Studies have determined that the application of technical safety measures is not adequate to protect human, economic and environmental assets in industries. Therefore, promoting Health, Safety and Environment (HSE culture), as an alternative approach, is of great importance. The aim of this study was to evaluate and manage HSE culture among employees of an industrial sector in Iran. This descriptive analytic research was carried out during the years 2009 and 2010. The statistical population included ten subsidiaries of the industry. To gather the required data, an HSE culture questionnaire was developed. SPSS software was also applied to analyze the data gathered. Data analysis determined that the mean of HSE culture scores was 262.7. Considering the borderline between the negative and positive HSE culture (279), it is inferred that 79.4% of personnel culture scores was negative. Finally, the study concluded that to improve safety culture in an organization, not only psychological and personal factors but also organizational and environmental factors should thoroughly be investigated. In this way, the actual problems would be identified, appropriate problem-solving methodologies be implemented and, ultimately incidents rate be reduced.

Background and aims: The diversity of health, safety and environmental issues (HSE) and limitations of the resources hinders response to all the research needs in the field of HSE. HSE promotion and policy making require research based on the real needs and problems of the society. Although, the budget allocated to the research is limited, this budget is not optimally utilized in present situation of Iran. Therefore, setting research priority in HSE is important to direct the flow of resources to the real needs of the society. This study aims to define research priorities in the field of HSE with the use of experts’ and other stakeholders’ opinions. Methods: The qualitative research method was used in this study. The proposed model of Council on Health Research for Development (COHRED) was applied in five stages including stakeholder analysis, situation analysis, identifying research topics, scoring research priority using defined criteria and prioritizing researches based on maximum agreement. The first stage was stakeholder analysis, the centers, institutions, organizations and universities related to HSE field were identified through review of literature, investigating Iranian scientific journals and by asking the experts. Also, the contact information of 70 experts, professionals, and stakeholders who were members of health centers, institutions or universities in the field of HSE were collected. In the second stage, an extensive search was done on the literature and published scientific articles from 2014 to 2019 in google scholar. The articles were selected through investigating the title and abstract of the articles and then studying deeper into the texts. Also, the official websites of Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Ministry of Cooperatives, Labor and Social Welfare, Ministry of Industry, Mine and Commerce were examined. The third stage was to identify the research topics and occupational areas, which was done by using the classification of International Labor Organization and also through brain storming of the experts. The fourth stage was scoring the priority of researches in each occupational area and research topic based on criteria such as necessity of research, appropriateness of the research to the target population, feasibility of researches based on the available resources and the research outcome. Scoring was done in a panel discussion based on a Likert scale of 1 to 9 by experts; one represented the lowest and represented the highest priorities. The fifth step was to prioritize the researches based on mean score given by the experts. Results: Situation analysis of studies in the field of HSE from 2014 to 2019 in Iran showed that most studies have been conducted in industries. According to experts, in the field of health and environment, the highest research priority was given to agriculture, fisheries, and livestock, and the highest priority to safety was given to workers in industry and mines, construction and driving. Also, workers in medium and small scale constructions and workers in small and medium industries and mines had the highest priority in the ten research areas in health and safety. Agriculture, fisheries, husbandry and poultry had the highest priority in most of the ten research areas in environment. Among the three HSE domains, in the managerial and sales jobs, the research priority was given to occupational health research. Priority research in health care, industries and mines and construction, service, armed forces and driving related jobs were given to safety related researches. In agriculture, fisheries and husbandry, the priority of research was given to environmental issues and then to occupational health. In the area of occupational health, the highest priority in managerial occupations was given to the researches that assess impact of different program. In sales jobs, the highest priority was given to the research area of developing new interventions or solutions. In large scale industries and mines, the highest priority was given to the researches that are related to developing interventions or solutions, but in medium and small industries and mines, the highest priority was given to the researches that assess the impact of a program or intervention. In the field of medium and small-scale construction workers, the highest priority was given to the research area of qualitative or quantitative situation analysis and assessing the causes of a problem. In the service occupations, the highest priority was given to the research area of qualitative or quantitative situation analysis. In the military occupations, the highest priority was assigned to the research area of developing new interventions or solutions. In large scale agriculture, fisheries, husbandry and poultry industries, the highest priority was given to the research area of determining the trends of a situation or problem. In agriculture, fisheries, husbandry and poultry industries of medium and small industries, the highest priority was assigned to the field of evaluation of the impact of programs. In the driving jobs, higher priority was given to the research area of developing new interventions or solutions. In the area of occupational safety research, the highest priority in managerial occupations was given to the research domain of cost effectiveness or cost benefit analysis. In the health care occupations, the highest priority was given to Evaluation of the interventions. In sales jobs, the highest priority was given to the research area of developing new interventions or solutions. In the field of large-scale mining and industrial workers, the highest priority was given to research in developing new interventions or solutions. In the field of medium and small-scale industrial and mining workers, the highest priority was given to evaluation of the interventions. In the field of large industrial construction, the highest priority was given to determining the trends of a situation or problems and developing new interventions or solutions. In the service occupations, the highest priority was given to the research area of developing new interventions or solutions. In the military occupations, the highest priority was devoted to the research of developing new interventions or solutions and evaluation of the interventions. In agriculture, fisheries, poultry, and small and medium-sized industries, the highest priority was given to evaluation of the impact of programs. In the driving jobs, the highest priority was given to the research area of developing new interventions or solutions. In the area of environmental research, the highest priority in managerial occupations was given to determining the trends of a situation or problems and developing plans or strategies. In the health care jobs, the highest priority was given to the evaluation of the interventions. In sales jobs, the highest priority was given to the qualitative or quantitative situation analysis. The highest priority was given to developing new interventions or solutions for workers in large-scale industries and mines. For workers in the field of medium and small industries and mines, the highest priority was given to developing plans or strategies. The highest priority was given to developing plans or strategies for workers in the field of medium and small scale construction. In service jobs, the highest priority was given to qualitative or quantitative situation analysis. In military jobs, the highest priority was given to determining the trends of a situation or problems and evaluation of the interventions. In agriculture, fisheries, husbandry and poultry industries, the highest priority was given to qualitative or quantitative situation analysis and determining the trends of a situation of problems. In agriculture, fisheries, poultry, and small and medium-sized industries, the highest priority was given to evaluation of the interventions and evaluation of the impact of programs. In the driving jobs, the highest priority was given to the determining the trends of a situation or problem. Conclusion: Most studies in the field of HSE have been conducted in industry. It is required to expand the HSE research based on the priorities set out in this study.

Introduction: Oil and gas industry with respect to the quality and quantity of raw materials, intermediate and final products, as well as having three properties of high complexity, low flexibility and high vulnerability are critical industries and occurrence of an event in aspects of human, environmental and economic can be disaster. The overall benefits of this research could be defined as assessing the HSE performance quantitatively based on the multi attributes decision making method in order to create a motivation for different gas companies to make them improve themselves.Material and method: This work started with observing the processes of the sites of 4 groups of companies in the Iran National Gas Company namely: Provincial Gas, Development & Engineering, Gas Distribution and Refinery, gathering and classifying the effective parameters on HSE management system along with hard-work parameters too. Then the data was analyzed with TOPSIS method.Results: Analyzing gathered data and indexes by TOPSIS was resulted to ranking the studied companies as follow: with the final score of 0.74, 0.55, 0.40 and 0.19 from 1 respectively. Conclusion: In this study to compare the performance of the gas companies, 29 indicators (23 HSE indicators, and 6 indicators of hard work) were developed and TOPSIS method were used to rank mentioned companies.

Introduction: Quality and efficiency of health, safety and environment (HSE) management systems play a vital role in achieving their goals. Considering that outputs and objective achievement make continuous improvement of services and products, internal and external customer satisfaction, adopting a systematic way for performing various tasks, system performance, and analysis are very important. The present study was conducted to construct a proper framework for assessing the Iran Power Plant Projects Management Company (MAPNA) group contractors in terms of their health, safety and environment performance.Methods: In the first step of the study, all the documents and literature associated with performance assessment were reviewed. In the second step, using a focus group approach, a basic model for assessing the HSE management system was designed. Lastly, the framework was tested and credited on three major contractors of the MAPNA group.Results: The proposed framework composed of five criteria. The main criterion was the pattern of HSE process implementation, which had seven sub-criteria and 120 guiding hints. Moreover, the five criteria were able to assess the organizational capabilities in terms of health, safety and environment management.Conclusions: The proposed framework made contractors able to promote their HSE performances by identifying organizational strong and weak points, prioritizing improvement projects, and also monitoring the pace of improvement in achieving organizational excellence.