Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
where external pressures (e.g. government and business funding of research) combine to
generate a situation of naive induction. Naive induction is where the use of relatively
unsophisticated concepts are used to study the subject, even though complex analytical
techniques may be employed (e.g. multiple regression and factor analysis) to understand
recreational phenomena. This is particularly the case in terms of the supply function of
recreation. A lack of theoretically derived research has meant that the geographer has
failed to develop this area beyond the use of simple spatial analytical tools. Thus the
underlying theoretical framework remains inadequate despite the limited degree of
theoretically informed research (e.g. Perkins 1993), and novel attempts to integrate the
leisure and tourism functions within an urban context using constructs related to power
and political decision-making (Doorne 1998). The assessment by S.L.J.Smith (1983a)
remains an important debating point in recreational geography, particularly in relation to
supply issues. For this reason, Smith's (1983a) synthesis of the field remains one of the
only comprehensive surveys of the research geographers have undertaken on recreation.
For this reason, it is worthy of discussion, not necessarily because it is the most up-to-
date study of recreational geography but because it illustrates the variety of approaches
geographers have developed. S.L.J. Smith (1989:304) listed the principal research
questions geographers pose which outline the particular concerns for supply issues:
• Where are the resources? What is their quality and capacity? What effect will use of
those resources have on the resource base and the local environment? What will the
effect be on other people who live in the area and on other users?
• How easy is it for people to travel to the resource or facility? What are their travel
costs? Are there other constraints, such as problems of physical accessibility,
inconvenient scheduling, excessive admission fees, and racial, linguistic and social
barriers?
• What new facilities or resources need to be supplied? What areas have priority for the
new supply? Who should pay to support those who play? How many people are
expected to use a new facility at a given location?
• What are the regional differences in recreation preferences? Why do these exist? Do
they represent differences in tastes, culture or historical inequalities?
An interesting illustration of these issues can be seen in the following Insight on Walsall
Metropolitan Borough Council's leisure provision based on a 2003 report by the UK
Audit Commission on service provision. It also highlights how many spatial issues are
intertwined with and embedded in wider socio-economic issues of locality, provision and
how scare resources are allocated on a fair and meaningful basis.
INSIGHT: Local authority expenditure on leisure and recreation provision—
Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council
In the UK, the government body which audits public sector expenditure, the Audit
Commission (http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/), reviews the performance of local
authority expenditure in relation to provision as part of the Local Government Act 1999.
It produces 'Inspection Reports' which illustrate the scope and extent of a local
authority's leisure provision in specific areas. In October 2003 it produced a report on
Walsall
a metropolitan borough in the West Midlands
England
with a population of
