Comparative Analysis of Occupational Injuries Dynamics in Russia and the Republic of Crimea in 2017–2021

Introduction. One of the health-saving resources for the working population is the improvement of the occupational safety system and prevention of occupational injuries (OI). Systematic scientific research in this field remains relevant as it helps to understand the interrelationships between the causes and consequences of OI in different sectors of economic activity. In recent years, there has been a lack of research on the structure and dynamics of OI in the Republic of Crimea (RC), and its indicators have not been compared. The aim of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of Crimean and all-Russian dynamics of occupational injuries over a five-year period from 2017 to 2021 in order to identify trends and develop strategies for improving production safety.
Materials and Methods. Methods of systematization of scientific literature on the issue of OI were employed. Statistical data on the state of OI in the Republic of Crimea and the Russian Federation were analyzed and compared. The results were graphically presented in the form of histograms. Additionally, the positions of the republic in the official ratings on compliance with labor legislation were taken into consideration.
Results. The analysis of statistics has made it possible to compare the structure and dynamics of OI indicators in the Republic of Crimea with similar data on the national average. Regional differences in occupational injury rates have been identified. In 2017–2021, the number of fatal injuries per 1 000 workers increased in the country, and in Crimea the problem was more acute than in the average for Russia. According to the results for 2021, construction was the most hazardous type of activity in the Crimean region, while mining was the most dangerous one in the Russian Federation. The relative rates of occupational injuries (per 1 000 employees) in the region were lower than the national average. At the same time, the proportion of fatal injuries in Crimea was 1.5–2 times higher than the national average. The highest level of fatal injuries in Crimea was recorded in 2018–2019, likely due to increased construction activity. Injury rates were increasing, while the costs of occupational safety measures were also rising. At the same time, in 2021, the amount of funds allocated to labor protection in Crimea was approximately 1.7 times lower than the similar national average (per employee).
Discussion and Conclusion. It is advisable to use data on occupational injuries in the Republic of Crimea to develop scientifically grounded recommendations for improving the regional occupational safety system. These results are partially influenced by the integration of Crimea and are presented in comparison with all-Russian indicators. Therefore, the findings of this scientific work can be applied more broadly when developing a strategy for labor protection in other regions of the Russian Federation.

1. Pushenko SL, Gaponov VL, Kukareko VA. Analysis of Occupational Injuries in the Construction Industry and Ways to Reduce it. Safety of Technogenic and Natural Systems. 2022;(2):24–30. https://doi.org/10.23947/2541-9129-2022-2-24-30

2. Popov SV, Schenyaev VI. On Problems of Labor Safety in the Agricultural Sector of the Economy at the Current Stage of the Industry Development. Don Agrarian Science Bulletin. 2021;3(55):76–85. (In Russ.).

3. Merkulova AM, Chavkina LYu. Industrial Safety Analysis in the Mining and Metallurgical Complex. Mining informational and analytical bulletin (Scientific and Technical Journal). 2020;(S14):88–97. https://doi.org/10.25018/0236-1493-2020-5-14-88-97 (In Russ.).

4. Kondrateva OE, Loktionov OA, Vasileva NV, Miroschnichenko DA, Efremova AS. Occupational Injuries: Analysis of the Main Causes and Prospects for Reduction. Occupational Safety in Industry. 2023;(8):40–46. https://doi.org/10.25018/0236-1493-2020-5-14-88-97 (In Russ.).

5. Gontarenko AF, Klovach EV, Tsirin IV. Occupational Injuries and Innovations in the Occupational Safety Training. Occupational Safety in Industry. 2022;(3):84–92. https://doi.org/10.24000/0409-2961-2022-3-84-92 (In Russ.).

6. Tikhonova IG, Churanova AN. Long-Term Analysis of the Features of Occupational Injury Recording and Reporting in Russia. Demographic Review. 2019;6(2):142–164. (In Russ.).

7. Malajan KR, Faustov SA. On the Issue of Occupational Injures Statistics. Life Safety. 2020;8:3–9. (In Russ.).

8. Sang D Choi, Liangjie Guo, Jaehoon Kim, Shuping Xiong. Comparison of Fatal Occupational Injuries in Construction Industry in the United States, South Korea, and China. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2019;(71):64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.02.011

9. Abdulgazis DU. Evaluation of the Dynamics of Production Traumatism at Enterprises and in Organizations of the Republic of Crimea. Scientific Notes of the Crimean Engineering and Pedagogical University. 2018;(2(160)):196–200. (In Russ.).

10. Abiltarova EN. Safety Culture as One of the Methods of Preventing Industrial Injuries. Construction and Industrial Safety. 2018;13(65):169–176. (In Russ.).

11. Makaricheva AA, Efimova VM. Indicators of Occupational Injuries in Agriculture, Forestry, Hunting, Fishing and Fish Farming of the Republic of Crimea. Don Agrarian Science Bulletin. 2023;16(2(62)):77–88. https://doi.org/10.55618/20756704_2023_16_2_77-88 (In Russ.).

12. Efimova VM, Gribenko EN. Issues of Industrial Injuries and Occupational Diseases in the Professional Training of Students. Problems of Modern Pedagogical Education. 2014;44(1):54–60. (In Russ.).