4.3 Article

Health Risks Awareness of Electronic Waste Workers in the Informal Sector in Nigeria

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14080911

Keywords

electronic waste workers; health risk knowledge; attitude; practice; informal sector; informal economy; Nigeria

Funding

  1. Netherlands Fellowship Program of NUFFIC (Netherlands Universities Foundation for International Cooperation) research grant [CF9420/2014 NFP-PhD.14/37]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Insight into the health risk awareness levels of e-waste workers is important as it may offer opportunities for better e-waste recycling management strategies to reduce the health effects of informal e-waste recycling. Therefore, this study assessed the knowledge, attitude, and practices associated with occupational health risk awareness of e-waste workers compared with a control group (butchers) in the informal sector in Nigeria. A cross-sectional study was used to assess health risk awareness of 279 e-waste workers (repairers and dismantlers) and 221 butchers from the informal sector in three locations in Nigeria in 2015. A questionnaire was used to obtain information on socio-demographic backgrounds, occupational history, knowledge, attitude, and work practices. The data was analysed using Analysis of Variance. The three job designations had significantly different knowledge, attitude, and practice mean scores (p = 0.000), with butchers consistently having the highest mean scores. Only 43% of e-waste workers could mention one or more Personal Protective Equipment needed for their job compared with 70% of the butchers. The health risk awareness level of the e-waste workers was significantly lower compared with their counterparts in the same informal sector. A positive correlation existed between the workers' knowledge and their attitude and practice. Therefore, increasing the workers' knowledge may decrease risky practices.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available