Policy issues and risk–benefit trade-offs of ‘safer surfacing’ for children’s playgrounds

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(03)00088-5Get rights and content

Abstract

The case for the universal application of ‘safer surfacing’ in playgrounds is assessed in terms of absolute risk, cost–benefit, and qualitative factors, and found to be open to question on each front. In parallel, it is noted that members of the child welfare and play communities are increasingly of the view that playgrounds are losing their appeal for children, which in turn has its own health, safety and developmental consequences. In part, this loss of attractiveness may have linkages with the recent concern over play safety and the imposition of measures such as ‘safer surfacing’. It is proposed that the drive for play safety, which has existed for some 20 years, should be succeded by a more holistic approach which, rather than considering play safety in isolation, acknowledges the importance of all attributes of play including child safety both on and off playgrounds, potential beneficial aspects of childhood risk exposure, adventure, and play value.

Introduction

The safety of children in playgrounds has been high on the agenda of western-style countries for several decades. However, in any setting, it is an unavoidable truth that the single-minded pursuit of any objective, including valued commodities such as safety, will ultimately impinge upon the attainment of alternative targets. In Britain, many agencies with interests in children’s play provision and children’s health are now questioning the appropriateness of the current balance between safety and other goals within the play environment. In 2000, a group of influential agencies1 concerned with children’s play produced a report noting a ‘poverty of play opportunities in the general environment’ and their deep concern over the ensuing deprivation and its consequences (National Playing Fields Association, 2000). The report also drew a challenging conclusion, namely, that risk taking in playgrounds is both natural and desirable. In 2002, a larger group of national agencies2 with interests in play provision and children’s welfare in the UK produced a position statement expressing concern about how safety was being addressed in children’s play (Play Safety Forum, 2002). Fear of litigation was seen as leading many play providers to focus on any actions having the appearance of minimising the risk of injury, even though at the expense of other fundamental objectives such as the right to play, the need for interesting and challenging play environments, and the opportunity for children to learn about risk in a reasonably safe environment. The statement goes on to say that the appropriate balance should be set on the basis of properly conducted risk assessment, with due regard to the risk–benefit tradeoffs between safety and other goals. Many individuals in Britain and across Europe have likewise expressed anxiety about the state of children’s play and its apparent emasculation through the way in which society has addressed the issue of safety (Heseltine, 1994, Heseltine, 1995, Jensen, 1995, Richter, 1995).

This paper investigates this situation in respect of one particular safety intervention which has been strongly advocated for reducing playground injury risk, namely, the use of impact-absorbing surfaces (IAS) around equipment from which falls are possible. This intervention is chosen for three reasons. Firstly, because it has dominated the discussion surrounding playground safety in Britain for over two decades, secondly, because it has increased provision costs so sharply that many parties believe it to be a factor in the overall decline in both the quantity and quality of play areas, and thirdly, because the Chairman of the National Play Safety Forum has identified this issue as a starting point for “putting play safety in perspective” (Sutcliffe, 2000). Review of the effectiveness of major safety interventions should in any case be a routine requirement of any safety policy.

Section snippets

Method

This analysis is based upon several types of evidence, much of which was gathered during a review for the UK Health & Safety Executive (HSE) of playground injury statistics and policy in Britain during the period 1988–1999 (Ball, 2002). Firstly, quantitative data on the numbers of non-fatal play equipment-related injury cases were assembled using the UK Department of Trade and Industries leisure accident surveillance system (LASS). Equivalent fatality data were provided by the HSE. Secondly,

The injury record

So far as non-fatal injuries in leisure activities are concerned, by far the best source of information in the UK is that provided by the DTI Consumer Safety Unit’s LASS database. The LASS system records attendances at A & E departments from a sample of UK hospitals (sample size in the range of 2–5%). These data were examined for the 12 year period from 1988 to 1999. The quality of the data was checked by going back to the individual case reports for one of these years—1998. This proved to be

Risk management decision making in the UK

In UK policy circles, it is the norm that decision making at the strategic level requires systematic economic appraisal of expenditure decisions (HM Treasury, 1991). This has always been regarded as the basis of sound economic management5 even in the case of non-traded goods with no market price such as accidental deaths avoidable by some safety measure. To make

Concluding remarks

The evidence gathered here is not supportive of the case for the wholesale application of IAS as a playground safety measure. The main factors are:

  • (a)

    The risk of serious injury in UK playgrounds is actually small and nowhere near the level which normally is deemed to warrant substantial intervention.

  • (b)

    Attempts at dealing with already small risks frequently fail overall because they transfer risks elsewhere.

  • (c)

    Cost–benefit calculations, although not strictly warranted and despite uncertainties, do not

Acknowledgements

The views expressed here are the responsibility of the author. Thanks are due to the Health & Safety Executive for sponsoring the work which underpins this paper (Contract CRR 426/2002), to the Children’s Play Council and all members of the Play Safety Forum for information, constructive criticism and support, to the DTI for access to its database, and to members of the Association of Play Industries for information and encouragement. Specific information or comments have been provided on parts

References (36)

  • D.J. Ball

    Consumer affairs and the valuation of safety

    Accid. Anal. Prev.

    (2000)
  • C. Macarthur et al.

    Risk factors for severe injuries associated with falls from playground equipment

    Accid. Anal. Prev.

    (2000)
  • P.A. Scuffham et al.

    Trends in cycle injury in New Zealand under voluntary helmet use

    Accid. Anal. Prev.

    (1997)
  • Adams, J., 1995. Risk. University College London Press,...
  • D.J. Ball

    Risks and benefits of sport and exercise—looking ahead

    J. Sports Exerc. Inj.

    (1998)
  • Ball, D.J., 2001. Cost calculation and injury prevention: issues of science, rationality and ethics. In: Proceedings of...
  • Ball, D.J., 2002. Playgrounds—Risks, Benefits and Choices. Report No. CRR 426/2002. HSE Books, Sudbury, Suffolk. ISBN...
  • P.A. Briss et al.

    Injuries from falls on playgrounds

    Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med.

    (1995)
  • D.J. Chalmers et al.

    Height and surfacing as risk factors for injury in falls from playground equipment: a case-control study

    Inj. Prev.

    (1996)
  • Chilton, S., Covey, J., Hopkins, L., Jones-Lee, M., Loomes, G., Pidgeon, N., Spencer, A., 1998. New research results on...
  • Graham, J.D., Wiener, J.B., 1995. Risk Versus Risk—Tradeoffs in Protecting Health and the Environment. Harvard...
  • Health and Safety Executive, 1992. The Tolerability of Risk From Nuclear Power Stations. HMSO, London. ISBN...
  • Health and Safety Executive, 1999. The Costs to Britain of Workplace Accidents and Work-Related Ill Health in...
  • Health and Safety Executive, 2001. Reducing Risk—Protecting People. HSE Books, Sudbury,...
  • P. Heseltine

    Confessions of a playground safety adviser

    J. Handicapped Adventure Playground Assoc.

    (1994)
  • Heseltine, P., 1995. Safety versus play value. In: Chistiansen, M.L. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Playground Safety...
  • Jarvis, S., Towner, E., Walsh, S., 1995. Accidents. In: Botting, B. (Ed.), The Health of Our Children—Decennial...
  • Jensen, M.T., 1995. CEN … and the art of motor-skill maintenance. In: Chistiansen, M.L. (Ed.), Proceedings of the...
  • Cited by (30)

    • Shade provision in public playgrounds for thermal safety and sun protection: A case study across 100 play spaces in the United States

      2019, Landscape and Urban Planning
      Citation Excerpt :

      Each year in the United States, over 200,000 children are treated in emergency departments for playground-related injuries (Hanway, 2016) with falls identified as the most common type of injury (Hanway, 2016; Chen, Bell, Haileyesus, Gilchrist, Sugerman, & Coronado, 2016; Tuckel, Milczarski, & Silverman, 2017). A fall onto a shock-absorbing surface is less likely to cause a serious head injury than a fall onto a hard surface (Ball, 2004; Chalmers et al., 1996), with fall height being a significant predictor of injury severity (Fiissel, Pattison, & Howard, 2005). Safety protocols, such as impact attenuation testing, has led to the evolution of new playground designs (Lewis, Naunheim, Standeven, & Naunheim, 1993), such as installing artificial surfaces (Rubber Manufacturers Association, 2014) to provide cushioning for falls and to meet accessibility laws (U.S. Department of Justice, 2010).

    • Comparative multibody dynamics analysis of falls from playground climbing frames

      2009, Forensic Science International
      Citation Excerpt :

      Injury risk in playgrounds should be kept to a tolerable level, where the risk of serious injuries is low. Nevertheless, to completely eliminate risk from playgrounds would reduce their play value, which could, in turn, have negative consequences for the health of the child population [37]. The use of HIC has been effective in reducing head injury and its use is recommended as a tool for assessing head impact injury, but its limitations when applied to scenarios other than sagittal impacts during car crashes should be understood [38].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text