Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
seeking to predict locational characteristics for recreational activities and facilities is the
reliance upon economic geography, particularly retail geography with its concomitant
concern for marketing.
NORMATIVE RESEARCH ON LOCATION
Within the public sector, the objectives for locational decision-making are distinctly
different (or at least traditionally have been different, despite changing political
philosophies towards public recreation provision). The characteristics of public sector
provision have traditionally been associated with taxes paying for facility provision and
its ongoing operation, with a collective use that cannot be withheld, so that access is not
knowingly prohibited to anyone. In other words, their contribution to the quality of life
and wider social well-being of the affected population underpins public provision that
cannot easily be accommodated into conventional locational theory which is market
driven. Austin (1974) identifies recreational facilities as 'site preferred' goods, where
proximity to their location is often seen as a measure of their use (i.e. its utility function).
Thus maximum distances exist as in the case of urban parks (see Chapter 5). The object,
therefore, in public facility location for recreation is to balance the 'utility' factor with
minimising the distance people have to travel and providing access to as many people as
possible; though Cichetti (1971) examined a number of the problems associated with
different methods of balancing travel distances, social utility and other approaches to
demand maximisation. Smith (1983a) reviews a range of methods of analysis used by
geographers to assist in work on public facility. Site selection, namely models, which
emphasise mechanical analogues, comparative needs assessment, demand maximisation,
heuristic programming and intuitive modelling (for more detail, see Smith 1983a: 156-
68).
Howell and McNamee (2003) reviewed the literature on how public sector leisure
policy allocates scarce resources, particularly how fiscal retrenchment in the public
sector, as a response to a greater managerialism, has placed a greater emphasis on private
sector provision as well as Best Value in local authority provision. Erkip's (1997)
evaluation of the distribution of urban parks and recreational services in Ankara, Turkey,
raised a number of important debates which the geographer, public policy-maker and
recreational planner need to address. The normative nature of urban public service
provision for recreation as public goods raises distribution issues such as:
• To what extent can the spatial distribution of public goods and services achieve equal
versus selective access? Although equal access is a normative concept, in reality goods
and services will rarely achieve equality of access, particularly where fixed resources
have to be located.
• The extent to which the public versus private sector should be responsible for the
provision of services, a feature which is inherently politically determined and has
transformed the nature of leisure and recreation provision since 1980 (Coalter 1998).
• The extent to which private sector profit objectives can be balanced with public sector
distributional objectives for public goods and services such as leisure and recreation
resources.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search