Recounting health at work counts: A Tale of Numbers and Their Uses


In the early 2000s, occupational physicians at Aero, a major aerospace group, teamed up with researchers to build a new type of statistics. Embedded in the EVREST (EVolutions et RElations en Santé au Travail) scheme, these statistics rely on a questionnaire based survey administered during the medical check-up. Each year, the occupational physicians report the survey results to the social partners in several workgroups. Through the use of statistics issued from EVREST, the physicians wanted to display a link between working conditions and health issues, which was often ignored by the institution and its representation of occupational health and safety. The purpose of this article is to analyze the use of quantification, its genesis and its effects. Focussing on the "conflicting uses" around the numbers, this article demonstrates that their production is part of social relations that contribute to the redefinition of the goals initially assigned to instrument by their creators. Finally, the analysis aims to contribute to the reflection on the social conditions for the development and acceptance of alternative indicators

DOI Code: 10.1285/i20356609v7i2p278

Keywords: health; indicators; occupational physicians; quantification; working conditions


Beck F. (2005), “Dénombrer les usages de drogues : tensions et tentations”, Genèses, 58 (1): 72-97.

Bruno I., Didier E., Vitale T. (2014), “Statactivism: Forms of Action between Disclosure and Af-firmation”, Partecipazione e conflitto, 7(2), doi: 10.1285/i20356609v7i2p198

Buzzi S., Devinck J.C. et Rosental P.A. (2006), La santé au travail 1880-2006, Paris: La Décou-verte.

Desrosieres A. (1993), La politique des grands nombres. Histoire de la raison statistique, Paris: La Découverte.

Desrosieres A. (1997), “ Refléter ou instituer : l’invention des indicateurs statistiques ”, in Du-poirier E., Parodi J.-L. (dir.), Les indicateurs socio-politiques aujourd’hui, Paris: L’Harmattan, pp. 15-33.

Desrosières A. (2008), L’argument statistique. Tome 1 : Pour une sociologie historique de la quantification, Paris: Ed. Mines ParisTech.

Didier E., Névanen S., Robert P., Zauberman R. (2009), “La solidité des institutions. Les statistiques de ‘ victimation’ de l’Insee (1996-2006) ”, Genèses, 74 (1): 128-144, doi: 10.3917/gen.074.0128

Didier E., Tasset C. (2013) “ Pour un statactivisme. La quantification comme instrument d’ouverture du possible ”, Tracés. Revue de Sciences humaines, 24 (1): 123-140, doi : 10.4000/traces.5660

Eyraud C. (2013), Le capitalisme au cœur de l'État. Comptabilité privée et action publique, Paris: Éditions du Croquant.

Jany-Catrice F. (2010) “La longue marche vers de nouveaux indicateurs sur les territoires”, Sa-voir/Agir, 11 (3): 93-101.

Latour B. (2005), Changer de société. Refaire de la sociologie, Paris: Éditions La Découverte.

Penissat E. (2010), “Des statistiques sans statisticiens ? Politique des ‘indicateurs de la Lolf’ et enjeux statistiques, le cas du ministère du Travail et de l’Emploi”, Pyramides, 19 (3): 179-202.

Porter T. (1995), Trust in Numbers. The Pursuit of Objectivity In science and Public Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Volkoff S., Molinié A. (2010), “Quantifier sans broyer ? Les statistiques en santé au travail à la rencontre des analyses cliniques”, in Lhuilier D., Clot Y. (eds), Travail et santé. Ouvertures cli-niques, Toulouse: Erès, pp. 175-188.

Volkoff S. (2005), “Des comptes à rendre : usages des analyses quantitatives en santé au travail pour l’ergonomie”, in Volkoff S. (dir.), L’ergonomie et les chiffres de la santé au travail : ressources, tensions, pièges, Toulouse: Octarès, pp. 3-74.

Full Text: PDF


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia License.