The Management of Parks and Public Spaces in the Context of Unsheltered Homelessness: Perspectives from Three Key Stakeholder Groups

Abstract

People experiencing homelessness make extensive use of parks and public greenspaces, and recent years have seen increased interest in park agency-based strategies to address homelessness and its symptoms. However, there is a relative lack of literature addressing the management of these spaces with consideration for unhoused users, and much of the existing work has been conducted from the perspective of a single user group. In this research we triangulate the perspectives of people experiencing homelessness, housed members of the public, and park agency employees through a series of focus group interviews. This work provide unique context and multiple angles of approach to a challenging issue as we seek to understand perceptions and priorities within the context of park and public space management. Specifically, we addressed three research questions focused on (a) the current and ideal role of a park and recreation agency in addressing homelessness in the community, (b) the characteristics of positive and negative interactions between agency employees and people experiencing homelessness, and (c) management priorities and challenges in this context.

Our results indicate substantial common ground, ambiguity, and a number of concrete priorities for managing parks and public spaces in this context. All three stakeholder groups agreed that the current agency role was limited in scope, and largely focused on enforcement and quality control over parks and the recreation experience. Whereas park district employees advocated for a more proactive approach to homelessness, both unhoused and housed members of the community favored maintaining a limited role for the park district. Positive interactions mirrored those between park agency employees and any other user group, and were characterized by an ethic of caring, and the formation of long-term familiarity and relationships. Negative interactions on the other hand were largely related to enforcement of rules and regulations, and patterns of previous negative interactions. Safety was identified as the number one priority by all three user groups, with the public also prioritizing a welcoming and aesthetically pleasing park environment. Key challenges included a lack of resources, and the complexity of the issue of homelessness.