Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Local Policy-Makers' Community Priorities and Perceived Contributions of Parks and Recreation

Samantha L. Powers, Nicholas A. Pitas, Austin G. Barrett, Alan R. Graefe, Andrew J. Mowen

Abstract


Parks and recreation provide extensive health, quality of life, and community benefits. Yet their ability to deliver quality services relies on funding and supportive policies—both of which are decided largely by local government officials, both elected and appointed (e.g., town/city manager, town/city council members, mayors, etc.). Given their role as a decision-making stakeholder, it is important to understand local officials’ priorities and how well they feel parks and recreation contribute to these. This knowledge will allow for the development of management strategies to better position parks and recreation among officials. This national study (n=648) examined local officials’ community priorities relative to their perceptions of parks and recreations’ contributions. 

Officials from various types of local governments (e.g., town, city, county) were asked to indicate how important they believed a variety of priorities were in their communities and the extent to which they felt parks and recreation contributed to these. While officials deemed all community priorities to be important, attracting and retaining businesses, youth development, and quality of life were rated highest. Local officials perceived the greatest contributions from parks and recreation relative to quality of life, youth development, and health. Importance-performance analysis (IPA) with a mean quadrant approach suggested attracting and retaining businesses as an area to concentrate, youth development and quality of life as areas to keep up the good work, and growth management and social equity/social justice as areas of low priority for officials. Gap score analysis revealed the largest deficiencies between importance and performance for attracting and retaining businesses, growth management, youth development, and social equity/ social justice. While IPA would suggest increasing efforts only in the concentrate here quadrant, gap analysis demonstrated the need to work to elevate perceptions of park and recreation’s performance for additional priorities. 

Subscribe to JPRA

 


Keywords


Community priorities; importance-performance analysis; local officials; parks and recreation; policy-makers

Full Text:

PDF


DOI: https://doi.org/10.18666/JPRA-2020-10295

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2020 Sagamore Publishing LLC