Understanding benefit-risk
In some parts of the world it's still the inaugural International Day of Play. What better way to celebrate that than by talking about boring adult documents and processes like health and safety and risk management?
Just kidding, that stuff isn't boring, it's fascinating and crucial to understand for the safe and empowering enablement of many play opportunities world-wide.
One of the significant developments in this space is the concept of benefit-risk assessment (I've talked about it here and here) and the publication of ISO 4980 (Benefit-risk assessment for sports and recreational facilities, activities and equipment) last year. I've dedicated a lot of time to understanding and beginning to disseminate this work (which has been developed by clever people around the world that aren't me) to the play, active recreation, and sport sectors in New Zealand.
One of those people is David Eager, Professor of Risk Management and Injury Prevention at the University of Technology Sydney. Last week David published what I think will be a pivotal journal article in Standards (a journal about standards): Benefit–Risk Assessment in Sport and Recreation: Historical Development and Review of AS ISO 4980:2023. The article chronicles the history of some of the standards on risk management, starting in 1995, that led to the development of ISO 4980 in 2023. Further, it helps to explain the benefit-risk concept and draw attention to this way of understanding risk that may be new or confronting to those who only understand traditional workplace risk management.
I've summarised what I believe are the key points from the article, points which should be helpful in communicating the ins and outs, importance, and the scope of benefit-risk assessment to anyone you work with.
Before you scroll down to the juicy bits, I thought it was worth mentioning that David concludes the article with the following,
It is expected that in some countries or jurisdictions where the appetite for risk is low, there may be some initial push-back to the acceptance that risk exposure within the sport and recreation industry can and does have benefits.
He's hit the nail on the head with that one folks. Even New Zealand, which has had, and probably still has to varying degrees, a reputation for being green, outdoorsy, playful, adventurous, etc. is becoming increasingly risk averse. From parenting to organisational approaches, we've started seizing up at our joints and losing touch with that image and the vitality it brings to actually live in that reality.
When you're a play advocate working with communities and local government you realise how pervasive this risk aversion is becoming. There are many that we meet with who don't understand the importance of risk-taking in play and how to carry out and document decision-making that is both aligned with legislation and enabling of children's rights and supports their development.
While I don't mind talking about risky play, it's this kind of issue that has led to Jacquelyn Collins and I to advocate for local government and its partners to instead refer to adventurous play (at least internally). People still tend to understand things like tramping and multi-sport events in this country, and that a) good risk management is an important part of that experience and b) that you can have an adventure, benefit from the risk-taking, and still be safe and sane (i.e., sometimes you can have your cake and eat it to).
All that to say, I'm excited by this article because it will be very helpful for getting New Zealand back on track in this space. Great work David.
Enjoy the tidbits...
Summary of key points:
Workplace-oriented risk management views risk as a purely negative phenomenon that requires elimination.
Risks can be negative, but they can also be positive.
ISO 4980 is important because it challenges the view that risk can only be negative.
Play, active recreation, and sport is a different context to the workplace and requires its own approach because of the implicit benefit-risk trade-off.
It is implied that risk exposure in play, active recreation, and sport can be positive.
Positive learning from making mistakes is not restricted to childhood development but also throughout the life course.
ISO 4980 does not conflict with traditional risk management standards/approaches, rather it specifically addresses the concept of benefit when applied to the appropriate context.
ISO 4980 is specifically about play, active recreation, and sport users, not employers or employees. Do not apply ISO 4980 for workplace risk management.
Where a play site can also be a workplace (e.g. the installation of a playground) the traditional risk management process should be followed for employees.
The importance of risk exposure for healthy child development is well documented.
The literature that opposes children’s playful risk taking is a) almost purely medical in nature, b) does not consider benefits of risk, or if it does, underestimates the ‘whole-of-life’ benefit to society, c) is usually funded on injury prevention grounds and by injury prevention groups, and d) play injury is viewed the same as injury from a car accident, but car accidents are not of benefit to society whereas play injury on average will be.
There is a difference between types of entertainment (e.g. a rollercoaster) and play (e.g. trampolining). The first is analogous to the workplace where it is expected that all hazards are removed, and therefore users may be exposed to thrills without exposure to injury. The second involves users actively interacting with the environment and needing to take a personal duty of care to risk exposure - in other words, it is skill-based.
There is a difference between voluntary recreational sport and professional sport. There are benefits and risks in both contexts, but the later requires a greater duty of care by employers because this also makes it a workplace setting.
ISO 4980 is uniquely placed to respond to the benefits and risks of parkour.
All situations are different and require their own assessments.
There are situations where the risks will outweigh the benefits in play, active reaction, and sport contexts, but in the majority of situations the benefits will outweigh the risks.
Truly quantitative data is seldom available for benefits so qualitative approaches will need to be followed.
Benefit-risk assessment should be conducted by a small team of at least three members to account for any necessary expertise.
ISO 4980 is new, and assessments should be documented and shared to establish best practice.
How does benefit-risk assessment shape your approach to play or recreation? Share your thoughts in the comments or reach out for workshops and support on implementing ISO 4980.
