TY - JOUR

T1 - Using local authority entrance charges to tackle inequalities in physical activity?

T2 - A qualitative study of leisure and public health perspectives

AU - Halliday, Emma Catherine

AU - Barr, B

AU - Higgerson, James

AU - Holt, Vivien Louise

AU - Ortiz-Nunez, Aurora

AU - Ward, Fiona

N1 - This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Journal of Public Health following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version E Halliday, B Barr, J Higgerson, V Holt, A Ortiz-Nunez, F Ward; Using local authority entrance charges to tackle inequalities in physical activity? A qualitative study of leisure and public health perspectives, Journal of Public Health, Volume 40, Issue 3, 1 September 2018, Pages 567–572, https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdx124 is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/jpubhealth/article/40/3/567/4110325

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - BackgroundReducing or eliminating entrance charges for the public use of leisure facilities is one potential tool that local authorities (LA) have to reduce inequalities in physical activity (PA). Facility charges are likely to be a greater barrier to access for those who have lower incomes.MethodsSemi-structured 1-to-1 and group interviews were conducted with 33 leisure and public health professionals in seven LAs in north-west England. We investigated how approaches to pricing varied in these settings and rationales influencing decision making.ResultsWelfare orientated (e.g. affordability) and commercial drivers (e.g. income generation) featured most prominently across areas. Pricing policies placed less direct focus on public health goals, although tackling inactivity was articulated as part of leisure’s role more generally. Local targeting of free/concessionary offers was also defined and implemented differently. Decision makers described navigating competing pressures of providing services for the public ‘good’ yet remaining financially viable.ConclusionMany LAs are reviewing the extent of subsidy for facilities or are considering whether to invest public health budgets in leisure. The findings offer evidence of how pricing decisions are made and the approaches adopted in practice as well as the conflicting priorities for decision makers within an austerity context.

AB - BackgroundReducing or eliminating entrance charges for the public use of leisure facilities is one potential tool that local authorities (LA) have to reduce inequalities in physical activity (PA). Facility charges are likely to be a greater barrier to access for those who have lower incomes.MethodsSemi-structured 1-to-1 and group interviews were conducted with 33 leisure and public health professionals in seven LAs in north-west England. We investigated how approaches to pricing varied in these settings and rationales influencing decision making.ResultsWelfare orientated (e.g. affordability) and commercial drivers (e.g. income generation) featured most prominently across areas. Pricing policies placed less direct focus on public health goals, although tackling inactivity was articulated as part of leisure’s role more generally. Local targeting of free/concessionary offers was also defined and implemented differently. Decision makers described navigating competing pressures of providing services for the public ‘good’ yet remaining financially viable.ConclusionMany LAs are reviewing the extent of subsidy for facilities or are considering whether to invest public health budgets in leisure. The findings offer evidence of how pricing decisions are made and the approaches adopted in practice as well as the conflicting priorities for decision makers within an austerity context.

KW - physical activity

KW - public health

KW - social determinants

U2 - 10.1093/pubmed/fdx124

DO - 10.1093/pubmed/fdx124

M3 - Journal article

VL - 40

SP - 567

EP - 572

JO - Journal of Public Health

JF - Journal of Public Health

SN - 1741-3842

IS - 3

ER -