McDonald, Kathryn (2021) A Critical Analysis of Aquatic and Recreation Centre Planning and Decision-making: A Tale of Two Cases in Metropolitan Melbourne. PhD thesis, Victoria University.

Abstract

Aquatic and recreation centres (ARCs) are social spaces that provide communities with opportunities to be physically active. They deliver important health, well-being, and social benefits to communities and contribute to local economies by providing job and income opportunities (Howat et al., 2012; Tower et al., 2014; Victorian Auditor General’s Office, 2016). Despite the significant role ARCs play in the community, the factors that have guided ARC planning and decision-making processes are largely unknown. To address this knowledge gap, two public sector management theories, new public management theory (NPMT) and public choice theory (PCT), were employed to explain ARC planning and decision-making processes. This is the first time these theoretical lenses have been applied simultaneously to explain ARC planning and decision-making processes. The current study was guided by two research questions, ‘How is a leisure planning process used in ARC planning?’ and ‘How is a decision-making process used in ARC planning?’ A qualitative multiple-case-study design investigated two local government cases in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. The current study employed two data sources: documents (n= 264) and semi-structured interviews (n=19) to explore the research questions. Data analysis, deductively guided by NPMT and PCT, were conducted using a six-step thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006, 2012). Data were analysed within the individual cases by using thematic maps to illustrate the components for ARC planning and decision-making processes. The data were then analysed across these two cases through triangulation and pattern-matching to identify the global, organising, and basic themes. The current study is the first in-depth academic investigation into ARC planning and decision-making processes. The findings explain the lived experiences of people involved in ARC planning and decision-making processes. The current study identified the two cases followed a non-systematic leisure planning process i.e., the local governments applied individual components based on leisure planning models and NPMT to suit their individual ARC’s development. Therefore, the planning process fits somewhere between an ad-hoc planning method, which has no structure, and a structured process similar to a leisure planning model. The ARC planning data analysis identified four focus areas i.e., research, service delivery, engaged experts, and organisational outputs, to explain the process used by the local government when planning an ARC in metropolitan Melbourne. The ARC decision-making data analysis identified three focus areas i.e., government influence, financial influence, and political influence, to explain the ARC decision-making process. Further, the ARC planning and decision-making processes was reliant upon each other. From a practical perspective, the findings explained that local government did not use a structured planning model, however, the two ARCs applied similar planning and decision-making focus areas. These focus areas act as a starting point in the development of a model of how ARCs are planned in metropolitan Melbourne. From a theoretical perspective, the findings identified that the ARC planners in the two cases made decisions that were explained by financial outputs (NPMT) and political behaviours (PCT), indicating that ARC decision-making was more weighted towards financial outcomes rather than community benefit.

Search Google Scholar

Repository staff login