...U.S. national parks. According to recent statistics, 34% of Whites hiked in the past year compared to just 11% of Blacks (Cordell, Betz, & Green, 2002), and 35% of Whites reported visiting a national park within the past two years compared with just 14% of Blacks (National Park Service, 2001). Past research has typically sought to explain leisure differences between Blacks and Whites either by pointing to a history of economic disparity, or by presuming subcultural differences in recreation tastes between the two groups (Floyd, 1998; Johnson, Bowker, English, & Worthan, 1998). More recent research into the development of racial differences in leisure behavior has examined the influence of such factors as differential socialization, ethnic/racial identities, and fear of discrimination (Bixler, Floyd, & Hammitt, 2002; Carr & Williams, 1993; Feagin, 1991; Taylor, 1993; Williams, 2002). Differences in leisure participation rates are undoubtedly a complex issue, and the explanations listed above have each provided greater understanding. In this article, however, I advocate for an additional explanation that I believe has been under-valued. I seek evidence for the position that there exists a stereotyped leisure identity that is associated with wildland leisure activities that results in fewer Black Americans participating in outdoor recreation.

Wildland recreation enthusiasts are generally viewed as young, rugged, and adventurous, and I contend that they are almost exclusively perceived as being White. This socially constructed conception of participants in wildland recreation is what I refer to as a racialized outdoor leisure identity. This outdoor leisure identity may be unappealing to some segments of the population, particularly those who value a more cosmopolitan or sophisticated identity, and it may be mutually exclusive from the self-image of many urban Blacks. Thus, the existence of a racialized outdoor leisure identity may deter socialization favoring participation in wildland recreation. This may help explain the low levels of participation in outdoor recreation by Black Americans and contribute to their low utilization of U.S. national parks. In this paper I review the literature on racial differences in leisure participation and the representation of Blacks in the media, and then I present the results of a content analysis of magazine advertisements in which a racialized outdoor leisure identity is shown to exist. The paper concludes with a discussion of how this may influence participation rates in wildland recreation.

Theoretical Background

When leisure researchers speak of outdoor recreation, they ordinarily use the term in a restrictive sense (Kelly, 1993). Outdoor recreation is not simply all leisure activities that take place out of doors (e.g., football, softball, or golf), but instead is synonymous with wildland or wilderness recreation (in this paper I use all three terms interchangeably). Wildland recreation refers to activities that usually take place in space socially constructed as the Great Outdoors (more on this below), such as hiking, camping, and whitewater rafting. Research over the past 30 years shows that Blacks are less likely than Whites to participate in outdoor recreation activities, and they are less likely to visit national parks (Cheek, Field, & Burdge, 1976; Clifford, 1994; Dwyer & Hutchison, 1990; Mueller & Gurin, 1962; Washburne, 1978). In the early 1980s, a study reported that 58% of Whites had visited a national park, compared to 17% of Blacks (National Park Service, 1986). More recently, a 1991 study of attendance at Yosemite National Park found that over 80% of visitors were White, with Blacks accounting for less than 3% (Clifford, 1994), and a 1992 study of attendance at Grand Canyon National Park showed that Blacks accounted for merely 1.5% of visitors arriving by car, and 2.0% of visitors arriving by bus (Goldsmith, 1994).

Studies of racial difference in leisure behavior began in earnest in the 1970s and have continued in the ensuing decades (Bultena & Field, 1978; Carr & Williams, 1993; Craig, 1972; Dwyer & Hutchison, 1990; Floyd, Shinew, McGuire, & Noe, 1994; Washburne, 1978). Much of this research has been informed by two broad theoretical perspectives: the marginality perspective, and the ethnicity (or subculture) perspective. The marginality perspective grew out of socioeconomic explanations for leisure differences. Its proponents point to the larger discretionary income among the dominant group (Whites), and their greater access to recreational facilities and other public goods, as having led to a broad range of leisure activities. Conversely, racial and ethnic minorities historically have been denied the opportunities mentioned above by both overt and institutional racism, and as a consequence developed a separate and more limited set of leisure activities (Floyd et al., 1994; Washburne, 1978; West, 1989). In contrast to the marginality perspective, the ethnicity perspective offers a cultural explanation for intergroup differences. It states that an identifiable set of Black leisure activities results from a distinctive Black subculture. In other words, Black Americans have a set of values and attitudes towards leisure behavior that are different from that of the majority of (White) Americans, and those subcultural values result in alternative leisure choices (Floyd et al., 1994; Washburne, 1978; West, 1989).

Although the marginality and/or the ethnicity perspectives have both received empirical support, they typically explain only a small amount of the variance (Bultena & Field, 1978; Christensen & Yoesting, 1973; Kelly & Godbey, 1992; White, 1975), and neither perspective, as they have been traditionally conceptualized, is adequate for explaining the complexities of racial differences in leisure participation. As a consequence, researchers have called for the field to move beyond the two perspectives and employ more multi-faceted explanations to anchor their research (Allison, 2000; Philipp, 2000). One promising avenue is research in the area of leisure socialization. Such studies still examine traditional socioeconomic status variables, but they also incorporate concepts like ethnic and leisure identities (Carr & Williams, 1993; Pfister, 1993; Taylor, 1993; Williams, 2002) and the sociocultural meaning of wildland spaces (Johnson, Horan, & Pepper, 1997; Lee, 1972; Virden & Walker, 1999). (For an in-depth critique of both marginality and ethnicity, and a more thorough review of alternative explanations, see Floyd, 1998.)

Leisure Socialization

Leisure activities are essentially learned behavior (Kleiber & Kelly, 1980). Norms, values, beliefs and attitudes are learned from parents, teachers, friends and classmates, at home, at school and at church, and the techniques and rules for games, hobbies, and other pastimes are learned in the same way. In addition to the various rules and techniques needed for participation in particular leisure activities, subjective aspects of leisure must also be learned: attitudes toward a particular leisure activity (whether the activity is an acceptable way to spend leisure time), and an aesthetic appreciation of the activity (whether the activity is enjoyable). These attitudes can vary from one ethnic group to another. Kelly (1989) states

Leisure is ethnic. That is, it is behavior learned in particular cultures and subcultures. It is interpreted in the symbols and language forms of a culture ... It is integrated into the full fabric of life, of all that we are and seek to become (p. 105).

An important influence on leisure behavior is the personal groups to which we belong. "Leisure socialization is a social process that takes place in the context of institutional roles, but is most directly developed in interaction with our immediate communities of family and friends" (Kelly, 1983). Individuals may belong to many different social groups (family, friendship groups, co-workers, etc.), and these groups collectively make up a personal community (Burch, 1969). People in an individual's personal community expose that individual to a menu of potential leisure activities. Additionally, the people in one's personal community display a variety of attitudes, norms, and values, about those activities, as well as about leisure in general. Repeated and prolonged exposure to attitudes and values concerning a leisure activity, stemming from role models, helps to shape attitudes and values regarding that activity.

Another component to understanding leisure behavior is the study of leisure identities. Leisure activities are often imbued with specific and widelyshared expectations about the types of people who engage in them. In this context, identity is viewed as an individualized interpretation or enactment of those expectations. The image of a polo player or a yachtsman is quite different from that of a bowler or horseshoe player, which is quite different still from that of a skydiver or in-line skater. Many activities, and the images that accompany them, are associated with particular racial, ethnic, or social class groups (Donnelly & Young, 1988; Haggard & Williams, 1992; Marx, 1994; Taylor, 1993). Individuals can modify or personalize a leisure identity, to some extent, but they must do so within a bounded framework to be considered authentic and to guarantee acceptance by other leisure participants.

Sociocultural Meaning of Wildland Places

Much also can be learned about leisure behavior through an understanding of the social definition of places. Just as leisure activities can have particular identities, so too can places have identities. Geographers distinguish between space (mere location) and place; space becomes place only after meaning is attached to it (Williams & Carr, 1993). Research has shown that public places can develop socially constructed definitions about the types of activities that are appropriate for particular locales, and concerning the types of people who are welcome there (Day, 1999; Greider & Garkovich, 1994; Lee, 1972; Lofland, 1973; Madge, 1997; Samdahl, 1988; Williams & Cart, 1993). This is certainly the case with wildland places, or the Great Outdoors.

In this article, I purposely use the term...

NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.



More articles from Journal of Leisure Research
A photo elicitation study of the meanings of outdoor adventure experie..., September 22, 2004
Use of visual research methods to measure standards of quality for par..., September 22, 2004
A picture and 1000 words: using resident-employed photography to under..., September 22, 2004

Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.

Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication name or publication date.

About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company analysis or best practices in managing your organization, Goliath can help you meet your business needs.

Our extensive business information databases empower business professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible, authoritative information they need to support their business goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting, company research or defining management best practices - Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.