Leisure and Recreation: Supply & Demand

Noshih Bin Amzad Asif

Dept. of Urban and Regional Planning 

Jahangirnagar University.

Introduction:

Leisure and Recreation are important part in the field of Urban Planning. Leisure is the time available to the individuals when the disciplines of works, sleep and other basic needs have been made. Recreation is any pursuit engaged upon during leisure time, other than pursuits to when people are normally committed.

Definition of Leisure:

Leisure is activity - apart from the obligations of work, family, and society - to which the Individual turns at will, for either relaxation, diversion, or broadening his knowledge and his spontaneous social participation, the free exercise of his creative capacity. Leisure is a state of mind which ordinarily is characterized by un-obligated time and willing optimism. It can involve extensive activity or no activity. The key ingredient is an attitude which fosters a peaceful and productive co-existence with the elements in one's environment.

Leisure is the time which an individual has free from work or other duties and which may be utilized for the purposes of relaxation, diversion, social achievement, or personal development.

N.P Gist & S. F. Fava (1964) Urban Society. New York, Crowell, p. 411.

Definition of Recreation:

Recreation is an emotional condition within an individual human being that flows from a feeling of well-being and satisfaction. It is characterized by feelings of mastery, achievement, exhilaration, acceptance, success, personal worth and pleasure. .. It reinforces a positive self-image. Recreation is a response to aesthetic experience, achievement of a person's goals, or positive feedback from others. It is independent of activity, leisure or social acceptance.

Recreation is considered to be activity voluntarily undertaken, primarily for pleasure and satisfaction, during leisure time.

David Gray and D. Pelegrino (1973) Reflections on the Park and Recreation Movement.Dubuque, Iowa, William C. Brown, p. 7.

Leisure and Recreation providing with two sectors, which are:

Ø  Demand

Ø  Supply

Demand of Leisure and Recreation:

A number of basic factors determine the demand for Leisure and Recreation.

Ø  Population.

Ø  Income.

Ø  Education.

Ø  Co-ownership.

There are six principle ways of collecting the necessary for measuring the Leisure and Recreational demand.

Ø  Interview Survey.

Ø  Self-administered Survey.

Ø  Observation.

Ø  Documentary.

Ø  Physical evidence.

Ø  Mechanical and electronic devices.

The underlying factors behind the demand for a particular recreational facility have been usefully summarized as:

Ø  Total number in the surrounding tributary area.

Ø  Geographic distribution within this tributary area.

Ø  Socio economic characteristics.

Ø  Average income and the distribution of incomes among individuals.

Ø  Taste of outdoor recreation.

Ø  Knowledge relating to outdoor recreation.

It should be recognized, however, that in any assessment of recreation demand, at whatever scale rural recreation only forms a very small proportion of the total, and that increasing the supply of rural facilities will probably have little effect on aggregate demand.

Supply of Leisure and Recreation:

The supply of outdoor recreational resources involves a complex combination of natural amenities, public recreation sites, and private recreational activities that are influenced by an array of factors to provide opportunities for leisure experiences thus satisfying local recreational needs and desires. In this article, we demonstrate an approach to assess supply components of outdoor recreation sites and related natural amenities at the sub-state level in Wisconsin. The purpose of this exercise is to demonstrate a technique used to assess recreation supply for comprehensive recreation planning that is regionally comparative, standardized to useful base metrics, easily interpretable, and flexible to alternative regional specifications and recreation typologies. Regional measures of recreational site density are a critical first step in analyzing supply and need to account for both geographic size (physical capacity) and population (or social capacity). We demonstrate an application of the recreation location quotient using alternative indices that reference amenities and recreational sites within a broader regional context. Results suggest that locations proximate to large population centers have fundamentally different supply characteristics and generally exhibit diminished opportunities for outdoor recreation, as a whole. Further, results suggest that measures of recreational site density vary widely depending on the metric used, and that capturing broader geographies is critical to understanding the spatial supply patterns of amenities and certain types of recreational sites. This type of work is logically a central feature of proactive, objective, and comprehensive outdoor recreation planning that has a basis in theoretically sound and empirically justified regional analysis. Recreation management professionals, parks and forest administrators, and the corresponding elected public officials who make decisions about allocation of scarce public resources need to better understand locational attributes of recreation supply. The process of maintaining current recreational resources require a more informed and thorough assessment of spatially explicit locational needs. These needs vary across state and sub-state regions. Perhaps more importantly, it would appear critical to utilize these informed regional supply metrics to set goals and to identify where recreational opportunities are lacking in the strategic targeting of increasingly scarce public funds to develop new outdoor recreation sites.

Various approaches for standardizing supply components have been forwarded. The most common are those that look to describe the availability of recreation resources based on the extent of simple areal metrics combined with data on the resident population. Sim­ple parks-to-population ratios were first used in Britain in the late 1800s and continue to be used today (Holland, 2003). More common is the use of acres per capita metrics (Claw­son & Knetsch, 1966; Clawson, 1984; Mertes & Hall, 1995; Smith, 1993). Such metrics are often used to set recreation supply provision standards (Florida, 2002; Mertes & Hall, 1995; Oregon, 2003). Along with per capita requirements, regional recreation planning has outlined minimum facility land requirements and maximum service radius requirements (Florida, 2002; Mertes & Hall, 1995; SEWRPC, 1977).

Recreation supply assessment techniques that attempt to incorporate demand proxies have long been recognized as important because of the positive relationship between dis­tance and travel cost (Austin, 1974; Clawson & Knetsch, 1966; Bergstrom & Cordell, 1991; Cordell & Bergstrom, 1991; English & Cordell, 1993) but standardized approaches have yet to see wide implementation.

Supply Analysis:

Here the supply analysis of Leisure and Recreation: (Flagstaff Parks)

I. Introduction to the supply analysis process

a.       identify the supply analysis boundaries: usually the city limits for city parks and recreation departments.

b.      identify the planning district boundaries: are neighborhoods, school districts or zones within the city, smaller areas makes comparisons with other areas in the city more meaningful.

II. Identification and description of all of the agency supplied parks and recreation     resources, facilities and programs

a.       detailed written description

b.      detailed map or diagram of resources, or facilities

c.       summary of facilities or resources for each planning district

III. Identification and description of all of the parks and recreation resources, facilities and programs supplied by other organizations or agencies

a.       detailed written description

b.      detailed map or diagram of resources, or facilities

Identifying other agencies/organizations

Fig: Map courtesy of Flagstaff Parks and Recreation Division

References

Andersson, T. (2007). The tourist in the experience economy. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(1), 46-58.

Austin, M. (1974). The evaluation of urban public facility location: An alternative to cost-benefit analysis. Geographical Analysis, 6, 135-146.

Bergstrom, J. C., & Cordell, H. K. (1991). An analysis of the demand for and value of outdoor recreation in the United States. Journal of Leisure Research, 23(1), 67-86.

Chubb, M., & Chubb, H. (1981). One third of our time? An introduction to recreation behaviour and resources. New York, NY: Wiley.

Clawson, M., & Knetsch, J. L. (1966). Economics of outdoor recreation. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press.

Clawson, M. (1984). Effective acreage for outdoor recreation. Resources for the Future, 78(Fall), 2-7.

Cordell, K. H., & J. C. Bergstrom. (1991). A methodology for assessing national outdoor recreation demand and supply trends. Leisure Sciences, 13, 1-20.

Cordell, K. H. (1999). Outdoor recreation in American life: A national assessment of de­mand and supply trends. Champaign, IL: Sagamore.

Marion Clawson & Jack L. Knetsch (1974) Leisure in modern America. In J. F. Murphy (ed.) Concepts of Leisure. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 78-90 (p. 78).

Wisconsin, State of. (2006). Wisconsin’s Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan 2005 – 2010. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.