YOUR FORUM FOR PLAY, SPORTS UND LEISURE AREAS
The German Children's Fund (DKHW) was established on 17 February 1972 by entrepreneurs and business people in Munich. The aim of the association was to improve playgrounds in Germany. What is the situation like today? An interview with the playground spokesperson from the DKHW, Claudia Neumann.
Playground@Landscape: What children were able to do one to two generations ago has in many ways been lost due to the fast-paced nature of our society: playing outdoors, be it on the playground with other children, in the garden or on the public playground. The motto “YOUR right to play!” must find its place in the municipalities once again, playgrounds and playing fields must be maintained and new ones created. How is the DKHW working towards this?
Follow-up question: So, do children want to play outside on a damp foggy November day, when they can have fun chatting with friends on Whatsapp?
Claudia Neumann (DKHW): As fun, easy and breezy communication through new media may be, it cannot compete with a real conversation face to face with all its emotions and expressions. Apart from the fact that younger children (I'm talking about the under eights) do not necessarily have their own mobile phone, for them, playing and adventure on the playground, exercise and romping with friends is at the top of their agendas, something that no Whatsapp conversation can replace. In bad weather, they may prefer to stay indoors − the crucial ingredient is playing together. What’s more, a real conversation is much more than merely verbal communication – it gives way to ideas that can be put directly into practice, such as experimenting with balancing on the seesaw or taking a trip to the neighbouring district. Correctly dressed, kids are not all that bothered about getting cold and muddy – quite the opposite, splashing around in puddles or later skidding on icy paths is very exciting. It is the parents actually who have an issue with the weather as they don’t want to freeze to death watching their kids play or they want to avoid them coming back home covered in mud.
I would even suspect that a genuine encounter with friends would even benefit the media-loving youth of today. There's nothing like a common experience, even if it means going to the local cafe or the shopping arcade in the winter months. What’s more, you should not underestimate what outdoor activities together, e.g. on the playground, playing field or in the skatepark, actually mean: here, young people can test their strengths by doing new tricks, constantly rebalance the ranking in the group, re-establish friendships, impress and flirt with the opposite sex. And it doesn’t stop there. On their way home or in their bedrooms, they can chat about it non-stop using Whatsapp or Facebook.
The main problem, however, is not the laziness of children or the superiority of new media – increasingly, children are simply lacking the time and space to play independently outdoors!
Playground@Landscape: The playground topic again in more detail: As a specialist at DKHW, you probably agree with Maria Montessori that it is not the role of the environment, “to shape the child, but to allow them to reveal themselves”. Children therefore need playing areas in which they can freely develop their imagination, communication skills and their joy for simply moving around. In cities, these spaces are disappearing. From your perspective, what does a playground look like that offers children a creative space, according to Maria Montessori’s philosophy, to allow their senses and abilities to develop?
Claudia Neumann: A playground/playing area – we also like to think beyond the playground fence – should offer children a number of qualities, as well as have the mandatory equipment safety and allow children to access them as independently as possible. These include, in our view, aspects such as adaptability, an exciting variety, layout and natural design.
Two examples: To challenge the creativity of children, playing venues must allow design freedom to allow playing and activities to develop flexibly and individually. This means no “monotonous slides”, but something that offers a variety of uses that each child can interpret for themselves. Planned areas should therefore largely preserve their natural character, provide space for imagination and role play and allow variability so that playing can always be reinvented and interaction is possible.
These qualities can be achieved using equipment as well as layout, with natural materials being better than general design elements made from metal and plastic. A corresponding layout provides niches where children can get away from it all and role play. The structure, e.g. created by trees, shrubs, perennials and grasses, allows for different play activities and gives children a sense of security. Walls or other structural elements for open space are also used in spatial planning. Large, connected areas allow children to independently move around and let off steam across large areas. Play areas for young children have to be visible. At the same time, existing landscape elements – i.e. hills, trees, shrubs, streams, etc. must be incorporated into the design.
Playground@Landscape: Children and young people in Germany are very limited in terms of where they can play. This is the result of a nationwide online survey by the DKHW. What is the general picture?
Claudia Neumann: Children and young people have the right “to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts”, this is set out in art. 31 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. There is sufficient proof highlighting how important it is to the child’s development that they engage in independent play and activities, enjoy sufficient recreation time and freely participate in cultural life. However, 25 years after children's rights were adopted, we note that there is still a clear problem when it comes to implementing them!
An increased renovation backlog at local playgrounds and schoolyards, a monotonous furnishing of existing playgrounds, the fragmentation of playing venues, the expansion of childcare centres without the provision of suitable outdoor areas, the implementation of urban development projects without the participation of children and young people being suitably anchored in law and internal administrative regulations, the displacing of youth venues to the suburbs, the walling in or suing of play areas, the reduction in funds for youth services, the increasing number of all-day schools without the widespread implementation of adapted concepts – the list of deficiencies is long and it gives the impression that circumstances in Germany have worsened!
The survey, which we conducted ahead of Weltspieltag 2013 (world play day) among around 2,000 children, reinforced this impression at least in part, here is an excerpt:
Approximately 75 percent of children and young people stated that there are places where they cannot play because their parents forbid them to go there alone. At the same time, approximately two thirds (67 percent) classed the area near where they live as being at least slightly dangerous. The reasons for this are, for example, major roads, too few traffic lights or zebra crossings, but also people whom the children are afraid of. The children and young people are not deterred by this, however. After all, 65 percent said that they still feel safe in the area where they live.
Playgrounds are in a bad way when it comes to cleanliness. While a little more than half of the children (53 percent) said the playground nearest where they live was clean or rather clean, 47 percent of the children classed their playground as rather dirty or dirty. The condition of the play apparatus leaves much to be desired in many places: 22 percent of children said that play apparatus that they actually wanted to use was frequently or permanently broken.
The area where children live is uninspiring for many. Around a quarter (24 percent) find it boring or stated that they can hardly find anything to do.
Generally, it must be noted, however, that children often view their situations in a far better light than us as adult professionals. That may be on the one hand because children deal with criticism more carefully; on the other hand, they may only be able to compare a situation if they know enough alternatives − which is precisely what is missing in most cases if you ask me!
A poor implementation of the right to play in the Member States was also noted by the UN, who wrote in their general comments “General Comment no. 17 on art. 31 of the UN CRC” in April 2013 a clear call for Member States to deploy all political, internal administrative and financial resources to bring about a significant improvement in this area. Policymakers and authorities are therefore clearly urged to improve the implementation of these improvements and to anchor all necessary measures at the federal, state and municipal level in terms of legislation, financing and human resources! The DKHW is currently actively engaged in compiling a corresponding list of demands with the help of the National Coalition (for the implementation of the UN-Convention on the Rights of the Child) and the partners in the Right to Play alliance and the German IPA (International Play Association) section and to anchor the next step in an action plan.
Playground@Landscape: Topic of playground safety: Playing also means that children learn their limits?
Claudia Neumann: Absolutely! Nothing is more boring for kids than a monotonous game. They want to experience adventure, test their physical limits, cheat gravity, and compete with others. This can mean anything from using the slides meant for sliding down as a climbing frame to scramble from the bottom upwards, climbing trees and walls, and exploring old ruined buildings. This type of playing is the only way of developing their wealth of experiences. We're talking about risk awareness that children can only gain through new challenges. We – and the accident insurers, those involved in the outdoors children project of the ABA association and also DIN 18034 – plead in favour of allowing manageable, predictable risks. We need to make greater distinctions between risk and danger. According to Holger Hofmann of the DKHW, “Danger is something that I cannot predict and that must be avoided. Risk is, in an ideal scenario, an extreme experience aimed at learning.”
Therefore, a scratch or bump is part of any normal childhood, even a broken arm would not be a disaster. Conclusion: “For every child, the right to their own bump!” The important thing is, however, that children are allowed to create their own experiences and learn to test their limits, but also to draw their own limits and not to exceed them unintentionally. Therefore, we believe it is fatal if parents push their children beyond these limits on the playground to take a risk and, for example, climb higher on the climbing frame than they would themselves − without the supporting hand of the parents!
Playground@Landscape: When playing outside, children do not stay in one place. They have a strong desire to move around. They want to meet friends in different places. However, these paths cross dangerous roads. How can you link these different playing venues more safely for children?
Claudia Neumann: You make an important point about linking playing venues to create a coherent whole and allowing children to reach playing venues as independently as possible. This starts with ensuring there are essentially enough age-appropriate playing venues within the relevant perimeter of the area where the child lives − these do not always have to be large playgrounds, a smaller playing point, or green areas for playing count in our eyes too. In this way, children can reach the venue independently and do not need to be brought by their parents, perhaps even by car, and supervised all the time. Here, however, parents should check whether a playing venue supposedly nearby is actually unreachable because of road traffic. We have to deal with a clear dominance of car traffic, with Germany home to at least four times as many cars as children; space is distributed accordingly. In this context, the transportation planning department has a clear job to adapt roads to children – unfortunately, it has more often been the case that we have adapted children to the roads, equipped them with safety vests and practice road safety education, but it shouldn’t be like that! In the town planning for playing areas, it happens, for example, that children name such dangerous spots on the road and then decide what measures can be taken together with the accompanying planners. This starts with a change in traffic lights, through to the creation of a centre island and setting up – at least on a temporary basis – play streets. Particular attention should be given to ensuring that the immediate entrance area to the playing venue is designed to include clear transitions, both for drivers and the children. What are known as “meeting zones” , are also a very new concept and are currently being tested in Berlin; here, drivers must assume a less dominant position on the roads. Generally, a cruising speed of 30 kph is required; 50 kph should be the exception in cities and towns.
Playground@Landscape: Keyword: town planning for playing areas. What progress has the DKHW made in this area so far? Have you managed to implement town planning for playing areas into legislation?
Claudia Neumann: After town planning for playing areas was developed as a planning tool in Rhineland-Palatinate in 1997, we were able to follow and support around 20 projects under town planning for playing areas with the support of the Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth from 2008 to 2010 through the model program “Play! Space is everywhere”. This interdisciplinary planning tool is spreading further and further across Germany. The problem is, however, to extend this process in the already involved municipalities to all districts and continually implement it – the process must of course continue to be adapted and addressed again for the next generation of children and young people. Three important elements must be in place, however, both when establishing and introducing measures into municipalities: the political will, the financial resources – the projects developed should of course also be implemented – and, in particular, the human resources in the form of child and youth offices, etc., to follow and maintain the process internally. With respect to the financial situation, the municipalities must be clear that town planning for playing areas may mean additional costs in the first stage; in the long run, however, they can even save money because bad investments and considerable vandalism damage can be avoided through requirements-based planning. What is clear, however, is that here the youth office – often the one giving the impetus for the project – must be substantially supported by the urban planning transportation-, and environmental office; town planning for playing areas and the subsequent projects are not simply paid for from the budget for child and youth services! We believe these barriers mean that urban planning for playing areas has not yet become widely implemented and has not yet found its permanent home in the administrative structures. We have been calling for it to be implemented in legislation for years. While the amendment to the Federal Building Code has brought us a little step further, town planning for playing areas as a suitable tool could however still find a clearer place in the Federal Building Code, Federal Land Utilisation Ordinance and, above all, in the various municipal codes. Enshrining town planning for playing areas into law could also be linked with positive incentives, as in the Austrian region of Vorarlberg − here, municipalities that introduce town planning for playing areas are rewarded with funding.
Playground@Landscape: And do you not see incredible opportunities here to work closely with the BSFH (Federal Association of Playground Equipment and Leisure Facility Manufacturers) in this area because they are essentially following the same objectives!?
Claudia Neumann: Sure, we could and should use our diverse experiences, but also our influence to work in the pursuit of common goals. The DKHW acts as a lobbying organisation and tries to exert a positive influence on policy, but also on society. This is because it is often the parents who do not allow their children to experience risk, demand the safest possible playground (which cannot even have a fruit tree in it) or to whom learning is more important than playing. A lack of play and physical activities in a child's life is all too often underestimated because assigning this into a category is not as straightforward or clear as a lack of nutrition, for example. There must be a social change here! As long as the educational specialists at the childcare facilities are reprimanded by angry parents because the kids “learned nothing today because all they did was play”, or equipment on the playground was dismantled because a child was − through improper use, mind − slightly injured, then we still have much to do. The members of the BSFH in turn should use their influence on local decision-makers for playing venues to be jointly planned and implemented with the user groups according to their needs. This will require a lot of educating; the “Movement plan” plenary planned for 2015 for the first time in collaboration with the DKHW can help with this. Here, we want to discuss the future prospects of public playing and activities areas with interested experts.
Playground@Landscape: Members of the Federal Association BSFH produce safe and quite creative playground equipment. Where do you see potential for development with the manufacturers so that playing venues and playgrounds gain an even more individual appearance in terms of their diversity?
Claudia Neumann: We would love to get into discussions with the BSFH regarding the qualities of playing areas. This discussion must go beyond fall protection measures and equipment safety. Together, we can add new force to the comprehensive DIN 18034 standard. I think safety and creativity are important aspects; more attention should be given to the qualities mentioned previously, such as adaptability and an exciting variety. It's about creating play opportunities that always give children new incentives to try new things, that offer multifunctional use and that can be changed. What’s more, it is not about installing the most beautiful, brightly painted pieces of equipment. The aesthetic view of children differs considerably from that of adults; it should be nevertheless by a priority . Also, the manufacturers should work more closely with the planners and not just furnish the playgrounds, but work together on a concept based on which the playing venue is designed. The natural conditions underfoot and natural elements such as hills, trees and shrubs should be integrated into the design. The manufacturers should open up further, and the individual wishes and ideas of children should be implemented − by getting them involved early on. In this case, the planners and designers should hold back even more – it's not about the perfectly designed draft, but about meeting the needs of the children! If there are no suitable pieces of equipment in the catalogue, the products should be expanded whenever possible. Ideally, the pieces of equipment should be designed in such a way that they are only designed and prefabricated in the factory; the actual construction and finished installation can be done together with the children − under professional supervision of course.
Playground@Landscape: Is there actually a piece of children's playground equipment that a playground should always have (e.g. a swing)?
Claudia Neumann: Requests always made by children are for something for climbing, swinging and sliding down. In this area, however, the planners and designers are urged to be even more creative. Who says that the request for climbing facilities must necessarily result in a conventional climbing device? How about a custom climbing wall or climbing forest? What else should always be there: the element of water – whether as sophisticated water and sand apparatus, a small pool or just as simple depression in the ground where a puddle can form.
Playground@Landscape: The winners of the Fanta playground initiative 2014 have been announced − playgrounds in Flensburg, Rauenberg and Wustrau. Why were these chosen?
Claudia Neumann: In the Fanta playground initiative, all applicants were permitted who had a public playground and had pledged to renovate the playground or to create a new creative playing solution. Almost 450 playgrounds applied; the 100 winners and thus the three main winners were then determined using public online voting. Here, users and fans therefore made a considerable contribution to the process. We are in any case very happy with the winners because they definitely deserved it. Schlachthof Flensburg is a skatepark arising from a youth initiative that is supported by the Stadtjugendring (joint venture of youth organisations), local policy and the authorities and has since gained nationwide importance; it is designing and building the extension to the skating facilities in the holidays independently with children and young people, thus expanding what’s on offer for everyone. The playground in Angelbach-Tierpark Rauenberg zoo is being restructured by the members and adapted to a theme, for example based on an “ark” or various animals. The citizens' initiative in Wustrau, led by a very dedicated mother, has expanded the previously very mediocre playground in cooperation with the local community and with much personal dedication, transforming it into a natural playing venue.
Playground@Landscape: One last question: The DKHW has for many years worked towards child participation in the planning of children's playgrounds. Why, in your opinion, is it that, proportionally, more playgrounds are still “thrown together” through tender procedure rather than through a qualified moderated participation process?
Claudia Neumann: I am afraid that many authorities still view a participation process as large additional burden for which it simply has no time, with some nervous about the idea. Of course, when involving other people, you are bound to make one or two U-turns and the process lasts longer overall, but the results would be more valuable and longer lasting. It is not only that the needs of the actual users of the playgrounds are really taken into account but a participation process generates numerous potential benefits: democratic understanding among children, a desire to participate from parents or even participation from potential private sponsors. As long as the statutory regulations are lacking and participation is not a requirement of the municipal code, it remains just a can-do task that depends on the willingness of the authorities.
The interview was conducted by Thomas R. Müller (Playground@Landscape)
Photo: DKHW
