Study finds failure to apply leisure planning models in developing aquatic and recreation centres in Melbourne

A newly released study from leading academics at Melbourne’s Victoria University has revealed a lack of awareness or adherence to specific planning models when local governments in Melbourne plan aquatic and recreation facilities.

Instead, the paper Leisure Planning Process: Systemic Adhocracy, published in the Managing Sport and Leisure journal, reveals that local governments follow an ad hoc planning approach, with planners relying on data collected to guide the planning of the facility.

To build knowledge in this field and assist leisure planners, Dr Katie McDonald, Professor Clare Hanlon and Dr John Tower of Victoria University undertook a qualitative study into leisure planning typology, analysing 264 documents and conducting 19 semi-structured interviews from two aquatic and recreation centres (ARCs) case studies.

Despite the absence of leisure planning models being applied to the planning process, data showed similarities among the two cases that illustrated a somewhat systemic approach.

Examples of these similarities were identified in the data collection phase, where both ARCs completed all seven components, i.e., community engagement, community profile, existing reports, existing conditions, participation levels, community leisure needs, and interim findings.

The characteristics of this approach led to what the authors titled “systemic adhocracy”.

Commenting on the findings, Professor Amy Hurd from Illinois State University in the USA noted that the study “can make a significant contribution in Australia and abroad. Recreation agency staff often do not know what literature exists around topics such as this, meaning that they do not use best practices that come from research.”

Dr McDonald stated “the research highlights the challenges and intricacies inherent in leisure planning. It calls for a more structured and comprehensive approach to mitigate risks associated with ad hoc decision-making and ensure the effective realisation of community-centric leisure plans.”

Dr Tower advised “the publication of their leisure planning typology and introduction of ‘systematic adhocracy’ to the leisure planning lexicon were two key contributions. Little is known about how leisure planning proceeds and this research provides a foundation to guide future leisure planning projects.”

Professor Hanlon added “despite the key role ARCs play in our community, it has been unclear what planning and decision-making processes are conducted. This study has revealed key factors that guide these processes. An opportunity exists in the industry for current ad hoc practices to be strengthened and guided by the recommendations from this study.”

Click here to view the article - which is open access - in the Managing and Sport Leisure journal.