Page 1 of 9

European Journal of Applied Sciences – Vol. 9, No. 5

Publication Date: October 25, 2021

DOI:10.14738/aivp.95.11024. Onyango, D. O., Kinyua, R., Mayaka, A. N., & Kanali, C. (2021). Overview And Analysis of Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss

Legislation in East Africa. European Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(5). 356-364.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Overview And Analysis of Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing

Loss Legislation in East Africa

Daniel O. Onyango

Institute of Energy and Environmental Technology

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Nairobi, Kenya

Robert Kinyua

College of Pure and Applied Sciences

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Nairobi, Kenya

Abel N. Mayaka

Faculty of Engineering and Technology

Multimedia University of Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya

Christopher Kanali

School of Biosystems and Processing Engineeirng

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

Nairobi, Kenya

ABSTRACT

Hearing loss is a major occupational injury that leads to workplace accidents,

miscommunication, and loss of livelihood. Conventions and Recommendations

provide frameworks for mitigation of this problem. This paper evaluates

legislations related to noise control in East Africa, documented and implemented by

the respective governments. The scope of noise control measures and exposure

limits are qualitatively examined. Results show that the details of acceptable limits

are covered in both environmental and Occupational Safety and Health laws. Lower

action limit of exposure to continuous noise of 85 dB(A) is specified in all the

countries, but the upper action limit of 90 dB(A) is only specified by Kenya, which

also specifies that hearing protection must be worn when this limit is exceeded.

Impulsive noise is capped at 140 dB(A) in all the countries. Only two of the seven

noise types are considered in existing laws as contributing to occupational noise- induced hearing loss.

Keywords: noise-induced hearing loss, legislation, action limits, exposure limits, East

Africa

INTRODUCTION

The International Labour Organization (ILO) lays down the general principles of prevention

and control of occupational hazards and risks that may be adopted by competent authorities

such as national governments. Relevant documentations by the ILO are available for this

Page 2 of 9

357

Onyango, D. O., Kinyua, R., Mayaka, A. N., & Kanali, C. (2021). Overview And Analysis of Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Legislation in

East Africa. European Journal of Applied Sciences, 9(5). 356-364.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/aivp.95.11024

purpose (ILO, 1997 & ILO, 1981). For the prevention and control of noise-induced hearing loss,

these principles advocate for the identification and periodic assessment of hazards and risks,

and review of prevention and control measures. The level of noise and / or duration of exposure

should not exceed established limits, which should be laid down to prevent the risk of hearing

impairment. Depending on the degree of protection required, these limits should define

warning limit values that set the noise level under which there is very little risk of hearing

impairment, and a danger limit value that sets the noise ceiling above which hearing

impairment and deafness may occur from an eight-hour daily exposure of an unprotected ear.

Occupational laws are designed to provide for the safety, health, and welfare of workers and all

persons lawfully present at workplaces. Legislation specifically assigns responsibility for

hearing protection to occupiers. Consequently, the performance of hearing conservation largely

depends on employee commitment to compliance with applicable provisions. These laws in

combination with other related legislations, also assign responsibility and accountabilities to

each interested party, and overall aim at the prevention of injury and ill health to workers in

their course of duty. While employees are expected to take appropriate measures to protect

themselves and others against agents of harm within the workplace, employers are expected to

provide safe and healthy environments for working, carry out appropriate risk assessment, and

take every possible measure to minimize or eliminate risks and hazards.

Research has shown that prolonged exposure to excessive occupational noise leads to noise- induced hearing loss (Agarwal, Nagpure and Gadge, 2015). Statutory instruments therefore

play the role of guiding employers on protection against excessive noise exposure by specifying

limits of exposure that must be adhered to. Respective governments develop and implement

appropriate laws governing occupational safety and health and other related legislations to be

followed. Enforcement is provided by approved institutions that ensure that provisions of the

relevant laws are adhered to, and if not, noncompliance is penalized. It is therefore important

that the relevant laws are well developed and implemented to prevent occupational noise- induced hearing loss.

This paper seeks to evaluate occupational safety and health legislations related to workplace

noise control and prevention of hearing loss in the three East African Countries of Uganda,

Tanzania, and Kenya. These legal provisions are critically examined in terms of the scope of

noise control measures and specified limits to minimize noise-induced hearing loss. Reference

is also made to other subsidiary legislations and other relevant laws that provide for the

maintenance of safe and healthy hearing work environments.

METHOD

The methodology was designed to evaluate occupational safety and health, and related

legislations to ensure excessive noise exposure is adequately mitigated by:

2.1 identifying key legislative instruments relating to occupational noise exposure, and

evaluating the main components used in prevention, management, and control.

2.2 identifying, analysing, and comparing specific sections relating to occupational noise

pollution.

2.3 identifying and comparing measures put in place by the respective governments to define

noise types as one way of highlighting possible noise-induced hearing loss sources.

2.4 assessing and comparing the upper and lower action limits and maximum permissible

values specified for each country.

Page 3 of 9

358

European Journal of Applied Sciences (EJAS) Vol. 9, Issue 5, October-2021

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

2.5 provides recommendations to improve the levels of legislation to minimize the chances

of suffering from occupational noise-induced hearing loss.

RESULTS – REGIONAL REVIEW OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH LEGISLATIONS

Uganda

Labour issues including enforcement of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 8th June 2006

are covered by the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development. The main objective of

the OSH Act 2006 is “to consolidate, harmonize, and update laws relating to occupational safety

and health” (Uganda Parliament [UP], 2006). In this Act, “Noise” is only mentioned in the

Interpretation section as “all sound which may result in hearing impairment or which may be

harmful to health or which is dangerous, disagreeable, or undesired. No other section in the

Act talks explicitly about noise and hearing loss, but this is indirectly implied in provisions

relating to occupational diseases; preplacement, periodical, pre-assignment, exit medical

examinations; and risk assessment.

The Workers Compensation Act provides for compensation to workers for injuries suffered and

schedule diseases incurred during their employment (UP, 2000). Here, occupational deafness

or injury is referred to as arising from work involving exposure to excessive noise, ultranoise,

or to any physical or chemical agent proved scientifically to cause deafness. The Act goes

further to apportion at least 50% and 7% compensation to loss of hearing of both ears and one

ear, respectively.

The National Environment (Noise and Vibrations Standards and Control) Regulations 2013

provides “for the maintenance of a healthy environment for people and wildlife in Uganda, the

tranquillity of their surroundings, and psychological well-being by regulating noise and

vibration levels and generally, to elevate the standard of leaving of people and the safety of

wildlife” (UP, 2013). The Act prescribes regulations and standards to control noise and quality

of the environment and prescribes the maximum noise and vibration levels to which a person

may be exposed, and provides for the control and effective technical measures of noise

reduction. It also sets out strategies for the control of noise at the source and places

responsibility on those who create the noise. The Act further provides for zone-out areas and

specifies limits of noise impacts, including prohibition not to exceed the maximum increase in

background level by 3 decibels (dB).

Limits of noise emanating from a factory or a workshop and which the National Environment

Management Authority (NEMA) of Uganda enforces are 85 dB(A) for an 8-hour daily exposure,

and a maximum of 110 dB(A), of which a worker must not be exposed to at any given time (UP,

2013). In addition, a lower limit of impulsive noise exposure of 120 dB(A) and 10,000 impulses

is permitted, while a maximum of 140 dB(A) and 100 impulses should not be exceeded.

Tanzania

In Tanzania, the Occupational Safety and Health Act 2003 is implemented by the Prime

Minister’s office responsible for Labour, Youth, Employment and People with Disability. The

Act that repealed the Factories Ordinance, makes provision for the safety, health, and welfare

of persons at work in factories and other places of work; and provides for the protection of

persons other than persons at work against hazards to health and safety arising out of or in

connection with activities of persons at work (United Republic of Tanzania [URT], 2003). Noise