Outdoor play for many children today occurs on playgrounds near their homes. Playgrounds in neighboring communities may look similar, yet the way the playgrounds are viewed and used can differ considerably. These differences can be understood as expressions or reflections of intersecting geographies of childhood. Community inclusion and exclusion, as well as childcare cultures, also play a role in how children view and use playgrounds in their communities. Based on these understandings and their own research, the authors of this paper argue for combining macro-scale and micro-scale perspectives in scholarship focusing on the play behaviors of children and the places where they play. They also suggest a shift in focus.
This research drew on data from a study involving 1200 children (age 5-13) from an East London borough. Sources of data included a detailed questionnaire completed by over a thousand respondents and a follow-up mapping exercise completed by 360 respondents. While the data from these two sources related to play in more than 200 different outdoor spaces (including parks, playgrounds, streets, gardens, woodlands, school grounds, rivers, etc.), the analysis used for this paper focused only on three recently-refurbished playgrounds (Playground A, B, and C). These playgrounds were within two miles of each other and, from outward appearances, were quite similar. There were clear differences, however, in the social-economic demographics of the immediate communities surrounding the playgrounds. The Playground A community was among the 40% most affluent communities in the UK; Playground B among the 10% most deprived communities; and Playground C among the 20% most deprived communities.
Three major themes emerged from the analysis: (1) how children played differently in the three different playgrounds and how children valued the play; (2) how children talked about their anxieties and concerns regarding rumors and urban myths; and (3) how some features and narratives were unique to each playground. Children's narratives about the playgrounds and their experiences on the playgrounds varied widely, from expressions of relaxation, fun, and friendship to statements about danger, fear, and crime-related activities. Their critiques about the playgrounds included concerns about social-political marginalization and references to urban myths and rumors.
Children using Playground A tended to describe their playground in positive terms: “a nice place to play”, “a restful place”, a place “to spend time with family”, and a place where “you can see animals and birds.” They also tended to highlight its “green”/”natural” setting. Children using Playground B tended to focus more on time with friends versus family-play. This playground was described as a “safe” and “joyful” space. While the greenness of the setting wasn't typically mentioned, the children valued the opportunity to spend time outdoors in a safe place. Children living near Playground C tended to describe it as a boring place with nothing to do; yet they valued it as a place for “hanging out” without being 'hassled' by adults.
This research highlights the influence of social-economic conditions in local communities on children's play and on the places where they play.
Research Partner