Leisure, inequalities, and the Global South

Introduction

The concept of inequalities has been widely explored in academia and in the leisure literature. Indeed, in its first issue, Leisure Studies published a piece from Rosemary Deem on ‘Women, leisure and inequality’ (Deem, 1982). Since then, Leisure Studies has been a journal committed to exploring inequalities. In the late 1980s, for example, Carrington et al. (1987) debated gender inequalities and leisure practices in young people of South Asian descent. Other publications have emphasised inequalities and leisure accessibility for people with disabilities (Burns et al., 2009), racial inequalities (Bandyopadhyay, 2022), and the harm the cruise industry can cause by reinforcing inequalities between the Global South and Global North (Mahoney & Collins, 2020). Beyond Leisure Studies, many studies have investigated leisure and socioeconomic and/or gender inequalities (Beenackers et al., 2012; Szilcz et al., 2018; Wendt et al., 2021). However, they have been published only in English and in journals belonging to international organisations. One exception is the work of Ferreira et al. (2018), published in the Brazilian journal Cadernos de Saude Publica (Reports in Public Health), edited in Portuguese but available and translated into English.

We believe that the language of knowledge dissemination is a significant aspect of inequality in leisure research. The acceptance of English as the lingua franca in academia follows the colonial patterns of anglophone countries and their (sometimes oppressive) power in a globalised society. Indeed, there is an increasing global trend that associates hiring, promotion and tenure as well as funding, grants, and other subsidies with publication in international journals that have English as their only language (Suzina, 2020). Even with some levels of resistance from other (and also colonising) languages such as Portuguese, Spanish and French, English is still the most accepted language and is used almost exclusively by top-ranked international journals. For example, the most recognised leisure journals publish exclusively in English and this may prevent those from countries where English is not the first language from disseminating knowledge about leisure in their social worlds to a wider audience.

Language barriers can indeed be one of the systemic inequalities which has hitherto limited the participation of Global South academics in international debates on leisure. However, it is also important to consider other elements of inequality within the dissemination of leisure research. Analysing the participation of researchers from the Global South in editorial boards or in the role of editor-in-chief/managing editors of journals can highlight the ‘power-holders’ and demonstrate the predominance of the epistemologies of the North as the leading discourse in leisure research. The lack of special issues focusing on the Global South is also evident, along with the lack of significant initiative from publishers to minimise the costs of translation and proofreading of the work from researchers based in this part of the world.

This introductory paper sets the scene for this special issue on leisure, inequalities, and the Global South. It contextualises the debate and focuses on two key points: (1) research on leisure inequalities; and (2) the Global South and inequalities in leisure research. In this paper, we also introduce the contributions published in this Leisure Studies special issue and their relevance to the broad debate regarding leisure, inequalities, and the Global South.

Leisure inequalities, and inequalities in leisure

Equality is one of the most significant of the human ideals and embedded in the Bible (Stuurman, 2017). In Letter to the Romans, the message is that people are all equal in the eyes of God. This religious message has filtered into Western society and into positionings such as the slogan of the French revolution: ‘Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity’. These concepts have become the main values European countries feel the need to protect (Mason, 2015). However, with the increased strength of capitalism in the aftermath of the Cold War and the significant epistemological gap between West and East, the concept of equality has been revisited and questioned, and as George Orwell exposed in his book Animal Farm: ‘all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others’ (Orwell, 2021, p. 134). To Temkin (1993), most of the debates about equality focus on two central questions: (1) Is equality desirable? and (2) What kind of equality should one seek – does one want equality of opportunities, or primary goods or welfare?

On the one hand, debate on the importance of reducing inequalities is growing (Lakner et al., 2022); on the other hand, inequality seems to be an essential component of the capitalist modus operandi (Klein, 2022). Inequality, defined as the systemic disparity between members of the same nation, society, group or organisation, and its consequences, have been widely explored in many academic fields including health studies (Wade et al., 2022), gender studies (Acker, 2006) and sociology (Beck, 2007). In leisure studies, important debates indicate the negative impacts of social and economic inequalities on participation in physical activity and leisure practices (Geithner & Wagner, 2022; Owen et al., 2022; Rogers et al., 2022). Debates also concern gender inequalities in leisure participation (Yerkes et al., 2020) and in leisure accessibility for people with disabilities (Orakani et al., 2021). Furthermore, in the last 15 years, a debate has emerged regarding digital inequalities (Graham, 2008), which have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and how governments have responded to it (Woodrow & Moore, 2021). The digital inequality during COVID-19 and the ensuing lockdowns led to differences in leisure opportunities, and such disparities were felt more deeply in the Global South where the gap between social classes is wider compared with the Global North (Clemente & Stoppa, 2020). Finally, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the inequalities of the Global South were also felt by older people, who struggled with the introduction to digital technologies, developed by and for the Global North, as leisure alternatives (Tavares & Marinho, 2021). Hence, research and knowledge produced beyond Anglocentric epistemologies may contribute to a better understanding of not only other types of leisure practices, policies and approaches but also the influences the Global North has on the leisure of the Global South.

Epistemologies of the North: ethnocentrism and the anglophonic nature of leisure research

In exploring inequalities in leisure, we follow Chambers and Buzinde (2015) and claim that leisure knowledge is colonial and privileges the epistemologies of the Global North. This is because the knowledge is produced and disseminated by colonial powers, including the British, Portuguese, and Dutch empires. Indeed, the development of leisure knowledge in countries from the Global South, such as Brazil, has been strictly connected to theories produced and established in the Global North. Authors such as Dumazedier, Caillois, Parker and Roberts have been pillars in the development of leisure studies, and in countries such as Brazil, their work became essential reading for academics and sociologists in the field. These readings contributed to a sociological understanding of the Global North; at the same time, they reinforced colonial thinking and Western culture.

In recent years, the influence of colonial narratives in leisure studies has been recognised. Indeed, a special edition of the World Leisure Journal published in 2010 (volume 52, issue 3) was entirely dedicated to the discussion of the Anglocentric perspective on leisure, bringing evidence of its existence in leisure studies, explaining how to avoid it, and seeking greater inclusion of researchers from different parts of the world. Notably, this special issue was published only in English. The debate was initially sparked by (Roberts, 2010) article entitled ‘Is leisure studies “ethnocentric”? If so, does this matter?’ The author offers a thought-provoking analysis of leisure studies around the world and concludes that since the 1960s, leisure studies have become more uniformly anglophone, which suggests a certain ethnocentrism in the author’s production of the so-called ‘leisure studies countries’, especially the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia (Roberts, 2010). Based on this text, authors from different regions of the world presented reflections on this supposed ‘Anglocentrism’ in research regarding leisure. Atara Sivan, in the article ‘Is leisure studies “ethnocentric”? Integrating leisure studies worldwide: a view from Hong Kong’, emphasises that the use of the English language as an ‘international language’ has contributed to leisure becoming more anglophone (Sivan, 2010). Sivan also believes that her exposure to the Chinese language, culture and tradition facilitated her understanding of the leisure perceptions and attitudes of people from the Eastern world. These multiple cultural expressions are also present in the work of José Machado Pais, who has explored leisure in European countries where Portuguese is the main language. Pais’s (2010) article, ‘Is leisure studies “ethnocentric?” Other “musics”, other insights: A view from Lisbon, Portugal’, highlights recent socio-cultural trends that have contributed to the growing importance of leisure. The author also notes the importance of cultural democratisation that allows multiple expressions to emerge and a varied approach to leisure beyond ‘Anglocentrism’ (Pais, 2010).

Samdahl (2010), in her paper ‘Is leisure studies “ethnocentric”? It takes more than optimism: A view from Athens, Georgia, USA’, argues that to overcome Anglocentrism in the study of leisure, one should deeply understand different cultures and how leisure manifests itself therein. She thus brings to the debate voices other than those with an anglophone basis. She states that, as previously mentioned by Grazia and Dumazedier, the Western understanding of leisure emerged alongside the growth of an industrial culture reflecting the segmentation of peoples’ lives: ‘The Anglophone belief in a beneficent government led us to create agencies whose responsibility was to manage this new-found leisure. Given this history, it is impossible to separate the field of leisure studies from the Westernised culture where it was created’ (Samdahl, 2010, p. 190). However, this perspective may differ from the Latin American one presented by Ricardo Uvinha. He believes in the uniqueness of Latin American leisure perspectives while also acknowledging the challenges in communication. To Uvinha, it is essential to create awareness of the differences between Global South and Global North by strengthening partnerships and collaborative research opportunities with anglophone countries (Uvinha, 2010). One of the potential solutions was suggested by Li (2010), who believes that to overcome Anglocentrism in leisure production, comparative research should be carried out, including intra-cultural and cross-regional comparisons, thus expanding the study of individual ethnic and cultural groups. One of the issues with such a partnership approach proposed by both Uvinha (2010) and Li (2010) is the power dynamics in the publication system. Authors and researchers from the Global South seek partnerships with academics in the Global North to help them tailor their work for inclusion in an international and highly ranked journal. It thus becomes interesting to better understand the power-holders of leisure studies – those who dictate the publication system of the area under study, as discussed in the next section.

Leisure research and the Global South

The work of Chambers and Buzinde (2015) is positioned within the tourism context. Tourism research is rich in epistemological debates that, despite developing a more critical narrative, have neither dismantled nor disrupted some of the hegemonic power structures Wijesinghe et al. (2019) The gendered, political, colonial, racial, ethnic, economic, and geographical power agendas still control the international knowledge production (Tribe, 2006) and segregate the knowledge from the Global South. Leisure research in the Global South is extensive and explores concepts of inequalities. Uvinha et al. (2017), for example, explored leisure inequalities in their research involving 2,400 people in Brazil. This research indicates that, in a Brazilian context, the variables related to schooling, income and social class have a decisive influence on the way in which Brazilians spend their leisure time. People with lower education and income levels participate in a limited number of leisure activities compared with those with higher levels who have access to and can experience a greater number of activities. In addition, the increasing gap between social classes is a contributing factor to the rise of inequalities in leisure engagement among Brazilians (Uvinha et al., 2017). The World Leisure Congress held in Sao Paulo in 2018 was a step forward in discussing the main barriers to leisure under the theme ‘Leisure Beyond Constraints’ and aimed to identify, discuss, and propose strategies to overcome these obstacles. Consensus was that these barriers still exist and constrain people’s access to leisure, and these obstacles must be confronted to overcome them (World Leisure Congress, 2018).

In this context, we consider it important to align this discussion with the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs are linked to the United Nation’s 2030 agenda; they constitute new drivers for promoting sustainability among stakeholders in developed and developing economies, and they comprise 17 goals with a direct link to the promotion of leisure, such as #3 Good Health and Well-Being, #4 Quality Education, #5 Gender Equality and #10 Reduced Inequalities, among others (UN, 2022). The SDGs can provide the overarching framework for the analysis of inequalities, poverty and deprivation, offering strategies such as improving health, education and economic redistribution while addressing climate change and protecting the natural environment. In reality, to end inequalities, poverty and deprivation, a better understanding of the following is key: what the issues in the Global South are, how they manifest currently, and how they have been developed historically. The publication of both the Agenda2030 and the UN SDGs provide an opportunity to address some of the key inequalities in the Global South. Among them, the SDG #5 focuses on gender equality, and the SDG #10 focuses on reduction of inequalities and protection of those who are most vulnerable. However, more must be done to understand and discuss the issues facing the Global South on international platforms, to ensure that Global South knowledge is disseminated and to ensure that the Global South participates in decision-making processes at the international level.

To determine the participation of academics from the Global South in international debates about leisure, we analysed three of the most important leisure journals: Leisure Sciences, Leisure Studies, and Annals of Leisure Research. More specifically, we analysed the composition of their editorial and advisory boards in 2022 (Table 1) and the affiliation of authors who published in these journals between 2011 and 2020. We excluded the publication of calls for papers and editorials, but we included book reviews. Moreover, from the Global South, we considered the 78 countries on the list published by the Finance Center for South-South Cooperation (FCSSC),¹ a non-profit international organisation that has been in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.

Table 1. Analysis of leisure journals - editorial board and author affiliation.

Leisure Studies	Annals of Leisure Research	Leisure Sciences
4 out of 44 Editorial Board members from the Global South	1 out of 33 Editorial advisory Board from Global South	1 out of 56 Associate editors from the Global South
3 Editors based in the United Kingdom	2 Editors − 1 based in the United Kingdom and 1 based in New Zealand	3 Editors based in the United States
91/1,020 authors affiliated with Global South institutions	36/885 authors affiliated with Global South institutions	14/844 authors affiliated with Global South institutions

The data analysed shows that of 133 members of editorial boards, advisory boards and associate editors, only six came from the countries listed as part of the Global South. Leisure Studies had four members from the Global South: two based in Brazil, one in South Africa and one in China. Annals of Leisure Research had only one academic affiliated with an institution in the United Arab Emirates. Meanwhile, Leisure Sciences had only one associate editor from the list of countries considered to be part of the Global South; this individual was based in Singapore. Moreover, of the eight editors-in-chief/managing editors of these three journals, four were based in the United Kingdom, three were in the United States, and one was in New Zealand.

We also analysed 1,289 publications − 507 from Leisure Studies, 458 from Annals of Leisure Research and 324 from Leisure Sciences – from a total of 2,749 authors. We acknowledge that the same academics could have authored more than one paper in one or more journals. However, our aim here is merely to provide an overview of the disparity between authors from the Global North and those from the Global South. Indeed, and as presented in Table 2, only 141 authors were affiliated with a Global South institution. Another acknowledgement is that some of the authors affiliated with Global South institutions may not be originally from the Global South. Likewise, some authors from Global North institutions may be originally from Global South countries. Nevertheless, the number of papers authored by academics based in the Global South is minimal.

Table 2. Countries in the Global South where authors were based.

Leisure Studies	Annals of Leisure Research	Leisure Sciences
China − 45	China − 1	China − 4
Brazil − 22	Brazil − 7	Kenya − 1
South Africa − 11	South Africa − 3	South Africa − 9
India − 4	India- 3
Vietnam − 3	Vietnam − 1
Ghana − 3	Ghana − 4
Thailand − 2	Thailand − 1
Singapore − 1	Malaysia − 5
	Saudi Arabia − 2
	UAE −2
	Egypt − 1
	Nigeria − 1
	Philippines − 1
	Pakistan −1
	Costa Rica − 1
	Panama − 1
	Singapore − 1

Of the 507 papers, book reviews and research notes analysed and published by Leisure Studies, only 35 papers, three book reviews and eight research notes had at least one author based in a Global South institution. We also analysed 458 publications from Annals of Leisure Research between 2011 and 2020, and only 16 research papers and seven book reviews had at least one author from the Global South. Finally, of the 324 publications analysed from Leisure Sciences, only seven had at least one author based in the Global South.

Another barrier to academic equality relates to the accessibility to papers published. Taylor & Francis is increasing its open access policy with multiple actions from the deal with JISC² to the policy of 50 days of free access. However, most publications are still behind paywalls, which affects access to information for countries, institutions and researchers who may not have the economic privilege to buy the content. This contrasts, for example, with the developments of academic journals in the Global South. In Brazil, for instance, Licere is one of the most renowned and established journals in leisure studies. Between 2011 and 2020, this Brazilian journal published 586 papers (a higher number compared with that of the international journals previously analysed) with full open access. The journal is government-funded and peer-reviewed, and it has similar editorial practices to those of the international journals.

The initiative for this special issue was two-fold. On the one hand, we aimed to encourage academics from the Global South to present their work and have the support needed to feature their ideas in an international journal. On the other hand, we also sought to identify not only some of the leisure inequalities in the Global South, but also inequalities in leisure research between researchers based in the Global South and those in the Global North. The result of this analysis is a rich collection of papers exploring multiple perspectives of leisure. However, two points must be made. First, seven of the eight published papers came from Brazil, which is the country of origin of the editors of this special issue. This was disappointing considering the extensive population and geographical area of the Global South and the extensive awareness campaign undertaken to promote the special issue in international forums. The second point is that papers in this issue are published only in English, thus limiting the accessibility of such knowledge, which in many cases was funded by national governments with the public purse, to a privileged group of English-speaking people. Nonetheless, we still argue the value and the relevance of the work presented here and the opportunities this special issue afforded us to discuss leisure, inequalities, and the Global South.

About the special issue

This Special Issue is made of 8 original papers from all over the world and advances significantly the debates about leisure, inequalities, and the Global South. It invited contributions aligned to themes such as Leisure in the Global South; Leisure, Inequalities and the Sustainable Development Goals; Inequalities and Leisure Constraints; Leisure for Reduction of Inequalities; Digital Poverty; Excluding Leisure Spaces; Leisure and Vulnerable populations; and Leisure as a Social Transformation in the Community. Among the papers published, Carneiro and Munusturlar (2022) discuss the influence of socio-demographic factors and inequalities in the Leisure Education Level of students, teachers, and administrative staff in Brazilian Schools. Among the results presented, the authors identified that women have higher Leisure Education (LE) scores than men, teachers have higher LE scores than administrative staff and students, and individuals in the 14–17 age group have lower LE scores than other ages. The authors also point out the importance of developing public policies that will focus on the LE of young people in order to reduce deviant behaviour.

Public policy is also the focus of the article The development of pioneer national policy on adventure recreation in Brazil and Aotearoa/New Zealand’s first review by Bandeira, Wheaton and Amaral (2022). In this paper the authors conducted interpretive research using observation, interviews, and document analysis to investigate the development of pioneer policies on adventure recreation regulation in Brazil and New Zealand. The research uses Bourdieu’s concept of field to understand adventure as a form of leisure, which crosses the boundaries between sport and tourism, and, as a site of contestation. This study shows that many of the challenges experienced in developing national public policies for adventure activities in the Global South (Brazil), were also found in New Zealand (Global North). The authors conclude that adventure is a hybrid field, requiring inter-sector understanding in addressing risk management; and tourism sector in both countries reinforces mainly profit in a market-centred model instead of access equity, environmental and intercultural sensibility.

Capoeira as a cultural manifestation of Afro-Brazilian origin and its representation of playful and leisure moments for practitioners is addressed in the paper Traditional capoeira street circles in Florianópolis (Southern Brazil): impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, by Martins, Luiz, Franzoni and Marinho (2022). In this descriptive qualitative study, they investigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on traditional capoeira street circles in this Brazilian city, confirming the impossibility of carrying out the circles in person, resulting in difficulties faced by participants, with different reverberations in their lives. Also based on research in the city of Florianópolis is Franzoni, Martins, Luiz and Marinho’s (2022) article Children and the city’s streets: playing as a possibility for leisure in different communities in Florianópolis, southern Brazil. This qualitative study explores how playing in the streets is an important leisure activity for vulnerable communities and how this practice was impacted during the pandemic. Sustainable Village Project: the importance of leisure and public space for collective organisation by Sobczynski, Santana and Rechia (2022) discusses how the Sustainable Village Project, developed in a peripheral region of Curitiba/Brazil, enables residents to take ownership of different leisure spaces autonomously. To this end, the authors used a social-ethnographic approach and concluded that the experiences lived in the context of leisure can be decisive for human emancipation since they can promote critical reflection and collective construction with conditions to modify social realities.

Inequalities in access to consumption of leisure goods and services in Brazil, by Stoppa, Santos, Hemzo and Kishigami (2022), starts from the premise that many people still have limited or no access to leisure and that this is particularly true in highly unequal countries and regions such as Latin America. The authors investigate how social and economic disparities lead to inequalities in the access to consumption of leisure goods and services. Data from a recent and representative Brazilian household budget survey are analysed, concluding that expenditure on leisure items in Brazil is associated with region, race, gender, family size and composition, education, and income, highlighting the need for policies to promote equal leisure opportunities to development and justice. The ethnographic research entitled Women’s leading role in the political struggle for leisure: an ethnographic study in Porto Alegre, Brazil, by Silveira, Pacheco, Silva and Myskiw (2022), presented the city of Porto Alegre as a pioneer in public leisure services since 1926. The research discusses the tensions and achievements of female leaders from the Municipal Department of Sports, Recreation and Leisure and addresses their struggle for the right to leisure. The paper presents the debate around the collective protest that emerged to defend leisure public policies in this municipality and was led by these female leaders.

The penultimate paper by McDonald, Maxwell, Gholizadeh, and Burridge (2022), An exploration of physical activity, migrant women and leisure experiences, contributed to the debate about physical activity and its social, psychological, physical and leisure benefits. The research explored the perceptions of physical activity among a group of migrant women living in Sydney, Australia, proposing a guidance and direction for future policy development and health messaging with a strong focus on addressing leisure inequity. Finally, Açıkgöz and Demirbaş’s (2022) qualitative study, Daily struggles and aspirations: Exploring the leisure capabilities of working children and adolescents in Turkey, used the Capabilities Approach as an analytical lens to discuss the ways in which work shrinks the leisure capabilities of working children. In the face of fatigue and time scarcity, children adapt their leisure preferences to the available leisure cultures. Simultaneously, however, they display agency in various ways to gain time and protect their leisure rights.

This Special Issue advances the discussion about leisure and inequalities presenting an opportunity for hidden voices to be heard. One of the key contributions is to realign the question of leisure as a right in contemporary society in its diverse perspectives, expanding the understanding of leisure as a time for personal re-signification as well as for social and community development. We believe this is a starting point for the anglophonic academic world to open-up and listen to the voices of the Global South. It is also a starting point for leisure inequalities to be discussed in future research, and a starting point for the recognition of the relevance of the lived leisure experiences of those from the Global South. We call all leisure educators, researchers, policy makers, and enthusiasts to keep advancing the agenda on leisure inequalities and the Global South.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Fillipe Soares Romano, PhD Candidate in Tourism at the University of Sao Paulo, for his support with this paper.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sandro Carnicelli

Sandro Carnicelli is a Professor of Tourism and Leisure Studies and the Deputy Director of the Centre for Culture, Sport, and Events at the University of the West of Scotland, UK. He is the Editor-in-Chief of the World Leisure Journal, Co-Chair of the Young Academy of Scotland and a a member of the ABRATUR (International Academy for the Development of Tourism Research in Brazil).

Ricardo Uvinha

Dr Ricardo Ricci Uvinha is a Full Professor and the Dean of the School of Arts, Sciences and Humanities and Leader of the Interdisciplinary Group of Leisure Studies, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Professor Uvinha is a Productivity Fellow of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development CNPq/Brazil.

Notes

1. http://www.fc-ssc.org/en/partnership_program/south_south_countries.

2. https://newsroom.taylorandfrancisgroup.com/taylor-francis-group-and-jisc-agree-transformational-deal-for-uk-research/#.