standardising overseas fieldwork safety management … · standardising overseas fieldwork safety...

7
Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 Andrew Iain Knight Assistant Head of Health and Safety, University of Brighton, Chair of USHA Special Interest Group on Safety in Fieldwork [email protected] ABSTRACT The British Standard 8848 Specification for the provision of visits, fieldwork, expeditions and adventurous activities outside the United Kingdom was published by the British Standards Institute in April 2007. The release of the standard marked a fundamental shift away from fragmented subject or industry specific guidance on overseas fieldwork to a single all embracing set of requirements. The standard specifies operational requirements for organisers of adventurous and educational activities abroad. It is aimed at organisers of overseas activities including University and academic fieldwork, gap year experiences, adventure holidays, charity challenges and research expeditions. Using research data collected from the Universities Safety and Health Association (USHA) and case study examples, this paper examines: how the standard has been received by Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the UK; the impact of the standard upon Health and Safety Departments; potential benefits to non-UK HEIs; and the role of USHA and Universities and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA) in supporting their members. INTRODUCTION “More than 900 million international journeys were undertaken in 2008 “(WHO, 2009). Within the UK there were 70 million visits overseas in 2007, an increase of 30 million from 10 years previously in 1997 (Office for National Statistics, 2007). Higher Education Institutions are undertaking increasing numbers of fieldtrips and visits to countries to undertake increasingly varied work. Standards for health and safety management have existed for some time with standards such as the OHSAS 18001 and BS8800 providing auditable requirements for an organisational safety management system (based upon the Plan, Do, Act, Check model). It comes as no surprise that an attempt has been made to standardise the safety management of overseas fieldwork. BS8848 was produced by the British Standards Institute (BSI) and seeks to minimise the risks associated with overseas travel through improved planning and organisation. It is auditable either in-house by an institution’s Health and Safety Department (self declared conformity) or externally by a United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) accredited certification body. METHODOLOGY This paper has been produced following a survey and extensive involvement of the author in the chairing of an USHA special interest group on Safety in Fieldwork and recent joining of the BS8848 standard editing group, representing USHA. A survey was drafted and circulated on the Universities Safety and Health Association e-mail list server HASNET. The survey was directed to Heads and Directors of University Health and Safety Departments.

Upload: nguyendiep

Post on 09-Apr-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management … · Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 ... organisational safety management system

Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848

Andrew Iain Knight Assistant Head of Health and Safety, University of Brighton, Chair of USHA Special Interest Group on Safety in Fieldwork

[email protected] ABSTRACT The British Standard 8848 Specification for the provision of visits, fieldwork, expeditions and adventurous activities outside the United Kingdom was published by the British Standards Institute in April 2007. The release of the standard marked a fundamental shift away from fragmented subject or industry specific guidance on overseas fieldwork to a single all embracing set of requirements. The standard specifies operational requirements for organisers of adventurous and educational activities abroad. It is aimed at organisers of overseas activities including University and academic fieldwork, gap year experiences, adventure holidays, charity challenges and research expeditions. Using research data collected from the Universities Safety and Health Association (USHA) and case study examples, this paper examines: how the standard has been received by Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the UK; the impact of the standard upon Health and Safety Departments; potential benefits to non-UK HEIs; and the role of USHA and Universities and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA) in supporting their members. INTRODUCTION “More than 900 million international journeys were undertaken in 2008 “(WHO, 2009). Within the UK there were 70 million visits overseas in 2007, an increase of 30 million from 10 years previously in 1997 (Office for National Statistics, 2007). Higher Education Institutions are undertaking increasing numbers of fieldtrips and visits to countries to undertake increasingly varied work. Standards for health and safety management have existed for some time with standards such as the OHSAS 18001 and BS8800 providing auditable requirements for an organisational safety management system (based upon the Plan, Do, Act, Check model). It comes as no surprise that an attempt has been made to standardise the safety management of overseas fieldwork. BS8848 was produced by the British Standards Institute (BSI) and seeks to minimise the risks associated with overseas travel through improved planning and organisation. It is auditable either in-house by an institution’s Health and Safety Department (self declared conformity) or externally by a United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) accredited certification body. METHODOLOGY This paper has been produced following a survey and extensive involvement of the author in the chairing of an USHA special interest group on Safety in Fieldwork and recent joining of the BS8848 standard editing group, representing USHA. A survey was drafted and circulated on the Universities Safety and Health Association e-mail list server HASNET. The survey was directed to Heads and Directors of University Health and Safety Departments.

Page 2: Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management … · Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 ... organisational safety management system

The survey attracted a small number of respondents from across the United Kingdom for signposting purposes. The number of respondents is not statistically significant and no quantitative analysis has been attempted. Obtaining credible data on the uptake of BS8848 and other areas of safety management within the sector represents one of the challenges to USHA. CHALLENGES TO HIGHER EDUCATION The challenges facing Higher Education in the UK, USA and Australia are shared. Threats include terrorism, security threats, crime, transport risks, outbreaks of war, civil unrest, natural disasters and the growth in disease. The desire for greater academic freedom and pushing back of geographic and political boundaries has led to increasing travel abroad and the search for new research frontiers (Boor et el, 2007).Increasingly, University Health and Safety Departments are faced with having to provide safety advice and management frameworks to those wishing to travel further afield to potentially high risk countries. HEIs in the UK are looking for clear guidance on what measures need to be put in place for student groups, lone researchers and academic staff. The Business Travel Report (Control Risks, 2007) provides an indication of need for improved arrangements for overseas travellers. It reported 67% of UK organisations have no clear policy on travel security. British Standards Institute and supporters of BS8848 will find it difficult to gain momentum for the adoption of BS8848 with HEIs unless further training sessions are provided and the sector specific guidance on overseas fieldwork is issued. The obstacles to achieving success in the adoption of the BS8848 standard and subsequent improvements to management systems for overseas fieldwork are primarily: resource limits; time constraints on health & safety department staff; and emerging competing agendas e.g. Wellbeing, Student Placements and Fire Safety Reform. The biggest risk to a University is a threat to its reputation. Student death with subsequent civil action and potential prosecution under legislation such as the Corporate Homicide and Corporate Manslaughter Act 2007 (currently untested) may impact on grant funding awards, student recruitment, morale and retention. Human tragedies such as the shootings at Virgina Tech on April 16, 2007 have shown that the media memory, impact of tragedies and the attachment of negativity carry for long periods of time, well after the event e.g. Lyme Bay canoe disaster in 1993. High profile cases with media attention involving failure to manage safety of students on overseas fieldwork have not occurred in the UK to date. OVERVIEW OF THE BS8848 BS8848 provides a clear set of requirements for overseas trips covering operational aspects such as insurance, contingency and emergency plans, training and health (see table 1 below for list of sections). BS8848 is a risk based standard with the core safety requirements stemming from a venture specific threat and risk analysis. Additional clauses stipulate absolute (shall, not should) requirements in relation to operational arrangements. BS8848 is aimed at both those who organise overseas field activities and those who participate. The standard is designed to be applied on a venture by venture basis. The BS8848 standard has been drafted by fieldwork experts from a broad base of educational trip providers and higher education. Internal audits can be conducted by qualified Health and Safety Practitioners to verify if the academic school providing the fieldtrip is fully or partially conformant with the standard clauses.

Page 3: Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management … · Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 ... organisational safety management system

There is currently no published data on the number of Higher Education Institutions that have sought and achieved accreditation to the BS8848. The BS8848 standard was released on the assurance that there would be a review after the first year. During this year period a number of workshops were hosted by the Royal Geographic Society with members of the drafting committee present to collect views. The review after year one led to some refinements to the standard wording to clarify requirements for lone working of researchers and use of third party providers. A revised BS8848 was released in 2009 after consultation with the HE sector. Figure 1 below shows the BS8848 responsibility framework (British Standard Institute, 2007) In order to be fully conformant with the standard the venture provider (University or academic school) is responsible for all aspects of the trip, including third party providers e.g. in-country transport providers or activity specialists such as rock climbing organisations.

Table 1 below shows a list of some of the clause headings contained within BS8848 (British Standard Institute, 2007). The clause headings below show a comprehensive set of requirements for planning and organising trips overseas. Table 1 is provided to give an overview of the topics covered by the BS8848 standard.

Figure 1

Page 4: Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management … · Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 ... organisational safety management system

Table 1 - A selection of clause headings from BS8848 RECEPTION One of the problems with the standard is that it was never intended solely for the Higher Education sector but instead has a broad appeal to all organisations involved in overseas travel, such as year out providers, school trip companies and other organisations. Whilst there was a broad consultation undertaken by British Standard Institute with over 13000 comments received, there was no Health and Safety Adviser from the Higher Education sector involved. Terminology and language used in the standard did not accord with conventional terms, for example a new Risk Assessment and Management System (RAMS) (British Standard Institute, 2007) was introduced which appeared to accord with a risk assessment but caused confusion amongst some safety advisers. The standard does not impose any additional requirements to most Higher Education Institutions, but its release was a timely reminder of the need to ensure that often assumed arrangements are actually in place.

Survey Results The number of respondents to the survey is disappointing, although the responses that were received were thoroughly completed and provide a useful insight into the use of BS8848 and some of the benefits/problems. Nearly all of the respondents reported that their institution undertook fieldwork overseas and that this was an increasing activity. Asked whether respondents had amended their institutional policy arrangements as a result of BS8848, the vast majority indicated that they had not. Most respondents from the survey were planning to review the BS8848 and were awaiting revised sector guidance. When asked whether respondents had any concerns about the BS8848, the majority cited concern over bureaucracy. EXISTING GUIDANCE Guidance on fieldwork varies significantly between institutions with some opting for highly prescriptive requirements, whilst others point to risk assessment as the underpinning tool for managing overseas travel. Higher Education Institutions generally interpret the sector guidance (UCEA, 2005) and produce their own institutional arrangements based upon this. Based upon discussions held with HEIs the existing guidance has been well adopted by the sector and revision in light of the BS8848 will be looked at closely. UNIVERSITY OF BRIGHTON CASE STUDY University of Brighton has been successful in attracting greater funding for research and has entered into partnership with the Santander Group and Santander Universities network, with

• Identification of potential participants • Venture leader, leadership team and support

team • Supervision and staffing ratios • Protection of a participant under 18 years of

age or a vulnerable adult • Allocation of roles and responsibilities • Third party provider • Planning the venture • Venture integrity • Safety policy, risk analysis and management

system • Legal framework and contracts • Permissions

• Accommodation • Environment • Medical • Finance • Communication • Security • Contingency planning • Incident and emergency plan • Equipment • Evaluation • Insurance • Training and induction • Joining instruction • Travel

Page 5: Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management … · Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 ... organisational safety management system

funding opportunities for overseas partnership projects. The corporate plan for the University sets out a clear path to greater internationalisation. Destinations visited by student groups and academic staff in 2008 included Afghanistan, Iran, Argentina, Tunisia, Australia, USA, Malaysia, Vietnam and more. The Health and Safety Department identified failures of academic staff to undertake adequate risk assessments for trips to high risk locations or even to confirm suitable insurance cover. Following these problems the Health and Safety Department advised that the risk management corporate risk register needed to be amended to reflect the corporate risk and raise the profile of overseas travel to the senior management team. To address these problems the introduction of the BS8848 has provided an opportunity to review arrangements and rewrite guidance on overseas travel. A number of senior academic staff from disciplines including Sports Science, Tourism, Arts, Geography and Bio Sciences met to map the standard clauses against existing practice and decide upon revisions to the existing University of Brighton Fieldwork Safety code of practice. Overall the BS8848 acted as a useful checklist to challenge members of the group on the robustness of arrangements. Several gaps in arrangement were identified, for example in respect of emergency communications the University does not have a dedicated 24 hour contact number for dealing with enquiries from overseas. An overseas travel safety training course was developed in house and was delivered by a multidisciplinary team from the insurance office, occupational health, and health and safety to academic staff organising overseas trips. POTENTIAL BENEFITS FROM THE ADOPTION OF BS8848 Respondents did not cite many benefits of the BS8848. Two respondents stated that they were waiting for sector guidance to be produced by USHA/UCEA. The benefits advertised by British Standards Institute and the Royal Geographic Society The standard sets out a nationally recognised set of minimum requirements for the operational safety of overseas fieldwork. According to British Standard Institute (BSI) website promotional material the BS8848 can help minimise risk through:

• guidance on how to recognise a safe and well organised overseas venture • establishing good practice for organisers • helping a user recognise whether a venture is safe • preparing participants for the risks involved • aiming to reduce risk of injury and near misses • clear accountability and defined roles for everyone involved.

One of the other potential benefits to HEIs is the potential enhancement to student recruitment for courses with a traditionally high reliance on overseas fieldwork, such as the Geography, Earth and Environmental Science subjects. By having trips kitemarked (accredited) this can be used on published prospectuses and promotional material which may provide the edge over competitors and increase student recruitment. Kite marking HEI services is one of a series of ways an HEI can assist with University positioning in the sector and demonstrate a commitment to effective governance and risk management. One of the attractive benefits to HEIs is the potential protection the BS8848 affords in defence of civil action for negligence. By conforming to BS8848 an HEI could claim that they had conformed to national standards. A venture provider can use BS8848 to demonstrate

Page 6: Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management … · Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 ... organisational safety management system

minimum requirements had been achieved. How well this defence would stand is untested in the courts. POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WITH THE ADOPTION OF BS8848 The BS8848 specifies what you have to do, not how you should do it. HEIs struggled to interpret the requirements, despite efforts by the RGS to provide compliance workshops. This problem will be addressed by the release in November 2009 of HE sector guidance on Safety in Fieldwork which has been mapped against the BS8848 standard. By following the revised sector guidance, HEIs wishing to conform to the BS8848 can do so more easily. One of the problems with the BS8848 standard is that currently the HE sector does not collect and/or share data on the number of fatalities or serious injuries/ill health resulting from travel overseas. Without a performance indicator it will be difficult to decide whether the standard has been successful. The main problem with BS8848 identified by the survey data was that respondents felt that a prescriptive approach is bureaucratic. ROLE OF USHA AND THE UNIVERSITIES COLLEGES EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION USHA and UCEA have given support and endorsement to the formation of a special interest group to review the existing sector guidance on fieldwork and overseas travel. The review process involves mapping against the BS8848 standard and updating existing guidance where appropriate. The formation of a special interest group with participants from USHA members across all regions of the UK has been highly successful and demonstrates the effectiveness of forming a guiding coalition and engaging in a collaborative and inclusive development of sector guidance. Resource tools for assisting HEIs manage fieldwork safety are being developed as part of the safety in fieldwork guidance revision and these will be published on the USHA website safety directories <www.usha.org.uk>. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The BS8848 is useful to HEIs that are either establishing new arrangements or wish to confirm the adequacy of existing arrangements for overseas fieldwork safety. The BS8848 standard may lead to the improvement of planning and organisational arrangements for overseas fieldwork; the success of this has not yet been measured. Specific recommendations include:

• Non-UK HEIs to consider the use of BS8848 for benchmarking against existing arrangements for overseas fieldwork to identify potential gaps.

• USHA should continue to revise sector specific guidance on overseas fieldwork with consideration to the BS884.

• Sector guidance needs to be developed which aligns with BS8848 but not give rise to bureaucracy.

ACKOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks are expressed to Alan Cowen (Chair of USHA), Ann Bradshaw, Phil Thompson, Karen Kelly, Lesley Greenfield and all members of the USHA Special Interest Group on Safety in Fieldwork for their support. REFERENCES ABC News, 2007, Media Backlash at Virginia Tech, 18/04/09,

<http://abcnews.go.com/US/VATech/Story?id=3059025&page=1>

Page 7: Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management … · Standardising Overseas Fieldwork Safety Management with British Standard 8848 ... organisational safety management system

Bloor, M., Fincham, B. (University of Brighton) et el (2007) Risk to well-being of researchers in Qualitative Research. ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, Cardiff University British Standards Institute, n.d., What are the benefits of standards? 10/04/09, <http://www.bsi-global.com/en/Standards-and-Publications/About-standards/What-are-the-benefits-of-standards/>

British Standards Institute (2007). BS 8848:2007+A1:2009 Specification for the provision of visits, fieldwork, expeditions, and adventurous activities, outside the United Kingdom, BSI Group

Control Risks, 2007, Business Travel Report, 10/04/09, <http://www.control-risks.com/pdf/travel_sec_report_UK_LR.pdf>

Office for National Statistics, 2007, International Travel, 10/04/09, <http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=178>

Royal Geographic Society, n.d., Fieldwork Safety a resource briefing on BS8848, 10/04/09, <http://www.rgs.org/NR/rdonlyres/D93E45F0-68A4-430B-BC8F-DD0DEEB6D0FA/0/GEES8848Brief.pdf>

Universities and Colleges Employers Association, 2005, Guidance on Safety in Fieldwork, 10/04/09, <http://www.ucea.ac.uk/objects_store/UCEA%20H&S%20Safety%20in%20Fieldwork.pdf>

Universities and Colleges Employers Association, 1998, Health and safety guidance when working overseas, 10/04/09, http://www.ucea.ac.uk/download.cfm/docid/68508A1F-EA44-740A-002A913DE485E08B

Universities Safety and Health Association (USHA), <www.usha.org.uk> University of Brighton, 2007, Corporate Plan, 15/04/09,

<http://staffcentral.brighton.ac.uk/xpedio/groups/Public/documents/staffcentral/doc007325.pdf>

World Health Organisation, 2009, International Travel and Health, WHO press