Case-study of Salmon Aquaculture Welfare in Coastal Chilean Firms

Thesis Abstract

The wellbeing of salmon aquaculture workers in coastal Chilean firms is increasingly recognized as a critical factor influencing production efficiency, product quality, and long-term sustainability, yet empirical understanding of welfare determinants and organizational practices remains limited due to fragmented regional studies and sector-focused narratives. This study aims to comprehensively examine how welfare is defined, measured, and manifested within large-scale and mid-sized salmon farming firms operating along the Chilean fjords, and to identify scalable governance mechanisms that enhance worker wellbeing without compromising industry competitiveness. Specific objectives are (1) to map welfare constructs used by firms, including physical safety, psychosocial conditions, living and working arrangements, and access to health services; (2) to assess the relationship between welfare practices and productivity indicators such as feed conversion ratios, mortality rates, and incident frequencies; (3) to evaluate the moderating effects of organizational culture, leadership styles, and union engagement on welfare outcomes; (4) to explore workers’ perceptions of welfare adequacy through qualitative testimony; and (5) to develop an evidence-based framework for improving welfare governance in the Chilean salmon sector. A mixed-methods design is employed. The study surveys 320 frontline workers and 40 supervisors across 10 firms representing vertical integration levels and geographic distribution along the Aysén–Los Lagos region. Quantitative data are collected via a structured welfare questionnaire capturing safety climate, psychosocial risk factors (e.g., job demands, control, social support), access to health services, and perceived organizational justice, complemented by firm records on productivity and safety incidents for the preceding 24 months. Qualitative data comprise 40 semi-structured interviews with frontline employees, 10 with middle managers, and 4 focus groups with union representatives, designed to contextualize quantitative findings and illuminate sector-specific welfare dynamics. Instruments are validated through pilot testing and triangulated against firm-level documentation, national labor standards, and the International Labour Organization framework on decent work. Validity and reliability are ensured with Cronbach’s alpha checks (target >0.70 for constructs), test-retest reliability in a subsample, and content validity review by domain experts. Analytical techniques include descriptive statistics to profile welfare indicators, multi-level linear regression to examine relationships between welfare practices (independent variables) and productivity/safety outcomes (dependent variables) while accounting for firm-level clustering, and structural equation modeling to test a theoretical welfare governance model. The qualitative component employs thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s approach, with coding conducted by two independent researchers and adjudicated through intercoder reliability (Cohen’s kappa >0.80). A convergent mixed-methods approach will integrate quantitative and qualitative results to produce a holistic interpretation of welfare determinants and effects. The study anticipates findings that robust welfare practices—such as comprehensive safety training, accessible healthcare, stable shift patterns, and participatory decision-making—are positively associated with reduced incident rates, improved productivity metrics, and enhanced perceived organizational support. It is expected that strong leadership commitment and effective union engagement will moderate these associations, amplifying welfare benefits in firms with mature safety cultures and transparent grievance mechanisms. The qualitative data are likely to reveal nuanced worker experiences of remote logistics, exposure to hazardous conditions, and perceived trade-offs between welfare investments and operational demands, informing culturally attuned welfare interventions. The expected contribution to knowledge includes (i) an empirically grounded, domain-specific welfare framework for Chile’s salmon sector that integrates safety, psychosocial well-being, and health access with productivity outcomes; (ii) quantification of welfare-productivity linkages using multi-level modeling, which can inform industry performance benchmarks and policy guidance; and (iii) actionable governance recommendations for firm leadership, human resources practitioners, and policymakers aimed at institutionalizing decent work standards in aquaculture. The study also advances theory by integrating the ILO Decent Work framework with organizational behavior theories of safety climate and leadership, tailored to high-demand, coastal resource industries. Practical implications include scalable welfare improvements such as standardized safety audits, worker feedback loops, health service partnerships, and cooperative worker-management platforms, which collectively enhance resilience of Chile’s salmon supply chain. Concluding recommendations emphasize adopting holistic welfare indicators in annual reporting, incentivizing welfare investments through performance-linked contracts, and fostering regional collaboration to share best practices across firms and communities.