SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çalışma ve Toplum / 2026 / Cilt: 1 Sayı: 88

The Status of Occupational Diseases in Türkiye and Their Relationship with Socioeconomic Development: An Analysis of the 2013-2022 Period

Türkiye’de Meslek Hastalıklarının Durumu ve Sosyoekonomik Gelişmişlik ile İlişkisi: 2013-2022 Dönemine Yönelik Bir İnceleme

Mahmut Kılıç(YOZGAT BOZOK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ, DAHİLİ TIP BİLİMLERİ BÖLÜMÜ, HALK SAĞLIĞI ANABİLİM DALI)0000-0002-8921-1597
Lale Karasu(ERCİYES ÜNİVERSİTESİ, HALİL BAYRAKTAR SAĞLIK HİZMETLERİ MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU, TIBBİ HİZMETLER VE TEKNİKLER BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0001-9278-8779
Aysun Gökalp(TOKAT GAZİOSMANPAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ARTOVA MESLEK YÜKSEKOKULU, MÜLKİYET KORUMA VE GÜVENLİK BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0001-9535-4669
Esra Çınarlı(KIRŞEHİR AHİ EVRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MERKEZİ ARAŞTIRMA LABORATUVARI UYGULAMA VE ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ)0009-0005-1466-9818
Pages
41–64
Publication Date
2026-01-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results indicate that occupational diseases are influenced not only by workplace conditions but also by broader economic and social factors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to examine the relationship between occupational diseases and socioeconomic variables in Türkiye during the ten-year period following the enactment of the Occupational Health and Safety Law (2013–2022).
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the findings, the incidence rate of occupational diseases increased from 2.67 per 100,000 workers in 2013 to 6.8 in 2019, followed by a decline to 4.81 in 2022, likely due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results indicate that occupational diseases are influenced not only by workplace conditions but also by broader economic and social factors.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2013–2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:meslek hastalıkları · ekonomik göstergeler · sosyal faktörler

Abstract

This study aims to examine the relationship between occupational diseases and socioeconomic variables in Türkiye during the ten-year period following the enactment of the Occupational Health and Safety Law (2013–2022). Data were obtained from publicly available sources provided by the Social Security Institution (SSI), the Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT), and the World Bank. According to the findings, the incidence rate of occupational diseases increased from 2.67 per 100,000 workers in 2013 to 6.8 in 2019, followed by a decline to 4.81 in 2022, likely due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. A significant positive correlation was found with the Human Development Index (r=0.759), while a significant negative correlation was observed with per capita income (r = –0.903, p < 0.01). The highest incidence rates were recorded in Eastern Marmara, Istanbul, and the Aegean regions, where industrial activity is most concentrated. These results indicate that occupational diseases are influenced not only by workplace conditions but also by broader economic and social factors. Therefore, preventive measures should address both sector-specific risks and regional socioeconomic disparities.

Özet

This study aims to examine the relationship between occupational diseases and socioeconomic variables in Türkiye during the ten-year period following the enactment of the Occupational Health and Safety Law (2013–2022). Data were obtained from publicly available sources provided by the Social Security Institution (SSI), the Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT), and the World Bank. According to the findings, the incidence rate of occupational diseases increased from 2.67 per 100,000 workers in 2013 to 6.8 in 2019, followed by a decline to 4.81 in 2022, likely due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. A significant positive correlation was found with the Human Development Index (r=0.759), while a significant negative correlation was observed with per capita income (r = –0.903, p < 0.01). The highest incidence rates were recorded in Eastern Marmara, Istanbul, and the Aegean regions, where industrial activity is most concentrated. These results indicate that occupational diseases are influenced not only by workplace conditions but also by broader economic and social factors. Therefore, preventive measures should address both sector-specific risks and regional socioeconomic disparities.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kılıç, M., Karasu, L., Gökalp, A., Çınarlı, E. (2026). The Status of Occupational Diseases in Türkiye and Their Relationship with Socioeconomic Development: An Analysis of the 2013-2022 Period. Çalışma ve Toplum, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 88, 41–64. https://doi.org/10.54752/ct.1738965

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (22)

  1. Akkurt, İ. (2007). Occupational respiratory diseases. Turkish Medical Association Publications. http://www.ttb.org.tr
  2. Asfaw, A., Pana-Cryan, R., & Bushnell, P. T. (2012). Incidence and costs of family member hospitalization following injuries of workers’ compensation claimants. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 55(11), 1028–1036. https://doi.org/10.1002/AJIM.22110;SUBPAGE:STRING:FULL
  3. Boone, J., & van Ours, J. C. (2006). Are recessions good for workplace safety? Journal of Health Economics, 25(6), 1069–1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHEALECO.2006.03.002
  4. Conover, W. J. (1999). Chapter 6 Nonparametric Methods CHAPTER. In Wiley: Vol. II. Wiley. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Practical+Nonparametric+Statistics%2C+3rd+Edition-p-9780471160687
  5. Erol, İ. (2020). An analysis of occupational diseases observed in the mining sector in Türkiye. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Çukurova University, 35(4), 859–872. https://doi.org/10.21605/CUKUROVAUMMFD.867378
  6. Eurostat. (2025). HICP-All items (tei00127)”, Data coverage: 2013 – 2024. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/product/page/tec00027
  7. Field, A. (2018). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. 5th Edition, Sage, Newbury Park. - References - Scientific Research Publishing. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3504991
  8. Gümüş, R., & Gülsün, Z. (2017). International Journal of Healthcare Management Occupational health and safety indicators of Turkey and their relationships with social and economic development factors between 1998 and 2014. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 13(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/20479700.2017.1308669
  9. Hämäläinen, P., Leena Saarela, K., & Takala, J. (2009). Global trend according to estimated number of occupational accidents and fatal work-related diseases at region and country level. Journal of Safety Research, 40(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSR.2008.12.010
  10. ILO. (2013). World Day for Safety and Health at Work 2013 | International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/meetings-and-events/world-day-safety-and-health-work-2013
  11. ILO. (2019). Safety and Health at the Heart of the Future of Work: Building on 100 years of experience. Geneva: ILO. www.ilo.org/labadmin-osh
  12. ILO. (2023). Global strategy on occupational safety and health | International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/resource/policy/global-strategy-occupational-safety-and-health
  13. Ilıman, Z. E. (2015). Occupational diseases in Türkiye. International Journal of Health Management and Strategies Research, 1(1), 21–36. www.saysad.org
  14. Karadeniz, O. (2012). Occupational Accidents and Diseases and Inadequate Social Protection in the World and in Türkiye. Çalışma ve Toplum, 34(3), 15–73. http://www.social-protection.org/gimi/gess/ShowWiki.do?wid=76,
  15. Khoe, L. C., Saldi, S. R. F., Isbayuputra, M., Mansyur, M., Wiseman, V., & Asante, A. (2024). Global trends in occupational disease reporting: a systematic review. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.19.24314032
  16. Koçali, K. (2023). Occupational Disease Profile of Turkey: Analysis by EconomicActivities and Cities. Journal Of Social Humanities and Administrative Sciences, 68(68), 3448–3459. https://doi.org/10.29228/JOSHAS.72063
  17. Krakov, A. O., Zack, O., Sagiv, O. Y., Slodownik, D., Raanan, R., Alperovitch-Najenson, D., Rinsky Halivni, L., & Moshe, S. (2023). Disparities in occupational health services: an international comparative study. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology 2023 18:1, 18(1), 21-. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12995-023-00386-2
  18. Rosenstock, L., Cullen, M., & Fingerhut, M. (2006). Occupational Health. Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11750/
  19. Songur, L., & Songur, G. (2018). The Importance Of Work Accıdents And Occupatıonal Dıseases In Economıc Growth And The Responsıbılıtıes Of Socıal Partners. Academic Perspective International Peer-Reviewed Journal of Social Sciences, 68, 43–55. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/abuhsbd/article/467047?issue_id=39548
  20. Takala, J., Hämäläinen, P., Sauni, R., Nygård, C. H., Gagliardi, D., & Neupane, S. (2024). Global-, regional- and country-level estimates of the work-related burden of diseases and accidents in 2019. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 50(2), 73. https://doi.org/10.5271/SJWEH.4132
  21. WHO. (1985). Identification and control of work-related diseases: Report of a WHO expert committee. World Health Organization Technical Report Series 714 Albany. NY: WHO Publications Centre USA distributor. https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/40176
  22. Yılmaz, F. (2010). The Importance of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Improving Occupational Health and Safety. Journal of Social Policy Conferences, 56. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iusskd/article/9858