Larry k - trail presentation


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Larry k - trail presentation

  1. 1. Use and Benefits of Local Government Recreation & Parks Services - An Ontario Perspective The Trails of Simcoe County Symposium April 13, 2010 Larry Ketcheson Parks and Recreation Ontario
  2. 2. Agenda <ul><li>Background to Benefits </li></ul><ul><li>Context and Process for Research </li></ul><ul><li>Key Results in Parks and Recreation </li></ul><ul><li>Strategies and Implications for Ontario </li></ul>
  3. 3. Benefits Study Purpose and Objectives <ul><li>Provide current Ontario specific base line data </li></ul><ul><li>Measure changes in behaviour, attitudes and perceptions of residents over past ten years </li></ul><ul><li>Enhance advocacy initiatives of PRO </li></ul><ul><li>Service to PRO members, stakeholders and communities </li></ul><ul><li>Demonstrate to partners and stakeholders the relevance of recreation and parks as a tool for community and social development </li></ul>
  4. 4. Research Process <ul><li>Ministry of Health Promotion support </li></ul><ul><li>Research Steering Committee </li></ul><ul><li>Replicates 1996 Study </li></ul><ul><li>Data Collection- Opinion Search- </li></ul><ul><li>Random Phone Survey </li></ul><ul><li>5. Representative Sample N=1056 +(-) 3% </li></ul><ul><li>6 Harper & Godbey: Analysis, Cross Tabs and Banners </li></ul>
  5. 5. Key Research Questions <ul><li>1. What effect does time use, pace of life and the value of leisure versus work have on the attitudes and perceptions of Ontario residents regarding the use and benefit of recreation and parks? </li></ul><ul><li>2. Who do Ontario residents rely on to provide recreation and parks services and what role do public, private and non-profit service providers play in the community recreation system? </li></ul><ul><li>3. What benefits do Ontario residents associate with the existence of local government parks and recreation departments? </li></ul>
  6. 6. Key Research Questions <ul><li>Are benefits perceived differently at the individual, household and community levels and what is their relative strength of importance? </li></ul><ul><li>What contribution does local government parks and recreation services make to improved health, mitigation of social problems, environmental protection and community development? </li></ul><ul><li>6. What effects would the removal of local parks and recreation services have on individuals, households and communities? </li></ul><ul><li>7. How much are people willing to pay for local parks and recreation services and how is this value related to the use of such services and their perceived benefits? </li></ul>
  7. 7. Key Research Questions <ul><li>8. What effect does socio-economic, demographic, reported health status, life satisfaction and happiness have on recreation participation, park use and perceived benefits? </li></ul><ul><li>9. What impact does poverty and disability have on the use and benefits of parks and recreation services? </li></ul><ul><li>10. What implications do the results of this study present for recreation service providers including local government authorities, private and non-profit sector agencies provincial government departments and Parks and Recreation Ontario? </li></ul>
  8. 8. Time Use and Value of Recreation In 1996, 23% reported having more time 33% same amount of time 45% had less time Alberta: 41% less Time (2007)
  9. 9. In 1996, 32% always felt rushed 53% sometimes did, and 15% almost never felt rushed Alberta: 30% Always rushed Pace of Life
  10. 10. Work and Leisure
  11. 11. Local Park Supply, Use & Benefits Analysis of Individual, Household & Community
  12. 12. Distribution & Proximity In 1996, 90% of respondents lived within walking distance of a park
  13. 18. Recreation Service Providers, Participation & Benefits
  14. 20. In 1996, 29% of respondents had started a new activity
  15. 21. What recreational activity or Activities have you begun? 21% Working out/exercising 14% Skiing/x-country/snowboard 8% Swimming 7% Jog/run 6% Team sports 6% Walking 5% Dancing 5% Skating 4% Tennis/badminton/squash 4% Yoga/pilates
  16. 23. What activities did you take part in? 35% Festivals & cultural events 23% Swimming/water park 10% Hockey 10% Skating 9% Soccer 7% Working out/exercise 6% Walking 5% Baseball/softball 5% Camping 4% Hiking
  17. 25. Why have you NOT participated? 23% Not enough time/busy 23% Not at all interested 16% Not aware of activities 9% Participate in other activities 7% Schedules not convenient 6% Few activities/little variety provided 5% Disability prevents participation 4% Age (too old, or activities for younger) 2% Lack of transportation 2% Cost of activities 2% Health reasons
  18. 27. Recreation Participation & Benefits: Community
  19. 29. Need for Recreation & Parks Services
  20. 30. If there were no public parks, programs or facilities, effect this would have on respondents and their household 28% of respondents said there would be no effect. Of the 72% who said it would affect them and their household:
  21. 31. If there were no public parks, programs or facilities, what effect this would have on the community 5% of respondents said there would be no effect. Of the 95% who said there would be an effect on their community:
  22. 32. Opinions, Attitudes & Strategic Issues
  23. 38. Willingness to Pay for Recreation Benefits
  24. 39. On average, people in Ontario pay about $150 per person annually in local taxes for recreation park services. Are these services worth $150 per person per year? 81% YES 19% NO This is similar to the results of the 1996 study, in which 83% of respondents felt their recreation services were worth the average tax rate.
  25. 40. On average, people in Ontario pay about $150 per person annually in local taxes for recreation park services. Are these services worth $150 per person per year? 81% YES 19% NO
  26. 42. Alberta= 7.7
  27. 43. World Wide Happiness Study (2007). Max & Sterling 1st Danes 8.2 Canada 7.6 USA 7.4 Alberta 7.9
  28. 45. Does anyone in the household have a disability? 18% YES (N=180) 82% NO 19% Mental health disability 81% Physical disability
  29. 46. Does anyone in the household have a disability? 18% YES 82% NO
  30. 47. Does anyone in the household have a disability? 18% YES 82% NO
  31. 48. Highlights and Implications <ul><li>8 out of 10 households make use of public parks </li></ul><ul><li>90% recognize that parks contribute to environmental stewardship </li></ul><ul><li>Research provides support for evidence-based planning and decision making </li></ul><ul><li>Benefits report is an advocacy tool </li></ul><ul><li>Allen Gregg 2007 – trails / green space </li></ul><ul><li>Challenge is keeping the “T” front and centre in Government policy & funding </li></ul>
  32. 49. Highlights and Implications <ul><li>Basis in 2010 municipal elections </li></ul><ul><li>Emerging in master plans / visions </li></ul><ul><li>Substantiates the Ontario Community Recreation Policy </li></ul><ul><li>Aligns P and R with Public Health </li></ul><ul><li>Supports Ontario Charter </li></ul><ul><li>Basis for affordable access policy </li></ul><ul><li>Use 2015 to leverage legacies </li></ul>
  33. 50. Aligning Legislation and Policy MHP Health Promotion & Protection Act Tourism & Recreation Act 1987 Recreation Policy Statement Public Health Recreation & Sport Public Health Standards New Recreation Policy Statement Healthy Communities Strategy Healthy Eating Recreation & Sport Tobacco Substance Abuse Mental Health Injury Prevention Municipal Act
  34. 51. Policy Alignment with Benefits
  35. 52. Repositions Recreation and Parks <ul><li>Important in “work-life” balance </li></ul><ul><li>Ontarians seek opportunities in communities </li></ul><ul><li>Accessibility to everyone is fundamental </li></ul><ul><li>Ontarians benefit </li></ul><ul><li>Strong willingness to pay </li></ul><ul><li>Wider benefits understood </li></ul><ul><li>Public space vital to community health </li></ul><ul><li>Participation a key determinant of Q of L </li></ul><ul><li>Local services impact community and social development </li></ul>