Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Lawrence M. Mead presented an interesting argument as to why poverty exists in the United States. He problematizes the culture of the poor of which ethnic minorities over-represent. By referring to the geographic regions from which these ethnic minorities came from, he globalised the question of poverty in the US. This invites a global policy debate rather than a US-centric policy debate. Indeed, Mead so freely made references to Africa and the African culture severally throughout his commentary. It is against this backdrop that I show that Mead was right to a large extent on the question of inner-driven individualised orientation. However, he overestimates its influence and misreads what culture is. He presented the culture of poverty as the antecedent of poverty. It was concluded that manipulating both internal drive (internal locus of control) and the structure of society is a more effective way to tackle poverty.
EN
The progress of the social science disciplines depends on conducting relevant research. However, research methodology adopted and choices made during the course of the research project are underpinned by varying ontological, epistemological and axiological positions that may be known or unknown to the researcher. This paper sought to critically explore the philosophical underpinnings of the social science research. It was suggested that a “multiversal” ontological position, positivist-hermeneutic epistemological position and value-laden axiological position should be adopted for social science research by non-western scholars as alternative to the dominant naïve realist, positivist, and value-free orientation. Against the backdrop of producing context-relevant knowledge, non-western scholars are encouraged to re-examine their philosophical positions in the conduct of social science research.
EN
This paper explores the literature to identify common occupational injuries, diseases, and psychological wellbeing on oil rigs as well as the negative environmental impacts of the upstream oil and gas sector. It ends by making recommendations for effective health, safety, and environmental (HSE) management. Review of the literature showed that contusion (bruise), cuts, and laceration are the commonest occupational injuries that workers on the oil rig suffer and that the injuries mostly affect the hand and finger, leg, and eyes of the offshore workers. These injuries were found to be caused mostly by direct stroke, jamming and overstrain. Similarly, accidental poisoning, musculoskeletal disorders, respiratory disorders and diseases of the digestive system were also documented as the commonest occupational diseases among offshore workers. The literature also shows that working offshore is associated with poorer psychological wellbeing or health; this is to say that offshore workers tend to experience higher levels of stress, burnout, anxiety, depression, low job satisfaction (particularly with the environmental conditions associated with their work), and sleep disorders. Finally, the literature review indicated that land-use problems, air pollution, acid rain, climate change, habitat disruption, environmental degradation, oil spills and leakages are some of environmental impacts of upstream oil production. This review was concluded by recommending some measures for the management of the HSE hazards associated with the oil and gas sector.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.