Occupational safety and health in Europe - state and trends 2023 
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work – EU-OSHA 127 
6.4 Prevention practices in enterprises  
It is widely acknowledged that in practically every regulated area there is a difference between the 
legal prescription and the practice . Several data sources and background reports are useful to 
understand these differences in OSH. 410  The most comprehensive overview on OSH  practices in 
enterprises is done by EU-OSHA with its large survey ESENER.411 This survey provides information on 
how European workplaces are managing OSH in practice.  
In terms of the overall EU27 average scores, the most common reason reported for taking preventive 
action was ‘ fulfilment of legal obligations’  (85% in 2014, 88% in 2019), followed by ‘meeting the 
expectations of employees or their representatives’ (79% in 2014 and 81% in 2019), and ‘ avoiding 
fines or sanctions from the labour inspectorate’ (77% in 2014 and 79% in 2019). This latter point is 
interesting considering that ESENER 2019 reported a general decline in the number of establishments 
inspected, suggesting that fear of penalties is a sustainable driver.  
The complexity of legal obligations is still reported to be a major difficulty to address OSH by 41% of 
establishments in the EU27 (2019). The country breakdown shows a very diverse picture though, the 
highest shares being reported in Belgium and France (52% of establishments), as opposed to Latvia 
(14%), Lithuania (15%) and Finland (16%). While most factors report a slight drop in their respective 
shares between 2014 and 2019, a lack of time or staff shows an increase from 27% to 33% being 
reported as a barrier to O SH management in 15 out of the 19 sectors (becoming the second most 
reported factor). This is particularly the case among establishments in the Netherlands (39%), 
Luxembourg (36%) and Malta (33%).  
Lack of awareness among staff  is regarded by 18% as a major difficulty and by 35% as a minor 
difficulty, in total 53%. When looking at size classes, minor and major difficulties are observed for 47% 
(size class 5-9), 55% (size class 10 -49), 65% (size class 50- 249) and 71% in enterprises with above 
250 employees. Compared to size class differences, the differences between sectors are small, and all 
are quite close to the average. 
Lack of awareness among management  is mentioned by 36% ( EU27), while 12% see it as a major 
difficulty and 24% as a minor difficulty. Thes e differences between enterprise sizes quite remarkable: 
for the largest enterprises (50- 249 and above 250), the percentages are the highest, about 44% and 
49%; the other two size classes range at or under the average of 36%. The differences between sectors 
are practically negligible.  
It is somewhat  surprising that a lack of awareness among management and staff seems to 
increase with establishment size.  
The preparation of a document on health and safety responsibilities  and procedures, which ideally 
should be made available to employees, is clearly reported by a vast majority of surveyed 
establishments in the EU27 (89% in both 2014 and 2019).  
Consistent with the findings in 2014, a total of 75% of establishments interviewed in the EU27 in 
ESENER 2019 indi cate that they carry out risk assessments regularly. As expected, there is a 
positive correlation with establishment size. Several national studies show much fewer  enterprises 
carrying out risk assessment s, for example, only 50% in Germany, and SMEs even less.412 Moreover, 
only a small percentage of companies carry out workplace risk assessment s that will not only meet the 
essential procedural requirements but also take into consideration new and emerging risks in a 
comprehensive manner.413  
Particularly difficult is the assessment of the quality of risk assessments. A complete quality 
assessment would require specific knowledge of several aspects: of the specific topic, of the — real —