Conflicts Arising in the Generation Process of the ISO 45001 Standard

The process involved in the design, acceptance and launching of the ISO 45001 standard is turning out to be long and tortuous. It has been confirmed that, like its predecessors in the environmental (ISO 14001) and corporate social responsibility (ISO 26000) spheres of activity, this may prove to be conflictive as it deals with substantive social aspects such as those referring to labour issues. Disagreements can easily arise between stakeholders, and although some approaches may not show evidence of this, occupational health and safety is a complex area that is replete with multidisciplinary components that influence the daily tasks performed by employees—multidisciplinary components that are so deep-seated and controversial as cultural, political and ethical matters. The design and launching process for standards such as ISO 45001 has been under-researched in scholarly literature that focuses on the study of meta-standards. Priority is given to those of a technical nature or those that simply appear to rehash previous literature with regard to the phenomenon itself subject to study. In order to fill this gap, this contribution based on a work in progress aims at shedding light on the process involved in generating the ISO 45001. Extensive field work has been designed for such purpose that was currently underway at the time this contribution was completed, given that the ISO 45001 design and launching process has not yet concluded. Preliminary results obtained from the work evidence two types of main discrepancy—on the one hand, discrepancies in terms of form and specific content and, on the other, underlying discrepancies such as those that raise doubts about the raison d’etre of the standard itself.

[1]  Aseem Prakash,et al.  Green Clubs and Voluntary Governance: ISO 14001 and Firms' Regulatory Compliance , 2005 .

[2]  P. Hämäläinen,et al.  The effect of globalization on occupational accidents , 2009 .

[3]  Michael J. Lenox,et al.  The Strategic Use of Decentralized Institutions: Exploring Certification With the ISO 14001 Management Standard , 2005 .

[4]  Petra Christmann,et al.  Globalization and the Environment: Determinants of Firm Self-Regulation in China , 2001 .

[5]  Martí Casadesús,et al.  How integrated are environmental, quality and other standardized management systems? An empirical study ☆ , 2009 .

[6]  Michaela A. Balzarova,et al.  Stakeholders’ Influence and Contribution to Social Standards Development: The Case of Multiple Stakeholder Approach to ISO 26000 Development , 2012 .

[7]  L. Brès Membership strategies in pluralistic organizations: The case of ISO 26000 , 2013 .

[8]  D. O'Rourke,et al.  Multi-stakeholder regulation: privatizing or socializing global labor standards? , 2006 .

[9]  A. Culyer,et al.  The effectiveness of occupational health and safety management system interventions: A systematic review , 2007 .

[10]  Nils Brunsson,et al.  A World of Standards , 2000 .

[11]  H. Knutsen Geographies of Informalization: Conceptual Dilemmas over Social Standards and Informalization of Labor , 2006 .

[12]  David Vogel,et al.  Private Global Business Regulation , 2008 .

[13]  J. Clapp The Privatization of Global Environmental Governance: ISO 14000 and the Developing World , 1998 .

[14]  Charles F. Redinger,et al.  Development and Evaluation of The Michigan Occupational Health and Safety Management System Assessment Instrument: A Universal OHSMS Performance Measurement Tool , 1998 .

[15]  K. Hallström,et al.  Global multi-stakeholder standard setters: how fragile are they? , 2013 .