The Gap to Achieve the Sustainability of the Workforce in the Chilean Forestry Sector and the Consequences over the Productivity of System

  • Felipe Meyer
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 825)


The forestry sector is facing a number of challenges that having impact of the sustainability of the workforce and over productivity of the system. This study examines the relationship between the working conditions in the forestry sector and the workers. In addition examines the strategies the Chilean forestry companies are using. Finally, using two examples identify the consequence over the productivity of the system. The overall objective of this study was to investigate the impact of working conditions on the workforce in the Chilean forestry sector and over the productivity of the system. The study involved data collection from 350 forestry workers, both Chilean forest companies and contractors companies along with interviews with managers and experts in the area of forestry, ergonomics, working conditions and health and safety and the study cases. The findings indicate that even though working conditions in the Chilean forestry sector have been improve, they continue to have a negative impact on workers in terms of occupational health, market attractiveness and ageing population. Strategies that forestry organizations have implemented these are not enough to solve the problems mentioned before. The strategies are focuses on the prevention of accidents rather the OH problems and none of the strategies pays attention to the wellbeing of the workforce and the development of resources, aspects the workers demand. Finally, due the problem mentioned above, a negative impact over the productivity of the systems, based on examples related with pruning and harvesting.


Sustainability workforce Forestry sector Working condition 


  1. 1.
    Bolis I, Brunoro C, Sznelwar L (2014) Mapping the relationships between work and sustainability and the opportunities for ergonomic action. Appl Ergon 45(4):1225–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dyllick T, Hockerts K (2002) Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus Strategy Environ 11(2):130–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vidal N, Kozak R (2008) The recent evolution of corporate responsibility practices in the forestry sector. Int Forest Rev 10(1):13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Longoni A, Cagliano R (2015) Environmental and social sustainability priorities. Int J Oper Prod Manag 35(2):216–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baumgartner RJ, Ebner D (2010) Corporate sustainability strategies: sustainability profiles and maturity levels. Sustain Dev 18(2):76–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mani V et al (2016) Supply chain social sustainability for developing nations: evidence from India. Resour Conserv Recycl 111:42–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Meyer F (2017) Evaluation of workforce sustainability in the Chilean logging sector using an ergonomics approach. In: School of Management. Massey University, AucklandGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Docherty P, Kira M, Shani AB (2008) Creating Sustainable Work Systems. Developing Social Sustainability, 2nd edn. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brizay A (2014) The Rovanieni action plan for the forest sector in a green economy. In: Forest Europe Workshop on Green Economy and Social Aspects of SFM, Santander, Spain, p 46Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Corma (2015) Fuerza Laboral de la Industria Forestal 2015–2030. Corma, ConcepcionGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    DeVries P (2014) Wanted: skilled employees to work in B.C.’s woods. Business Vancouver, British ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ligaya A (2013) Forestry workers suddenly back in demand as average pay rises 11%. In: Financial Post, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Östberg K (2014) The Forest Kingdom, a vision for jobs and growth in a green economy. In: Forest Europe Workshop on Green Economy and Social Aspects of SFM, Santander, Spain. Summaries of presentationGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Apud E et al (1999) Manual de Ergonomia Forestal [Manual of Ergonomics in Forestry]. Proyecto FONDEF D96I1108: Desarrollo y Transferencia de Tecnologías Ergonómicamente Adaptadas para el Aumento de la Productividad del Trabajo Forestal, Chile [D96I1108 FONDEF project: Development and Technology Transfer Ergonomically Adapted for Increased Productivity of Forest Work, ChileGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Enez K, Topbas M, Acar HH (2014) An evaluation of the occupational accidents among logging workers within the boundaries of Trabzon Forestry Directorate, Turkey. Int J Ind Ergon 44(5):621–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Garland J (2008) Sustainable forestry? Only with a sustainable workforce: the idaho timber workforce development project. In: Council on Forest Engineering (COFE) Conference Proceedings: Addressing Forest Engineering Challenges for the FutureGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Forest Europe Workshop on Green Economy (2014) Forest Europe workshop on green economy and social aspect of SFM (Draft report), Santander, 29–30 April 2014Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Genaidy A et al (2010) The role of human-at-work systems in business sustainability: perspectives based on expert and qualified production workers in a manufacturing enterprise. Ergonomics 53(4):559–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Apud E et al (1989) Guide-lines on ergonomic study in forestry. Prepared for Research Workers in Developing Countries. ILOGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Apud E, Valdes S (1995) Ergonomics in forestry: the Chilean case, E.I.L. Office. ILO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Loeppke RR et al (2013) Advancing workplace health protection and promotion for an aging workforce. J Occup Environ Med 55(5):500–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ackerknecht C (2010) Relación Edad y Accidentalidad en Trabajadores del Sector Forestal en Chile. [Relationship between age and accidents in workers in rhe Forestry Sector in Chile. Ciencia y Trabajo 12(38):414–422Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meyer F, Tappin D (2014) Social Sustainability in the Chilean Logging SectorGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pontén B (2011) Physical safety hazards. In: Stellman JM (ed) Encyclopedia of Occupational Health and Safety. International Labor Organization, Geneva, vol 68Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Axelsson S-Å, Pontén B (1990) New ergonomic problems in mechanized logging operations. Int J Ind Ergon 5(3):267–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lagos S (2006) Calidad de Vida Laboral en el contexto en el contexto de responsabilidad social empresarial del sector forestal chileno. [Quality of Working Life in the context in the context of corporate social responsibility of the Chilean forestry sector]. In: Ciencias Ambientales, Centro EULA. Universidad de Concepcion, ConcepcionGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Slot T, Dumas G (2010) Musculoskeletal symptoms in tree planters in Ontario, Canada. Work 36(36):67–75Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Docherty P, Forslin J, Shani A (2002) Creating Sustainable Work Systems: Emerging Perspectives and Practice. Psychology Press, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kira M, Van Eijnatten FM, Balkin D (2010) Crafting sustainable work: development of personal resources. J Organ Change Manag 23(5):616–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    ILO (2011) Industria Forestal. [Forestry Industrie]. In: Encyclopedia of Occupational Health and Safety. International Labor Organization, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Toledo F (2017) Study about turnovers in chokers in forestry activities in Ergonomics. Universidad de Concepcion, Concepcion, ChileGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ConcepcionConcepcionChile

Personalised recommendations