE) hazards based on system life cycle in an aquaculture industry, Hormozgan province
Journal of Behdasht dar Arseh (i.e., Health in the Field),
Vol. 10 No. 4 (1401),
20 June 2023
,
Page 25-38
https://doi.org/10.22037/jhf.v10i4.39573
Abstract
Background and Aims: This study aimed to assess the risk of health, safety, and environmental (HSE) hazards based on the system's life cycle using Fuzzy Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FFMEA) in an aquaculture industry in Hormozgan province.
Materials and Methods Identification of HSE hazards by system life cycle stage, including (1) construction and preparation of pools, (2) construction of feed production and preparation plant, (3) pumping and filling the pools, (4) maintenance and breeding of aquatic animals and (5) catching and transporting the aquatic animals was carried out by five HSE experts using the FMEA worksheet. Then, the risk of identified hazards was assessed by the FFMEA method (with the range of risk priority number [RPN] of 1-634). All the ethical issues were considered in this study.
Results: In the life cycle of the aquaculture industry, a total of 343 HSE hazards were identified, of which 38.8% had high risk, 44.6% had medium risk, and 16.6% had low risk. About 86% of the HSE hazards were in the health and safety field and 14% of them were in the field of environment. The construction of feed production and preparation plant (having 46% of the HSE hazards) was determined to be the most hazardous phase of the life cycle of aquaculture.
Conclusion: The FFMEA risk assessment method based on the life cycle by taking into account the uncertainty in the risk components and identifying and prioritizing the HSE hazards in the entire life stages of a system can be used as an efficient and effective tool for assessing the risk of HSE hazards in different industries.
- Health effect; Risk assessment; Environmental consequence; Life cycle; Aquaculture industry
How to Cite
References
2. Fam IM, Nikoomaram H, Soltanian A. Comparative analysis of creative and classic training methods in health, safety and environment (HSE) participation improvement. Journal of loss prevention in the process industries 2012; 25(2):250-53.
3. Crane L, Gantz G, Isaacs SI. Introduction to risk management. In: editor.^editors. ed.: Extension Risk management education and risk management agency; 2013. p.
4. Yousefi S, Alizadeh A, Hayati J, Baghery M. HSE risk prioritization using robust DEA-FMEA approach with undesirable outputs: a study of automotive parts industry in Iran. Safety science 2018; 102:144-58.
5. Benakka L, Gharbi LZ, Bacroume S, Bejjaji Z, Aouane M. The implementation of the occupational health and safety management system according to OHSAS 18001/2007 in a Moroccan telecommunication company. editor^editors. The implementation of the occupational health and safety management system according to OHSAS 18001/2007 in a Moroccan telecommunication company. E3S Web of Conferences; 2021. EDP Sciences.
6. Zhu H-L, Liu S-S, Qu Y-Y, Han X-X, He W, Cao Y. A new risk assessment method based on belief rule base and fault tree analysis. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part O: Journal of Risk and Reliability 2022; 236(3):420-38.
7. Huang Y, Zhang Z, Tao Y, Hu H. Quantitative risk assessment of railway intrusions with text mining and fuzzy Rule-Based Bow-Tie model. Advanced Engineering Informatics 2022; 54:101726.
8. Tzanakakis K. Managing Risks in Railway System: Springer; 2021.
9. Brocal F, González C, Sebastián M, Reniers G, Paltrinieri N. Standardized risk assessment techniques: A review in the framework of occupational safety. Safety and Reliability–Safe Societies in a Changing World 2018:2889-95.
10. McDermott RE, Mikulak RJ, Beauregard MR. FMEA: New York: Taylor & Francis Group; 2009.
11. Sharma KD, Srivastava S. Failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) implementation: a literature review. J Adv Res Aeronaut Space Sci 2018; 5:1-17.
12. Panchal D, Srivastava P. Qualitative analysis of CNG dispensing system using fuzzy FMEA–GRA integrated approach. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management 2019; 10(1):44-56.
13. Li H, Díaz H, Soares CG. A failure analysis of floating offshore wind turbines using AHP-FMEA methodology. Ocean Engineering 2021; 234:109261.
14. Mascia A, Cirafici A, Bongiovanni A, Colotti G, Lacerra G, Di Carlo M, et al. A failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA)-based approach for risk assessment of scientific processes in non-regulated research laboratories. Accreditation and Quality Assurance 2020; 25(5):311-21.
15. Karatop B, Taşkan B, Adar E, Kubat C. Decision analysis related to the renewable energy investments in Turkey based on a Fuzzy AHP-EDAS-Fuzzy FMEA approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering 2021; 151:106958.
16. Shih H-c, Ma H-w. Life cycle risk assessment of bottom ash reuse. Journal of hazardous materials 2011; 190(1-3):308-16.
17. Gallego-Schmid A, Tarpani RRZ. Life cycle assessment of wastewater treatment in developing countries: a review. Water research 2019; 153:63-79.
18. Barton J, Dalley D, Patel V. Life cycle assessment for waste management. Waste management 1996; 16(1-3):35-50.
19. Mitchell RJ, Lystad RP. Occupational injury and disease in the Australian aquaculture industry. Marine Policy 2019; 99:216-22.
20. Ngajilo D, Jeebhay MF. Occupational injuries and diseases in aquaculture–a review of literature. Aquaculture 2019; 507:40-55.
21. Theodorou JA, Tzovenis I. A framework for risk analysis of the shellfish aquaculture: The case of the Mediterranean mussel farming in Greece. Aquaculture and Fisheries 2021.
22. NIOSH CfMSaHSPDWDUhwcgnpcdh.
23. ISO E. 14044: Environmental Management, Life Cycle Assessment, Requirements and Guidelines, DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V. In: editor.^editors. ed.: Beuth Verlag, Berlin; 2006. p.
24. Liu H-T, Tsai Y-l. A fuzzy risk assessment approach for occupational hazards in the construction industry. Safety science 2012; 50(4):1067-78.
25. Kalbassi MR, Abdollahzadeh E, Salari-Joo H. A review on aquaculture development in Iran. Ecopersia 2013; 1(2):159-78.
26. Cavalli L, Jeebhay MF, Marques F, Mitchell R, Neis B, Ngajilo D, et al. Scoping global aquaculture occupational safety and health. Journal of agromedicine 2019; 24(4):391-404.
27. Mert B, Ercan P. Occupational health and safety in aquaculture industry. editor^editors. Occupational health and safety in aquaculture industry. Safety and Reliability of Complex Engineered Systems-Proceedings of the 25th European Safety and Reliability Conference, ESREL 2015, January 2015; 2015.
28. Moreau DT, Neis B. Occupational health and safety hazards in Atlantic Canadian aquaculture: Laying the groundwork for prevention. Marine Policy 2009; 33(2):401-11.
29. Badri A, Gbodossou A, Nadeau S. Occupational health and safety risks: Towards the integration into project management. Safety science 2012; 50(2):190-98.
30. Ansar MA, Assawadithalerd M, Tipmanee D, Laokiat L, Khamdahsag P, Kittipongvises S. Occupational exposure to hazards and volatile organic compounds in small-scale plastic recycling plants in Thailand by integrating risk and life cycle assessment concepts. Journal of Cleaner Production 2021; 329:129582.
- Abstract Viewed: 528 times