4.2.2. Respondents' Rating of the Safety Level and Framework Conditions

Respondents were also asked to rate the safety level in their own sector compared to that of international commercial aviation on several key aspects. Respondents were asked: "Imagine a scale from 1 to 10 indicating the level of safety, where 10 corresponds to the level of safety in international commercial aviation", "How would you rate the level of safety in your sector?" We also asked three additional questions, worded in the same manner, focusing on authorities' focus on safety, customer focus on safety and scope of safety regulations. The results are indicated in Figure 2.

Results indicate a general pattern; respondents from the maritime sector rate the safety level in their sector as higher than respondents in the road sector. All differences were statistically significant at the 1% level. The comparisons were "anchored" in an absolute reference point (i.e., the commonly known standard of international commercial aviation), as previous research has indicated that comparisons across contexts may be difficult, as respondents' assessments are relative, based on the different reference points and expectations in their respective sectors [35].

#### 4.2.3. Respondents' Ratings of Factors Influencing the Safety Level in Their Sector

We expect that respondents in the maritime sector rate SMS as more important for the safety level in their sector than respondents in the road sector (Hypothesis 3). In a previous study, we found a strong decline in the number of people injured in work-related accidents in both the road- and the maritime sector [2]. Based on this, we asked respondents about the following: "The number of work-related accidents in your sector has fallen sharply in recent years. What do you think are the reasons for this decline?" Seven answer alternatives were provided (cf. Figure 3).

**Figure 3.** Results for respondents answer to the question: "The number of work-related accidents in your sector has fallen sharply in recent years. What do you think are the reasons for this decline?" Seven answer alternatives were provided. Respondents from road (N = 66) and Maritime (N = 46).

> Figure 3 indicates that the most important answer provided by respondents from the road sector is technological development; half of the respondents from road answered this, which is twice as much as in the maritime sector. The most prevalent answer provided by respondents from the maritime sector is companies' safety management. This is in accordance with Hypothesis 3, and we can probably attribute this result to the focus on SMS in the maritime sector. The share answering "company safety management" in the maritime sector (76%) is nearly twice as high as that in the road sector (39%). This result is not surprising, given the fact that SMS is not mandatory in the road sector.

> In the interviews, we also asked the sector experts to point to the most important measures against work-related transport accidents that have been introduced in recent years. Interviewees in the maritime sector pointed to the SMS requirements of the ISM code:

"It is the ISM safety management systems that have been introduced. We think they work, based on the decline in work accident rates, but the background is a bit unclear. But I believe that the [SMS] requirements have led to a certain enlightenment in the shipping companies about how to implement measures, an increased focus."

Another interviewee stated, in line with this, that the focus on the human factors and safety management has increased because of the SMS-requirements of the ISM code.

#### *4.3. Multivariate Analyses*

4.3.1. Which Factors Influence Respondents' Perception That Responsibility for the Prevention of Work-Related Accidents Is Clearly Defined in Their Sector?

In Table 2, we examine factors influencing respondents' perception whether responsibility for the prevention of work-related accidents is clearly defined in their sector


**Table 2.** Logistic regression. Dependent variable: "Is the responsibility for the prevention of workrelated accidents sufficiently clearly defined in your sector? (0 = Yes, 1 = No/don't know). B values.

\* *p* < 0.1 \*\* *p* < 0.05 \*\*\* *p* < 0.01.

The first main result is that we see a positive and significant relationship between the road sector and disagreement with the statement that the responsibility for accident prevention is clearly defined. This is as expected, based on the bivariate results, however, in this analysis we also control for type of organization and the scope of safety regulations in the sector.

The second main result is that type of organization contributes negatively and significantly. This means that respondents from companies tend to assess that responsibilities for accident prevention is more clearly defined than respondents from other types of organizations, e.g., authorities. This could have been due to SMS rules applying to companies in the maritime sector, but we control for sector.

Third, results indicate a negative relationship between the scope of safety regulations and the dependent variable. This indicates that respondents who are subjected to comprehensive safety regulations (i.e., in the maritime sector) are more likely to perceive that the responsibility for prevention of work-related accidents are clearly defined.

The Nagelkerke R value is 0.376, which means that the model explains 38 % of the variation in the dependent variable.
