Occupational exposure limits for psychosocial hazards: A promising concept or a premature leap?

We critically examined the proposal to establish occupational exposure limits (OEL) for psychosocial hazards, evaluating its scientific feasibility, methodological challenges, and implications for occupational health practice.

We reviewed the conceptual framework and recommendations by Pauli et al and compared them with established approaches for chemical and physical hazards. Key obstacles were analyzed, including the reliance on latent constructs, terminological ambiguity, and the absence of objective exposure metrics, while considering the advent of the exposome in epidemiology, emerging technologies and political economy factors.

Our analysis shows that analogies with physical and chemical OEL offer useful insights but cannot be directly applied to psychosocial hazards. Unlike traditional hazards, psychosocial hazards are context-dependent, socially constructed, and often measured through self-reported surveys, limiting the derivation of adverse effect levels. Current psychosocial models of occupational stress aggregate diverse stressors under broad constructs, impeding actionable risk assessment. While organizational hazards such as shift work and long working hours can be objectively quantified using human resource data and sensors, social and moral dimensions remain elusive. Individual biomarkers might not offer adequate diagnostic value, while using multiple biomarkers in combination introduces challenges related to cost and feasibility. Furthermore, regulatory decisions are shaped by economic interests and stakeholder conflicts, complicating consensus and OEL adoption.

A paradigm shift is required: moving from generic theoretical models to specific, measurable indicators, integrating multi-source data, and harmonizing methodologies. Without this transformation, OEL risk over-simplifying complex psychosocial phenomena and failing to achieve meaningful preventive outcomes. For occupational safety and health practice, work organizations should prioritize the more specific identification and measurement of psychosocial hazards, using context-specific data and harmonized methods, to enable more effective risk management and prevention, pending the establishment of formal occupational exposure limits for psychosocial hazards.