Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Patmore (1983) and Page et al. (1994) in research on urban parks. Veal (1987) expressed
this using classic distance-decay theory reproduced in Figure 2.4 (see also Baxter 1979;
Greer and Wall 1979; Chavas et al. 1989). This shows that the proximity to a recreational
resource increased the propensity for use at a swimming pool, yet for leisure centres
where people attending them used cars to visit them, the distance-decay function had a
less rapid decline in attendance in relation to distance. Outside urban areas, the
occurrence of recreational resources are more varied in their spatial distribution, and
recreational opportunities need to be closely examined in relation to demand and supply.
More recently, Colwell et al. (2002) examined the influence of recreation demand on
residential location. Their research argued that consumers may live in areas according to
their preference for recreational activities, and the trade-offs in terms of wages, location
to live and recreation. What they also point to is the significance of second home
ownership in areas of recreation preference. However, even here distance plays a major
factor in recreational decision-making (Hall and Müller 2004).
In the Swedish case Jansson and Müller (2003) demonstrated that 25 per cent of all
second home owners have their property within 14 km from their primary residence, 50
per cent have less than 37 km to their property, and 75 per cent have less than 98 km.
Amenity-rich areas disturb the otherwise very regularly declining second home patterns.
The time sensitivity of leisure travel means that the location of overnight stays from a
generating region tends to cluster at a location related to time/distance from a point of
Figure 2.4:
The impact of distance and
geographical catchment areas on the
provision of leisure facilities
Source:
Based on Veal (1987)
