CONTRACT RESEARCH REPORT 426/2002

1 HSEH ealth & SafetyExecutivePlaygrounds - risks, benefits and choicesPrepared byMiddlesex Universityfor the Health and Safety ExecutiveCONTRACT RESEARCH REPORT426/2002 HSEH ealth & SafetyExecutivePlaygrounds - risks, benefits and choicesProfessor David J BallMiddlesex UniversitySchool of Health & Social SciencesCentre for Decision Analysis & Risk ManagementArchway Campus2-10 Highgate HillLondon N19 5LW This REPORT describes the first detailed strategic risk assessment of outdoor playgrounds in the UK forover a decade. It also reviews international RESEARCH on risk factors. In summary, the risk of injury onUK playgrounds is found to be modest compared with the risks of many other activities in whichchildren are encouraged, for accepted reasons, to participate. The main risk factors on playgrounds arefound to be behaviour, equipment height, and body orientation in falls to the ground (not necessarily inthat order).

2 Scientific evidence of the effectiveness of compliant undersurfacing as a risk mitigationmeasure is mixed. While some RESEARCH points to a positive benefit the associated risk factor isrelatively small and the question remains of how the measure affects child safety in the round. From alegal perspective, the question also arises as to whether the projected benefit, if accepted, is sufficientto meet the British safety criterion of reasonable practicability. It is noted that over the past decade,during which there have been many playground safety interventions, coupled perhaps with less usageof playgrounds, there is as yet no sign of a downward trendin overall numbers of injury , there is a view that play provision may have reduced in quantity and possibly also inquality. This, it is thought, has been brought about by concern over accidents, litigation, cost of safetymeasures et cetera.

3 A problem for play providers is that these concerns are very tangible, whereas thebenefits of play , social, physical and psychological are far less easily quantified. The appropriatebalance between play benefits, one of which is considered by leading play agencies to be theopportunity to experience real risk, and safety on playgrounds, is a social and not a scientific matter,and may warrant careful reconsideration. Some risk management measures are suggested whichmight be helpful. It is also recommended that, in the interests of child safety, risk assessment shouldbe applied to the activities of children both on and off playgrounds to safeguard against plausiblerisktransfer mechanisms and to optimise child safety REPORT and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive. Its contents,including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the authors and do not necessarilyreflect HSE BOOKSii Crown copyright 2002 Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to:Copyright Unit, Her Majesty s Stationery Office,St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1 BQFirst published 2002 ISBN 0 7176 2340 8 All rights reserved.

4 No part of this publication may bereproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmittedin any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical,photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the priorwritten permission of the copyright owner. CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1. INTRODUCTION Background Objectives REPORT Structure 2.

5 AN OVERVIEW OF play INJURY CASES IN THE UK Non-fatal injuries where and how many? Data from the LASS reports play equipment product-related accidents and the LASS data base Numbers of equipment-related cases by location Fatalities in playgrounds An overview of where and how many 3. TYPES OF INJURIES AND CAUSAL FACTORS Fatalities Non-fatal injuries 4. ASSESSING RISKS Studies of perspective International data UK data Studies of playground risk factors Biomechanical studies of falls Impact attenuation of surfaces play observed minutely The PRAV study Real time observation 5. ASSESSING BENEFITS Why consider benefits? Unavoidable difficulties associated with play benefits Modest evidence Playground risks a step on the road to coping with life?

6 Iii 6. BEHAVIOUR versus ENVIRONMENT Social approaches to understanding play and behaviour Environmental approaches to safety Behaviour versus environment 7. ANALYSIS AND REVIEW How dangerous are playgrounds in the UK? Why the focus on safety in the playground? What is the meaning of safety ? The effectiveness of safety measures Threats to playgrounds The problem of balance 8. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The key issue is balance Safety on and off playgrounds Safety on playgrounds Standards Good practice Playground surfacing RESEARCH needs APPENDIX A Analysis of the 1998 DTI LASS data set APPENDIX B Further analysis of trends APPENDIX C Risk-benefit analysis and alternative playground surfacing APPENDIX D The application of cultural theory to playgrounds iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Although the views finally expressed in this REPORT are necessarily the responsibility of the author.

7 The analysis and the formulation of these ideas has been greatly assisted by discussions held with numerous parties. Space is insufficient to thank everyone, but the following organisations in particular are gratefully acknowledged for their invaluable support throughout this project: all of the members of the UK play Safety Forum as hosted by the Children s play Council the DTI s Consumer Safety Unit staff of the Glasgow office of the HSE Many individuals have also provided data, offered comments and given advice. Special mention is due to Amy Yan, Helen Vicary and Phil Raine of the DTI CSU, Robin Foster and Fiammetta Gordon of HSE (Rose Court), David Chalmers (IPRU, University of Otago) and Steve Marshall (formerly of IPRU and now of the University of North Carolina), Ian Burks (Keep Our Children Safe Campaign and Fairplay), Tim Gill of the Children s play Council, Robin Sutcliffe (chair of the PSF), Jean Wenger (NPFA), Peter Heseltine (RoSPA), Diane Pain (formerly RESEARCH officer for PRAV), and Joan Wood of Learning Through Landscapes.

8 V vi 1. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Childhood injuries incurred on playgrounds have attracted considerable attention in Britain and many other countries over the past several decades. Apart from children themselves, a surprising number of stakeholders is involved with or has an interest in this issue. These include play providers, particularly local authorities at various levels but also including schools and the education sector more widely, the private sector and charities, plus equipment manufacturers, playground designers, parents, play promotional agencies and other special interest groups, standards-setting bodies, insurers, solicitors, assorted experts, the courts, regulatory bodies, advisory bodies, the health service, the media and academics from various disciplines.

9 In the United Kingdom, the regulatory authority with respect to playgrounds is, by dint of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (HSWA), the Health and Safety Executive. The reason for the relevance of this Act to playgrounds is to be found in Section 3 of the Act which contains provisions to protect people who may be affected by work activities even though they are not employees of the business or undertaking concerned. Crucially, this includes visitors to premises including the public and their children. The fundamental purpose of this REPORT is to provide an up to date review of knowledge on the safety of playgrounds. There are several reasons why it is appropriate to do this now. Paramount is the concern over safety itself which has been with us for two or three decades and shows little sign of abating. However, there is also another side to this issue that warrants consideration.

10 Perhaps the most pressing aspect of this arises from the awareness in some circles of the importance of play for the development of children,1 coupled with genuine anxiety that play opportunities may be less than adequate or otherwise under threat, because of escalating costs of provision, fear of litigation, and what has even been termed the (over-)rigid application of Standards, 2, 3, 4 together with more general concerns about an alleged loss of children s independence and an associated, well-intentioned, but potentially harmful circumscription of their While it is not to be expected that a predominantly (though not exclusively) scientific review could resolve matters as complex as these, it would nonetheless be mistaken to ignore what information there is. Furthermore, under the HSWA, there is an implied duty to conduct risk assessments of hazards.