For an enhanced digital experience, read this story in the ezine.

Imagine if your agency received a complaint that at least 50 percent of ebike users were dangerously exceeding the speed limits after the state legalized ebikes on recreational bike trails. How would you address this complaint? The best way to approach the problem would be to use data to either confirm or refute the complaint. Professionals in Clearwater, Florida, used this approach. They collected data from their automated trail-counting system to investigate travel direction and speed for ebikes and found, in fact, only one percent of riders were exceeding the speed limits, and it was a known group of riders using bikes not allowed on the trail. The data informed them of the true situation and helped their communications team educate the public on the situation to allay their fears about sharing the trails with ebike riders.

Using technologies that assist park and recreation agencies to monitor the use of public spaces is a growing trend. From infrared sensors to extensive use of cellphone data, professionals are seeking out these tools that can supplement or even replace the often arduous and staff-intensive task of observational counting methods. But what do professionals think about these automated counting technologies? NRPA researchers conducted a study to find out.

NRPA’s recently released report, Perspectives on Automated Counting Technologies in Parks and Recreation, publishes findings from focus groups with 14 park and recreation professionals, a brief survey of the U.S. public about public surveillance in park and recreation spaces, and a relevant literature and statute review. Surrounded by rich stories and quotations from participants, the report summarizes ways agencies use (or intend to use) the data, considerations for selecting the appropriate tool, challenges and lessons learned, communications with the public, and public support.

Technology Uses

As expected, agencies most often value automated counting technologies for collecting visitation numbers in public spaces. Agencies also are drawn to measuring recreational activity, event attendance, foot traffic, movement through spaces and dwell time in specific areas. Professionals also mentioned interest in applying the data from these systems to planning and design, improving management and operations, measuring economic impact, supporting alternate funding efforts, and supporting equity. The far-and-wide application of these systems seems endless, saving staff time and effort while providing more usable data.

Challenges

Employing these systems is not without some barriers. Common challenges include the inability to measure what people are doing in the parks, data overwhelm, data inaccuracy and unavailability, and difficulty calculating the return on investment of the technologies. While observational techniques of measuring park use offer the opportunity to not only count visitors, but also to qualify data with activity and visitor characteristics, to date, this functionality does not exist for even the most advanced automated counting technology systems.

Public Communication and Support

Public notification plans for these surveillance systems are highly dependent on a local community’s statutes, culture, and other expectations and capacities. Accordingly, park and recreation agencies approach communication about the systems with the public in a variety of ways. Interestingly, 59 percent of people we surveyed were informed whether their park and recreation spaces used any surveillance technologies, leaving a full 41 percent who were unsure.

The report includes several useful guidelines for agencies considering automated counting technologies, including questions to answer when deciding whether to use them, advice for agencies when preparing to select which system is most appropriate for their needs and selected topics for future research.

With the rapid evolution and increasing use of technology that gathers data from public settings, the park and recreation field has an opportunity to take full advantage of efficient and accurate information to more effectively and equitably serve communities, make better decisions and more confidently measure impact.

Thank you to our sponsor, Musco Lighting, LLC, whose generous contribution made this research study possible.

Dianne K. Palladino, Ph.D., is NRPA’s Interim Director of Research and Evaluation.