Revista Cultura Científica - web logo
Submit Your Research
  • Research Article

Third Spaces in Recreation Management: Social Connection, Community Well-Being, and a Local Government Perspective

Nur Neşe Şahin1, Emrah Örgün2, Aydın Ünal3, Duygu Karaköse4
1Department of Hotel-Restaurant and Catering Services, Armutlu Vocational School, Yalova University, 77500 Yalova, Türkiye
2Department of Gastronomy and Culinary Arts Tourism Faculty, Sinop University, 57000 Sinop, Türkiye
3Department of Recreation Management Tourism Faculty, Sinop University, 57000 Sinop, Türkiye
4Department of Recreation Management Tavşanlı Faculty of Applied Sciences, Kütahya Dumlupınar University, 43300 Kütahya, Türkiye
DOI: https://doi.org/10.70517/revcc272516
Published: 10/09/2026
: Nur Neşe Şahin, Emrah Örgün, Aydın Ünal, Duygu Karaköse. Third Spaces in Recreation Management: Social Connection, Community Well-Being, and a Local Government Perspective. Revista Cultura Científica, 2027 Issue 25. pg. 185-201.

Abstract

This study aims to examine the third place approach in recreation management within the context of social connectedness, social well-being, and inclusive recreation management. Designed as a conceptual review, the study is based on the assumption that recreation areas are not merely physical spaces for physical activity, relaxation, or leisure participation, but also public spaces where individuals build social relationships, develop a sense of belonging, and participate in social life. Accordingly, the literature was evaluated within the framework of four main concepts: third place, social connectedness, social well-being, and inclusive recreation management. The findings indicate that parks, public gardens, youth centers, campus recreation areas, walking paths, and municipal social facilities may function as third places. The findings also reveal that recreation areas should be evaluated not only in terms of physical facilities and activity provision but also in terms of their capacity to generate social interaction, trust, belonging, inclusive participation, and well-being. As a result, it is argued that recreation management should move beyond the traditional facility- and activity-oriented approach and adopt a management perspective focused on social impact and social well-being. This study is expected to contribute to the recreation management literature through the third place perspective and to provide a theoretical basis for local governments to reconsider recreation services in terms of social connectedness and inclusiveness.

Keywords: recreation management, third place, social connectedness, social well-being, inclusive recreation management

Abstract

This study aims to examine the third place approach in recreation management within the context of social connectedness, social well-being, and inclusive recreation management. Designed as a conceptual review, the study is based on the assumption that recreation areas are not merely physical spaces for physical activity, relaxation, or leisure participation, but also public spaces where individuals build social relationships, develop a sense of belonging, and participate in social life. Accordingly, the literature was evaluated within the framework of four main concepts: third place, social connectedness, social well-being, and inclusive recreation management. The findings indicate that parks, public gardens, youth centers, campus recreation areas, walking paths, and municipal social facilities may function as third places. The findings also reveal that recreation areas should be evaluated not only in terms of physical facilities and activity provision but also in terms of their capacity to generate social interaction, trust, belonging, inclusive participation, and well-being. As a result, it is argued that recreation management should move beyond the traditional facility- and activity-oriented approach and adopt a management perspective focused on social impact and social well-being. This study is expected to contribute to the recreation management literature through the third place perspective and to provide a theoretical basis for local governments to reconsider recreation services in terms of social connectedness and inclusiveness.

Keywords: recreation management, third place, social connectedness, social well-being, inclusive recreation management

References

  1. Oldenburg, Ray. The Great Good Place: Cafés, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. 3rd ed., Marlowe & Company, 1999.

  2. Oldenburg, Ramon, and Dennis Brissett. “The Third Place.” Qualitative Sociology 5.4, 1982: 265–284.

  3. Finlay, Jessica, et al. “Closure of ‘Third Places’? Exploring Potential Consequences for Collective Health and Wellbeing.” Health & Place 60, 2019, article 102225.

  4. Jennings, Viniece, and Omoshalewa Bamkole. “The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 16.3, 2019, article 452.

  5. Wan, Calvin, et al. “Underlying Relationships between Public Urban Green Spaces and Social Cohesion: A Systematic Literature Review.” City, Culture and Society 24, 2021, article 100383.

  6. Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, 1961.

  7. Gehl, Jan. Life between Buildings: Using Public Space. Translated by Jo Koch, 6th ed., Island Press, 2011.

  8. Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space. Translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith, Blackwell, 1991. Originally published 1974.

  9. Mehta, Vikas, and Jennifer K. Bosson. “Third Places and the Social Life of Streets.” Environment and Behavior 42.6, 2010, pp. 779–805.

  10. Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon & Schuster, 2000.

  11. Iso-Ahola, Seppo E. The Social Psychology of Leisure and Recreation. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, 1980.

  12. Mannell, Roger C., and Douglas A. Kleiber. A Social Psychology of Leisure. Venture Publishing, 1997.

  13. Iwasaki, Yoshi, and Roger C. Mannell. “Hierarchical Dimensions of Leisure Stress Coping.” Leisure Sciences 22.3, 2000, pp. 163–181.

  14. Peters, Karin, et al. “Social Interactions in Urban Parks: Stimulating Social Cohesion?” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 9, no. 2, 2010: 93–100.

  15. Kaźmierczak, Aleksandra. “The Contribution of Local Parks to Neighbourhood Social Ties.” Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 109.1, 2013: 31–44.

  16. Tuan, Yi-Fu. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. University of Minnesota Press, 1977.

  17. Low, Setha M., and Irwin Altman. “Place Attachment: A Conceptual Inquiry.” Place Attachment, edited by Irwin Altman and Setha M. Low, Plenum Press, 1992: 1–12.

  18. Scannell, Leila, and Robert Gifford. “Defining Place Attachment: A Tripartite Organizing Framework.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 30.1, 2010: 1–10.

  19. Keyes, Corey Lee M. “Social Well-Being.” Social Psychology Quarterly 61.2, 1998: 121–140.

  20. Diener, Ed, et al. “Subjective Well-Being: Three Decades of Progress.” Psychological Bulletin 125.2, 1999: 276–302.

  21. Driver, B. L., et al., editors. Benefits of Leisure. Venture Publishing, 1991.

  22. Godbey, Geoffrey. Outdoor Recreation, Health, and Wellness: Understanding and Enhancing the Relationship. Resources for the Future, 2009. RFF Discussion Paper no. 09-21.

  23. Stebbins, Robert A. Serious Leisure: A Perspective for Our Time. Transaction Publishers, 2007.

  24. Hartig, Terry, et al. “Nature and Health.” Annual Review of Public Health 35, 2014: 207–228.

  25. Kuo, Ming. “How Might Contact with Nature Promote Human Health? Promising Mechanisms and a Possible Central Pathway.” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 6, 2015, article 1093.

  26. Maas, Jolanda, et al. “Social Contacts as a Possible Mechanism behind the Relation between Green Space and Health.” Health & Place, vol. 15.2, 2009: 586–595.

  27. Wood, Lisa, et al. “Public Green Spaces and Positive Mental Health: Investigating the Relationship between Access, Quantity and Types of Parks and Mental Wellbeing.” Health & Place 48, 2017: 63–71.

  28. Cacioppo, John T., and Stephanie Cacioppo. “Loneliness in the Modern Age: An Evolutionary Theory of Loneliness (ETL).” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 58, Academic Press, 2018: 127–197.

  29. Holt-Lunstad, Julianne, et al. “Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-Analytic Review.” PLOS Medicine 7.7, 2010, article e1000316.

  30. World Health Organization. From Loneliness to Social Connection: Charting a Path to Healthier Societies. Report of the WHO Commission on Social Connection, 2025. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240112360.

  31. Aitchison, Cara Carmichael. Gender and Leisure: Social and Cultural Perspectives. Routledge, 2003.

  32. Henderson, Karla A., and M. Deborah Bialeschki. “A Sense of Entitlement to Leisure as Constraint and Empowerment for Women.” Leisure Sciences 13.1, 1991: 51–65.

  33. Shinew, Kimberly J., et al. “Leisure Spaces as Potential Sites for Interracial Interaction: Community Gardens in Urban Areas.” Journal of Leisure Research 36.3, 2004: 336–355.

  34. Gobster, Paul H. “Managing Urban Parks for a Racially and Ethnically Diverse Clientele.” Leisure Sciences 24.2, 2002, pp. 143–159.

  35. Byrne, Jason, and Jennifer Wolch. “Nature, Race, and Parks: Past Research and Future Directions for Geographic Research.” Progress in Human Geography 33.6, 2009: 743–765.

  36. Wolch, Jennifer R., et al. “Urban Green Space, Public Health, and Environmental Justice: The Challenge of Making Cities ‘Just Green Enough’.” Landscape and Urban Planning 125, 2014: 234–244.

  37. Rigolon, Alessandro. “A Complex Landscape of Inequity in Access to Urban Parks: A Literature Review.” Landscape and Urban Planning 153, 2016: 160–169.

  38. Rigolon, Alessandro, et al. “Inequities in the Quality of Urban Park Systems: An Environmental Justice Investigation of Cities in the United States.” Landscape and Urban Planning 178, 2018, pp. 156–169.

  39. Dietz, Linus W., et al. “Examining Inequality in Park Quality for Promoting Health across 35 Global Cities.” arXiv, 22 July 2024, arXiv:2407.15770.

  40. Project for Public Spaces. The State of Public Space in 2025. 2025. https://www.pps.org/state-of-public-space-2025.

  41. Cardinali, Marcel, et al. “Examining Green Space Characteristics for Social Cohesion and Mental Health Outcomes: A Sensitivity Analysis in Four European Cities.” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 93, 2024, article 128230.

  42. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. Urban Green Spaces and Health: A Review of Evidence. 2016. https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/WHO-EURO-2016-3352-43111-60341.

  43. Klinenberg, Eric. Palaces for the People: How Social Infrastructure Can Help Fight Inequality, Polarization, and the Decline of Civic Life. Crown, 2018.

  44. National Recreation and Park Association. 2025 Engagement with Parks Report. 2025. https://www.nrpa.org/engagement/.

Nur Neşe Şahin
Department of Hotel-Restaurant and Catering Services, Armutlu Vocational School, Yalova University, 77500 Yalova, Türkiye
Emrah Örgün
Department of Gastronomy and Culinary Arts Tourism Faculty, Sinop University, 57000 Sinop, Türkiye
Aydın Ünal
Department of Recreation Management Tourism Faculty, Sinop University, 57000 Sinop, Türkiye
Duygu Karaköse
Department of Recreation Management Tavşanlı Faculty of Applied Sciences, Kütahya Dumlupınar University, 43300 Kütahya, Türkiye
duygu.karakose@dpu.edu.tr

How to cite:

Nur Neşe Şahin, Emrah Örgün, Aydın Ünal, Duygu Karaköse. Third Spaces in Recreation Management: Social Connection, Community Well-Being, and a Local Government Perspective. Revista Cultura Científica, 2027 Issue 25. pg. 185-201.

Publication History

  • Received: 24/06/2026
  • Accepted: 15/08/2026
  • Published: 10/09/2026
Copyright © 2026, Nur Neşe Şahin, Emrah Örgün, Aydın Ünal, Duygu Karaköse. Published by Revista Cultura Científica. This article is published as open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Browse Advance Search