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


  • Samantha L. Powers The Pennsylvania State University
  • Nicholas A. Pitas State University of New York, College at Brockport
  • Austin G. Barrett United Housing Connections
  • Alan R. Graefe The Pennsylvania State University
  • Andrew J. Mowen The Pennsylvania State University




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


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 

Author Biographies

Samantha L. Powers, The Pennsylvania State University

Graduate Student, Department of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management

Nicholas A. Pitas, State University of New York, College at Brockport

Assistant Professor, Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies

Austin G. Barrett, United Housing Connections

Data Analyst

Alan R. Graefe, The Pennsylvania State University

Professor, Department of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management

Andrew J. Mowen, The Pennsylvania State University

Professor, Department of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management





Regular Papers