Framing the Root of the Problem:
Sport, Recreation, and Leisure as Luxury
Significant social and economic inequities prevent equity-owed residents’ participation in sport, recreation, and leisure (SRL). In New Brunswick (NB), the opportunity to participate in SRL depends on household socioeconomic status due to the predominance of a user fee model (i.e., pay-to-play or pay-to-access). This is particularly prevalent for equity-owed residents, such as Indigenous people, people of colour, newcomers, people living with disabilities, single-parent households, youth, and seniors, all of whom disproportionately experience poverty and low-income status.
To facilitate participation in SRL for equity-owed residents, particularly those experiencing poverty and living in low-incomes, “band-aid” or short-term solutions, such as fee assistance programs (FAPs), free and low-cost programming, free one-off events, or free or low-cost access, are employed. However, they are insufficient to create sustainable and equitable access to SRL.
When participation in SRL depends on one’s socioeconomic status, it proliferates the cycle of privilege, guards dignified access to participation and perpetuates “othering” for equity-owed residents. When community SRL provisions are designed to make money, they cater to those who can afford to pay, resulting in perpetuating a classist trap that excludes equity-owed residents (1) . Further, FAPs that target low-income residents are then based on these programmes and informed by and built on white middle- and upper-class values and interests— “forcing” or “guiding” equity-owed residents towards activities they may not have meaning or be of interest. Therefore, any efforts to create access and inclusion can create a narrative of us versus them, also known as othering.
What is othering?
Othering is a disempowering process and a discriminatory and exclusionary label (2) . Othering is utilized negatively to differentiate those labelled from those in power. To be ‘othered’ is to be recognized as being different from the norm, from those in power who are socially acceptable (3).
Othering also involves negatively assigning characteristics to people or groups different from the perceived normative social group. Othering can be based on various attributes, including age, ability, gender, sexual orientation, language, occupation, political affiliation, religion, citizenship status, skin colour, and socioeconomic status.
Types of Othering
“You walk into a gym, and they have, you know, 20 regulars, and you’re under a microscope. That’s not a welcoming feeling.”
“I know that you’re [SRL providers] only welcoming me here because you got a giant grant to do it.”
“Because of the price, and because of the regulars - to think that they own [the SRL service/spaces]. Like, not putting it out there for more people.”
What are some root causes that create othering in SRL settings?
In our project (4) , equity-owed residents identified the prioritization of revenue generation from user fee models as part of the root issue. When SRL providers must prioritize revenue generation, they develop programs and services targeting only those who can afford to pay. This prioritization leads to SRL norms and sense of belonging that are dictated largely by White, able-bodied, middle-upper class residents’ interests, values and resources (i.e. transportation, money, social capital, and knowledge). This creates a two-tier system in SRL: those who afford to be there all the time and anytime (dominant tier) and those who can’t or only get partial access (non-dominant tier).
When you have a pay-to-play or pay-to-access model, over time, societal values towards SRL are viewed as a luxury where residents must “earn” access versus having the “right” to access. When SRL is considered a luxury earned through economic contribution to society, it can leave equity-owed residents who cannot afford to play or access SRL feeling shame, guilt, fear of judgement, and undeserving when SRL providers attempt to create access.
“Why is it that people who live in poverty often feel undervalued? Because we are. Profit-profitability comes first. And, sometimes, the barriers aren’t even thought of by the sports, leisure and recreation activity coordinators and the people who come up with these things [provisions]. They’re not thinking of the poor people, and they’re not thinking of the seniors, and they’re not thinking of the newcomers, and all of the barriers that we have to jump over to get through to get to those things [sport, recreation and leisure].”
Unfortunately, these feelings and the notion of othering are perpetuated by the types of “access” provisions SRL providers implement in the community.
“And when you already feel like you shouldn’t, or the guilt associated with the cost, that stops a lot of people from trying.”
“There is a thought of sports, leisure and recreation being an indulgence rather than need. I feel guilty if I spend money on a pottery class that I’m so interested in. I feel guilty because that money could be used and is needed in so many other places.”
“Not enough participation from the local community because of the exclusiveness. It’s pricey - and so, the families - the people are discouraged not to go.”
What does othering look and feel like in SRL for equity-owed residents?
When we have a two-tiered SRL system that requires high socioeconomic status for participation, SRL sectors provide the non-dominant tier (equity-owed residents) with financial and material resources (i.e., fee assistance programs, free or low-cost programs, etc.). However, these strategies - intended to create access and foster “inclusion” - perpetuate exclusion and develop the notion of othering in a variety of ways:
Limited access to facilities based on “free” or low-cost access hours only; this sends the message to equity-owed residents that this space is not for everyone. They are only welcome on some days or to participate in certain activities (free swimming or skating only).
Offering equity-owed residents free one-off events versus ongoing programs with leadership/instructor guidance; this type of support creates a second-class experience for equity-owed residents when compared to user fee programming that comes with access to instructors, coaches, ongoing participation, skill development, and access to facilities. The message this sends is that “I don’t deserve better.”
Only financially subsidizing organized sport and recreation opportunities while disregarding other leisure activities such as arts/culture and outdoor; this diminishes opportunities to strengthen diversity and self-expression as equity-owed residents can only participate in what the dominant tier values. Ultimately telling equity-owed residents “they are not valued.”
Proving low-income status for financial assistance creates shame and causes stigmatization.
Lack of diversity in programming, staff, and board membership sends the message that Whiteness is the norm as differences of race, ethnicity, culture, gender, and ability are denied visibility.
Complicated financial forms and rigid payment options shame equity-owed residents because they have not earned enough to play.
Surveillance of financially assisted participants creates a narrative that equity-owed citizens cannot be trusted.
Time-intensive programming conveys that equity-owed residents do not fit in and that these activities are not meant for them.
Hidden access fees or not disclosing financial assistance sends the message to equity-owed residents that they are not welcome here.
These “othering” effects from SRL access provisions create barriers to belonging, which leads to…
Equity-owed residents feel ineligible, uninvited, and unwelcome, and feel they do not deserve to be-or belong in community SRL settings.
Therefore, it might be more valuable to focus on redesigning SRL provisions that cultivate a sense of belonging and dignified access and inclusive experiences to SRL for equity-owed people.
1 Oncescu, J. (2021). Low-income families and the community sport and leisure delivery systems. In D. E. Trussell, & R. Jeanes (Eds.), Families, sport, leisure and social justice: From protest to progress (pp. 164-176). Routledge.
2 Brons, L. L. (2015). Othering, an analysis. Transcience: A Journal of Global Studies, 6(1), 69-90.
3 Jensen, Q. S. (2011). Othering, identity formation and agency. Qualitative Studies, 2(2), 63-78. https://doi.org/10.7146/qs.v2i2.5510
4 https://www.reimaginingaccess.ca/
Please cite this report as: “Oncescu, J. 2023. The Intersection of the Social Determinants of Health and Sport and Recreation Delivery Systems & The Impact Equity-Owed Residents’ Participation. Re-Imagining Access to SRL”