IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v4y2010i1p48-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of inspection sequence in compliance with the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) standards: Interpretations and implications

Author

Listed:
  • Kilkon Ko
  • John Mendeloff
  • Wayne Gray

Abstract

We examined the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) inspections in the US to identify the effects of repeated inspections and the time between inspections on non‐compliance. Our sample included 549,398 inspections conducted from 1972 through 2006 in manufacturing plants in the 29 states where federal OSHA enforces the law. We controlled for inspection type, industry, establishment size, and year. The number of total violations cited fell by 28%–48% from the first to the second inspection; after that, the numbers declined much more slowly. These effects were found in every one of the four sub‐periods examined. The number of violations cited increased with each additional year since the prior inspection after controlling for other variables; however, the increases were small, totaling approximately 15% over five years. OSHA should probably give higher priority to first time inspections than to repeated inspections. The current requirement that at least two years elapse between planned inspections should probably be lengthened.

Suggested Citation

  • Kilkon Ko & John Mendeloff & Wayne Gray, 2010. "The role of inspection sequence in compliance with the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) standards: Interpretations and implications," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), pages 48-70, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:4:y:2010:i:1:p:48-70
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01070.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01070.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01070.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Weil, 2001. "Assessing OSHA Performance: New Evidence from the Construction Industry," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 651-674.
    2. David Weil, 1996. "If OSHA Is So Bad, Why is Compliance So Good?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(3), pages 618-640, Autumn.
    3. Bartel, Ann P & Thomas, Lacy Glenn, 1985. "Direct and Indirect Effects of Regulation: A New Look at OSHA's Impact," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 1-25, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Angelo Castaldo & Anna Rita Germani & Alessia Marrocco & Marco Forti, 2022. "Drivers and frictions of workplace accidents: an empirical investigation of cross-country European heterogeneity," Public Finance Research Papers 55, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.
    2. Anja Bondebjerg & Trine Filges & Jan Hyld Pejtersen & Malene Wallach Kildemoes & Hermann Burr & Peter Hasle & Emile Tompa & Elizabeth Bengtsen, 2023. "Occupational health and safety regulatory interventions to improve the work environment: An evidence and gap map of effectiveness studies," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David WEIL, 2008. "A strategic approach to labour inspection," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 147(4), pages 349-375, December.
    2. Christine Jolls, 2007. "Employment Law and the Labor Market," NBER Working Papers 13230, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Bilgrami, A. & Cutler, H. & Sinha, K., 2021. "Do standardised workplace health and safety laws and increased enforcement activities reduce the probability of receiving workers' compensation?," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 21/08, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    4. Oscar Rikhotso & Thabiso John Morodi & Daniel Masilu Masekameni, 2022. "The Extent of Occupational Health Hazard Impact on Workers: Documentary Evidence from National Occupational Disease Statistics and Selected South African Companies’ Voluntary Corporate Social Responsi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-25, August.
    5. Wayne B. Gray & John Mendeloff, 2002. "The Declining Effects of OSHA Inspections on Manufacturing Injuries: 1979 to 1998," NBER Working Papers 9119, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Bilgrami, Anam & Cutler, Henry & Sinha, Kompal, 2021. "The impact of harmonising Australia’s workplace health and safety laws on workers compensation," GLO Discussion Paper Series 773, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    7. Jorge Rivera & Jennifer Oetzel & Peter deLeon & Mark Starik, 2009. "Business responses to environmental and social protection policies: toward a framework for analysis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(1), pages 3-32, February.
    8. John Mendeloff & Wayne B. Gray & Philip Armour & Frank Neuhauser, 2021. "The re‐occurrence of violations in occupational safety and health administration inspections," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1454-1479, October.
    9. Wayne B. Gray & John M. Mendeloff, 2005. "The Declining Effects of Osha Inspections on Manufacturing Injuries, 1979–1998," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 58(4), pages 571-587, July.
    10. Michael Gmeiner & Robert Gmeiner, 2022. "Regulation Enforcement," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 163-202, June.
    11. Nadeau, Louis W., 1997. "EPA Effectiveness at Reducing the Duration of Plant-Level Noncompliance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 54-78, September.
    12. Masaru Sasaki, 2010. "Unemployment and Workplace Safety in a Search and Matching Model," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 10-14, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    13. Nicole Darnall & Irene Henriques & Perry Sadorsky, 2010. "Adopting Proactive Environmental Strategy: The Influence of Stakeholders and Firm Size," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(6), pages 1072-1094, September.
    14. Jeffrey T. Macher & John W. Mayo & Jack A. Nickerson, 2011. "Regulator Heterogeneity and Endogenous Efforts to Close the Information Asymmetry Gap," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 25-54.
    15. W. Kip Viscusi & Robert J. Cramer, 2023. "How regulations undervalue occupational fatalities," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 250-271, January.
    16. Dolar, Burak & Shughart II, William F., 2011. "Enforcement of the USA Patriot Act's anti-money laundering provisions: Have regulators followed a risk-based approach?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 19-31.
    17. Dean, Thomas J. & Brown, Robert L. & Stango, Victor, 2000. "Environmental Regulation as a Barrier to the Formation of Small Manufacturing Establishments: A Longitudinal Examination," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 56-75, July.
    18. Alm, James & Shimshack, Jay, 2014. "Environmental Enforcement and Compliance: Lessons from Pollution, Safety, and Tax Settings," Foundations and Trends(R) in Microeconomics, now publishers, vol. 10(4), pages 209-274, December.
    19. Bauer, Thomas K. & Million, Andreas & Rotte, Ralph & Zimmermann, Klaus F., 1998. "Immigration Labor and Workplace Safety," IZA Discussion Papers 16, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Richard M. Locke & Fei Qin & Alberto Brause, 2007. "Does Monitoring Improve Labor Standards? Lessons from Nike," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 61(1), pages 3-31, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:4:y:2010:i:1:p:48-70. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.