Some Americans feel guilty about play. They reflect the traditional "work ethic" thatties all value to productivity. Considering all the evidence about the benefits of playand recreation, perhaps these people should feel guilty about not playing enough.America needs a new "leisure ethic" to balance its old "work ethic" -- and a leisurepolicy as well. Japan and many other countries have official governmental policies thatencourage more leisure and recreation participation. In fact, the state governments ofseveral countries contribute to the costs associated with trips taken during vacations toencourage people to benefit from their "holidays."

The benefits of leisure -- physical and mental health, economic development, familybonding, environmental awareness, and so on -- are now well-documentedscientifically. When asked, most people on the street can also readily mention severalways they benefit (physical fitness, coping with every day life stresses, family bonding,learning, skill testing) from their recreation.

This evidence suggests that the benefits realized from leisure opportunities certainlyequal, and most likely exceed, the benefits produced from other public services such aspolice and fire protection, transportation, housing, communication, sanitation, health,and educational services. Yet, while most governmental bodies in the United States andCanada have firmly established, clearly articulated, and funded policies and programsfor these other services, few units of government have given public leisure services thesame attention and resources. What causes this paradoxical reduced "political parity" tobe given to leisure in North America?

An important factor that contributes to this paradox is the lingering "Puritan Ethic"which promotes the misconception that play and recreation stand opposed to socialproductivity. This is a misconception simply because a person can both play and workhard and because "re-creation" is needed for effective work performance. Althoughremnants of a strict work ethic still exist, the past 10-15 years has shown considerabledemise in the degree to which that ethic tarnishes individuals' attitudes and beliefsabout leisure. Many North Americans today purposively pursue "life-stylemanagement" through avoidance of substance abuse, good nutrition, stressmanagement, planned systems of social interaction, and planned leisure includingphysical exercise.

If the work ethic is not the cause of the paradox, what is? A guess is that governmentalbodies in North America do not give leisure parity with the other public services theyprovide simply because of the erroneous belief that most of the benefits of leisure arerealized by individuals rather than by groups of individuals, such as families,communities, and society at large. If so, principles of public finance suggest that limitedamounts of scarce tax dollars should be allocated to a social service that does notprovide a broad social "good." Or more simply, if the benefits are largely realized byindividuals, than they should find and pay for their own recreation, just as individualsshould find and pay for their own food.

Most of the benefits of leisure do accrue individually to the recreationists who userecreation opportunities. Nevertheless, most of these benefits to individuals lead toother benefits that have social or collective merit and also that many of the immediatebenefits of leisure are in fact social instead of individual in nature. The "social good" ofleisure is both substantial and widely unappreciated. To build a case for the "socialgood" of leisure, a wide variety of the benefits of leisure will be listed below andexamined in regard to the social merit of each. Since these benefits have impactseconomically, physiologically, environmentally, psychologically, and socially, thoseclasses of benefits will be used to help simplify the following discussion.

Economic Benefits

The tremendous economic benefits of leisure investments and expenditures have beenwell documented empirically, both in terms of how much people are willing to pay forleisure services and in terms of economic impacts of actual expenditures. Literallyhundreds of recent studies have documented that recreationists exhibit a greatwillingness to pay for their leisure opportunities -- usually considerably in excess ofwhat they actually have to pay in the form of entrance and use fees. This reflects highlevels of perceived benefit to these consumers. Perhaps more impressive are data thatshow the leisure industry is not just big, but is one of the biggest industries in theworld in terms of cash flows, income generation, and creation of employmentopportunities. Travel and tourism is now the world's largest generator of cash flowsbetween nations, bigger than world-wide transactions for all agriculture products or forautomobiles, each of which is a "big ticket" item in the world market. Furthermore, infour out of five of the 50 states in the United States, tourism currently ranks in the topthree among all industrial sectors in the amount of income and/or employment itgenerates. A few example statistics on paying customers illustrate how big the leisurebusiness is. As of June 1992, Disney World in California had attracted 300,000,000visitors since it opened on July 17, 1955; the Alamo in Texas attracts 2.2 million visitorsannually; and Colorado Ski Country USA reported on June 22, 1992 that Vail posted itsbest season ever with 10.4 million skier visits. In addition, many people believe that there-creative aspects of leisure increase both the quantity and quality of workerproductivity and can reduce absenteeism from the job. There is also a strongconventional wisdom that leisure activity helps reduce social anomie and alienationand their associated economic costs to society.

All of these economic benefits accrue to collectives of people rather than to individuals.Given the economic scope and magnitude of the leisure and tourism industries, it isamazing that the United States has no national tourism policy. Why does one of thebiggest promoters of foreign exchange, employment opportunities, and income receiveso little public attention? It is puzzling, but there appears to be conventional wisdomthat these sizable expenditures on leisure will not hold up or persist over time. This ispuzzling because there has been no evidence of decay in these expenditures since theend of World War II.

Physiological Benefits

The physiological benefits of regular exercise are documented scientifically, probablybetter than the above-described economic benefits are. Regular aerobic exercise offerscardiovascular benefits by reducing serum cholesterol and triglycerides and increasinghigh density lipids in the blood stream and by helping prevent and controlhypertension. Exercise also reduces spinal problems, improves neuropsychologicalfunctioning, increases bone mass and strength in children, increases muscle strengthand creates better connective tissue, increases lung capacity, in general reducesincidences of diseases, and nurtures a holistic sense of wellness. While all these benefitsof exercise cannot be attributed to leisure behavior, many of us purposively exerciseduring our leisure time, and physical activity is required of many recreation activitiesmotivated by personal goals other than physical fitness.

Many of these previously listed physiological benefits also accrue from stressmanagement activities purposefully engaged in during leisure time. Those behaviorsalso promote psychophysiological benefits, including reduced tension and anxiety,mental and physical relaxation, reduction in stress hormones, in the blood and urine,positive changes in mood, and enhanced outlook on life. In turn, these more relaxedstates promote other benefits, such as improved performance at work, improved socialinteractions, and a general sense of well-being.

While these physiological and psychophysiological benefits accrue mostly toindividuals, it takes little imagination to see how society in general benefits fromindividuals who are healthier mentally and physically, are more productive at work,need to take out fewer of their stresses and strains on other people, and function betterin all ways. Can any intelligent person question the "social good" that results from thesephysiological benefits of leisure? One would not think so, but why don't the decisionsof public policy makers reflect this type of thinking? It is a paradox.

Environmental Benefits

Although not as well documented empirically as the economic, physiological, andpsychophysiological benefits -- but nevertheless readily evident -- are the notcommonly thought of contributions of the leisure sector to environmental protection.One reason listed in the 1964 Wilderness Act for creation of the currently 90-plusmillion acre Wilderness Preservation System was to preserve opportunities for"primitive types of recreation." Thus, creation and preservation of opportunities forrecreation is one of the multiple driving forces for protecting not only naturalenvironments (including urban forests and other green spaces in cities) but alsocultural, historic, and heritage sites.

Furthermore, it is logical to assume that the on-siterecreational use and off-site study and appreciation of these areas promoteenvironmental learning, nurture an environmental ethic oriented toward sustainability,and even help cause environmentally sound behaviors such as recycling. In addition,taxes on some recreation equipment help maintain local golf courses and state huntingand fishing areas, as do sales of special licenses to pursue particular recreationactivities. Little needs to be said here about whether these environmental benefitscontribute to the "social good." Fortunately, these contributions do seem to beunderstood and recognized in public policies.

Psychological Benefits

There is a rather lengthy list of psychological benefits that are known or thought to beattributable to leisure activity. Included are: perceived sense of freedom, independence,and autonomy; enhanced self-competence, improved sense of self-worth/esteem,self-reliance, and self-confidence; improved leadership skills; better ability to relate toothers, including greater tolerance and understanding and improved abilities to be amember of a team; value clarification; enhanced creative ability; expressions of andreflection on personal spiritual -- and not just religious -- values and orientation;increased cognitive efficiency, including better problem solving ability; greateradaptability and resiliency; improved sense of humor; greater joy from life andenhanced perceived quality of life; more balanced competitiveness; enhanced sense ofpersonal place and fit; increased learning about history, culture, nature, cities, etc.;more positive outlook; nurturance of a can-do attitude; and reduced personal sense ofsocial alienation.

While there is less scientific evidence about these psychological benefits than for thepreviously mentioned three classes, there is considerable belief not only that thesebenefits exist but that they are quite pervasive, of great magnitude, and help promoteand maintain characteristics that considerably enhance an individual's ability tofunction in, and contribute to, society at large. Put more simply, since these benefits domuch "good" for individuals, they contribute to the "social good" because the "welfare"of a society reflects the welfare of its individuals. Yet, these collective benefits are notrecognized adequately in the political arenas in North America.

Social Benefits

Last, but certainly not least, are the social/cultural benefits. Perhaps the bestdocumented are the significant contributions of leisure and related amenities to pridein one's community (and nation) and to community satisfaction. For example,communities are proud of their football teams and local spectacular amenity resources,and monuments such as the Gettysburg Battlefield help us understand our culturebetter.

Leisure resources and opportunities also help maintain the central values andpositive identities of communities. Certainly expenditures on leisure, especially bytourists, are vitally important to maintaining either the stability or promoting economicdevelopment of many communities, regions, and states -- as well as the nation. Asmentioned above, both on- and off-site use of some types of recreation areas promotesenhanced cultural and historic awareness in a citizenry as well as improves naturalenvironmental understanding.

In addition, leisure activities and places can maintainand enhance ethnic identities, meet the unique needs of particular segments of society(the elderly, single parents, children, teenagers, the physically disabled, vagrants, andthe under-employed) that cannot be met otherwise. During leisure also, family bondsare strengthened, and other types of social cohesion and integration occur, which addsubstance and meaning to life.

Evidence is mounting that systems of social support andcompanionship contribute to longer, more disease-free, and higher quality life.Certainly many of these systems center, or are highly dependent, on leisureopportunities, places, and behavior. Although the empirical evidence is scarce, most ofthose in the leisure professions believe that appropriate leisure opportunities arenecessary: for child development; to reduce social alienation; and to facilitate treatmentand recovery of clinically institutionalized populations as well as ease the burdens ofconfinement for some populations such as those in jail. There is also widespreadsentiment that these opportunities, if properly structured and administered, cancontribute significantly to reduction of substance abuse, crime, and other social ills.

Finally on social benefits, many of the benefits of continuing education accrue duringthe leisure time when that learning and skill development is taking place. In aggregatethese benefits constitute a sizable contribution to human welfare.

In summary then, the "social good" of leisure is truly staggering. Nevertheless, that"good" is usually recognized and promoted strongly in public resource allocations onlyat some local units of government. State/provincial and federal programs that extolthese benefits, such as urban and rural development programs, generally receive morelip service than public funds, and this lip service varies with the administration that isin office.

The above identified social goods of leisure need to be better articulated so that leisurewill be recognized in all political arenas as the valuable social service it is.

For further information, contact Bev Driver.

Back to the list of Academy of Leisure Sciences White Papers.