The performance of local authority sports facilities in England during a period of recession and austerity

Ramchandani, Girish; Shibli, Simon; Kung, Shia Ping

doi:10.1080/19406940.2017.1420676

Cited by 20 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is shown that the ownership of programmes does not influence the overall incidence of participation, but there is evidence that the number of commercial opportunities available is negatively associated with the incidence of participation in non-profit sports clubs. This is consistent with the arguments in Downward (2011) that in the UK the private sector's share of participation has grown at the expense of the public sector, which may be due to the outsourcing of supply generating greater customer satisfaction with the overall experience of using a facility (Ramchandani et al, 2018). These claims are, however, not tested.…”

Section: Participation In Sportsupporting

confidence: 78%

Means as well as ends: some critical insights for UK sport policy on the impact of facility ownership and configuration on sports participation

Kumar

Downward

Hodgkinson

et al. 2018

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effectiveness of sports facility provision in increasing participation is debated internationally. The impact will be mediated by the sport delivery system, the welfare system within which sports policy might operate and the culture of sport. Change in the political persuasion of recent UK governments has followed a broadly consistent neoliberal policy direction of moving from big government and public ownership, to outsourcing and governance through networks. The intended aim: to more effectively achieve policy objectives, such as subjective well-being (SWB), health and social capital. A case study of participation in sport and fitness activities in a County Sports Partnership (CSP) in England is presented to examine if different ownership types and configuration of facilities that have emerged as a result of the policy direction, has influenced participation and policy targets. Regression results reveal that the ownership and configuration of facilities has no effect on the duration of activity and consequently no impact on policy outcomes. The largest influence on participation occurs in using facilities with others that were previously met there. The results also suggest that participation in facilities combined with other sport and physical activity can have an impact on health and social capital, and indirectly SWB. These insights are strongly indicative of the co-creation and interconnectedness of participation and suggest that policy should focus on network development more than specific forms of ownership and provision in seeking to achieve policy objectives. The research casts new critical light on the role of neoliberalism in sports policy.

show abstract

Section: Participation In Sportsupporting

confidence: 78%

Means as well as ends: some critical insights for UK sport policy on the impact of facility ownership and configuration on sports participation

Kumar

Downward

Hodgkinson

et al. 2018

International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Concerns over accessibility of facilities, especially to hard to reach or engage people is worthwhile. Research on sport facilities has showed that a strategy to increase pricing has not negatively impacted customer satisfaction, but it has coincided by a reduced focus on social inclusion objectives (Ramchandani, Shibli, & Kung, 2018). The dynamic or flexible pricing strategy appeared to lighten the burden placed on the amount of resource dependency on local government partnerships, whether through direct funding or shared resources (human and capital).…”

Section: Pricing Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further research, has shown that during a time of austerity policies some sport facilities have found building collaborations difficult (Iversen, 2018) and others have tended to outsource management and increase activity charges (Ramchandani, Shibli, & Kung, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interestingly, whilst customer satisfaction has risen, there has been a diminished focus on social inclusion objectives, which may result in reduced sport participation opportunities (Ramchandani, Shibli, & Kung, 2018;Widdop et al, 2018). Overall, the economic and political climate suggests declining funding for local government sport services until at least 2020 (Collins & Haudenhuyse, 2015;LGA, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Management strategies of non-profit community sport facilities in an era of austerity

Parnell

May

Widdop

et al. 2018

European Sport Management Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the Leeds Beckett Repository is to provide open access to our research, as required by funder policies and permitted by publishers and copyright law. The Leeds Beckett repository holds a wide range of publications, each of which has been checked for copyright and the relevant embargo period has been applied by the Research Services team. We operate on a standard take-down policy. If you are the author or publisher of an output and you would like it removed from the repository, please contact us and we will investigate on a case-by-case basis.

show abstract

“…Of 161 contracts with local authorities, three operators held 61%. A national market for managing sports facilities exists because they have become profitable without subsidy (Ramchandani et al 2018). The existence of national providers makes it attractive for local authorities to transfer a large tranche of facilities to one experienced operator.…”

Section: The Extent Of Community Asset Transfer Of Public Leisure Facmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Community Asset Transfer of Leisure Facilities in the UK: A Review and Research Agenda

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews recent work on community asset transfers (CAT): a transfer of management of facilities from the public sector to the third sector, largely led by volunteers. The emergence of CATs is placed in the context of the development of community organisations and their relation to the state. Transfer has been stimulated by cuts in local government budgets since 2010. The review focusses on leisure facilities because these are non-statutory and so more vulnerable to cuts in public expenditure. The experience of CATs is reviewed, including: the motivations of local government and volunteers; the transfer process and management of CATs post-transfer; and the market position of facility types. The methodological approaches and theoretical frameworks used in research are contrasted; in particular, how these have balanced agency and structure in analysing a contested neoliberalist discourse. The practicalities of research in this area are considered before concluding with research questions.

show abstract

The performance of local authority sports facilities in England during a period of recession and austerity

Cited by 20 publications

References 23 publications

Means as well as ends: some critical insights for UK sport policy on the impact of facility ownership and configuration on sports participation

Means as well as ends: some critical insights for UK sport policy on the impact of facility ownership and configuration on sports participation

Management strategies of non-profit community sport facilities in an era of austerity

The Community Asset Transfer of Leisure Facilities in the UK: A Review and Research Agenda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About