Duty of care in higher education has never been more complex.

Universities are sending students and staff further afield than ever before, while operating in a world shaped by geopolitical uncertainty, evolving health risks and rising expectations from those they support. International mobility now takes many forms, from short trips to long‑term placements and ongoing cross‑border travel, each with its own challenges.

This creates a risk environment that is difficult to manage through static policies alone. Conditions can shift quickly, access to healthcare varies widely, and incidents rarely follow predictable paths. Institutions are under increasing pressure to demonstrate that risks have been assessed, support is in place and decisions are proportionate.

Recently, Healix hosted a webinar bringing together higher‑education leaders and risk specialists to explore how duty of care is being delivered in practice. Drawing on real‑world scenarios and expert perspectives, the discussion examined where institutions are most exposed and how they can strengthen their approach.

These themes are explored further in Healix’s duty of care whitepaper, which provides practical guidance for higher education institutions navigating today’s complex travel risk environment.

What were the key takeaways?

Risk varies across higher education travel

Higher‑education travel covers a wide spectrum of activity. Supervised student field trips, study or work placements, academic conferences, senior leadership travel and individual research trips all present very different levels and types of risk.

Yet duty of care frameworks are often stretched by attempts to manage all travel in the same way. This can result in low‑risk trips being over‑engineered, while higher‑risk activity does not always receive the depth of preparation it requires.

A more effective approach recognises these differences. Clear risk assessment thresholds, defined escalation points and delegated approval levels allow most routine travel to proceed smoothly, while ensuring that complex or higher‑risk journeys receive appropriate scrutiny and support.

The aim is not to add more process, but to apply the right level of process to each type of journey.

Health and wellbeing risks are integral to duty of care

Medical and wellbeing issues are among the most common causes of disruption during international travel, yet they have historically received less attention than security risks.

Many students and staff now travel with pre‑existing physical or mental health needs. Others experience issues triggered or exacerbated by travel itself, such as stress, anxiety or disruption to established routines. Accessing care abroad can be complicated by unfamiliar healthcare systems, language barriers, cultural differences and cost.

Institutions with strong duty of care frameworks treat health and wellbeing planning as a core consideration. Pre‑travel health screening, continuity of care planning and clear access to medical and psychological support help reduce escalation and protect both individuals and institutions when issues arise.

Change is inevitable during international travel

Even well‑planned trips can change without warning. Security conditions, local infrastructure and healthcare access can all shift rapidly, particularly in unfamiliar environments.

When incidents occur, pressure often falls on small specialist teams who are expected to respond quickly, sometimes across time zones and outside normal working hours. Gaps in local knowledge, legal constraints in overseas jurisdictions or unclear decision‑making authority can quickly expose weaknesses in existing plans.

What makes the difference is clarity rather than complexity. Clear roles, simple escalation pathways and well‑understood thresholds for action allow institutions to respond calmly and proportionately when conditions change.

What this means for higher education

Duty of care in higher education is no longer defined by policy alone. It depends on how well institutions understand risk as it develops, how clearly responsibilities are set out and how effectively they support people when plans change. Proportionate frameworks, health and wellbeing readiness and well‑rehearsed response mechanisms all play a critical role.

Institutions that take a structured, people‑centred approach are better positioned to reduce uncertainty, respond calmly and maintain confidence across their travelling community. The goal is not to remove risk entirely, but to understand it, manage it thoughtfully and support students and staff wherever they are in the world.

To explore these themes in more detail and hear practical examples from higher‑education leaders and risk specialists, you can watch the full webinar here.