化學品全球調和系統對台灣產業衝擊之研究

Impact analysis of GHS to local industries in Taiwan

歐陽芸(Yun Ouyang)

指導教授 ： 蘇德勝 ； 曾若鳴

中臺科技大學/健康科學院/安全與防災科技研究所/碩士(2011年)

https://doi.org/10.6822/CTUST.2011.00026

摘要

化學品全球調和制度 (GHS) 提供全球統一調和系統，該制度涵蓋所有化學品之標示，包括純物質及混合物，並對緊急應變人員、工作場所勞工、運輸作業勞工及消費者提供危害資訊，以防止急性及慢性健康及生態危害。全球調和系統 2008 年以後逐漸成為國際間遵守之制度，並取代許多國家目前採用之危害物質標示分類及物質安全資料表與化學品危害相關規定，對於我國業界化學品製造、輸入、輸出及勞工化學品危害認知保護等及政府化學品管理國家政策立法執法均有相當之影響。
本研究評估我國實施化學品全球調和制度對政府推行勞工化學危害保護制度、及對業界產生之衝擊評估影響，透過德爾菲法共識性分析方法，以學者專家及產業界安全衛生專家、作業勞工為對象，問卷調查研究化學品管理之重要性及可行性等重要指標，利用李克特5分法進行比較分析，再以描述性統計分析、獨立樣本 t 檢定、邏輯迴歸分析等推論統計方法進行資料分析。
本研究結果發現學者專家、業界專家對推動 GHS 正負效影響指標權重調查結果：以「減少貿易障礙、提升國際競爭力」、「降低化學品危害意識」等在正效因子指標中較高；以「相關資訊取得不易」、「分類能力不足」在負效因子指標中較高。在推動GHS的重要性及可行性指標結果：以「我國與他國並行實施GHS」、「針對化學品製造商實施 GHS 分類標示」在重要性指標中較高；以「GHS制度推動透過媒體宣傳」、「針對化學品製造商實施 GHS 分類標示」在可行性指標中較高。
勞工對推動GHS重要性及可行性邏輯迴歸結果：接受GHS新制度教育時數愈長，愈認同運輸工會提升危害意識，同時認為標示能力不足會影響GHS制度的推動，及認為由事業單位自行測試分類重要但不可行。
專家與勞工對推動 GHS 正負效影響指標權重調查結果：以「降低職業災害」、「降低化學品危害」等在正效因子指標有顯著差異；以「分類與標示經費不足」、「教育訓練經驗不足」等在負效因子指標有顯著差異，達統計上之水準。
專家與勞工對推動 GHS 的重要性及可行性指標研究結果：以「由事業單位自行測試分類」、「針對一般消費者實施 GHS 」等在重要性指標有顯著差異；以「利用化學品測試方法推動 GHS 」、「對混合物採用推估方法推動 GHS 」等在可行性指標有顯著差異，達統計上之水準。
本研究提供政府部門、事業單位在推動該制度的因應策略與實際執行重點，以符合國際化化學品管理水準。

關鍵字

衝擊評估影響 ； 化學品危害 ； 標示 ； 化學品全球調和制度 ； 德爾菲法

並列摘要

The Globally Harmonized System (GHS) provides easily understandable global hazard communication. It encompasses all of the chemical substances with all of the pure and mixed chemical substances, and requires hazard labeling for chemical substances which were employed at workplace, in transportation, and by consumers, including the Chemical hazard information on how to prevent acute and chronic harm to human health and the environment. GHS was extensively used in the world in 2008.
Thus, an impact assessment on the new regulations or changes in regulations for government, potential costs, benefits, and the global trade in chemicals to industries and hazard communication program for workers was studied by the methods of the questionnaire design, five point Likert scale, and Delphi expert method. It was then compared with industrial personnel survey and the descriptive statistics, independent-samples t test, and logistic Regression.
Results indicated that “reduce barrier of trade for increasing the international competition ability”, “reduce the hazard recognition of chemicals” were given a higher positive factor by scholars and experts. “Relevant information was uneasily obtained” and “Classification ability was not enough” were given a higher negative factor. As for the importance and feasibility results for advancing the GHS, “Taiwan and other countries were collateral implement the GHS” and “implementing the GHS for manufacturer of chemicals” had the higher importance, “implementing the GHS by medium” and “implementing the GHS for manufacturer of chemicals” both had higher feasibility.
For the results of advancing the GHS for importance and feasibility index by laborers, taking more time on GHS training had higher identification of the labeling ability which could affect the advance of GHS, considering that self test for classification was very important but unfeasible. For the results of positive and negative factor for advancing the GHS by experts and laborers: “reduce the occupational accident” and “reduce the chemical hazard” had notable difference in the positive factor. “Lack of funds for classification and labeling” and “lack of experience for training” had a notable difference in negative factors, both were reached the degree of statistics level.
For the results of advancing the GHS for importance and feasibility index by experts and laborers, “classification of self test by company” and “implement the GHS to consumer” had a notable difference in importance index. “Advance the GHS by using chemical test method” and “advance the GHS by evaluation method for composite” had the notable difference in feasibility index. Both were reached the statistics significant level. This study could help government and company advance and implement the GHS in practice for compliance with the degree of international chemical management.

並列關鍵字

Delphi expert method ； Globally Harmonized System ； Chemical hazard ； Labeling ； Impact assessment

參考文獻

10.于樹偉：化學品全球調和系統推廣策略，工業安全衛生月刊，2006；33–41。

30.日本厚生勞働省：勞動安全衛生法，東京；2006。

31.日本厚生勞働省：勞動安全衛生規則，東京；1979。

2.ILO, International Labor Organization. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS), Geneva; 2003.

4.蘇德勝：運用專家資料庫於職業安全衛生優先議題專家共識之先驅研究。行政院勞工委員會勞工安全衛生研究所；2009。